Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

...and while I'm at it...

For those of you deluded fools who do not think the world is now over the edge in eager plunge, see the following:

well now, that's scienific for sure. Proof positive that the world is on the brink.

Animals sensitivity to impending natural events has been proven without any doubt.

It's just a matter of when.

lola said. They did not fail to reveal their anti-Darwin stand. Most, if not all, ran on a platform that" approved of each anti-science phrase".

The Kansas state ed board, like the school board in PA, had been hijacked about a year ago. Theyd proposed some really sweeping changes in what they define as science standards. For the most part, these changes hadnt had a sufficient time to be implemented -------

Spendi, while youre correct at how few people actually make the pluralities happen, the actual numbers of the Evangelicals are way smaller than those presented in their own "spin press". Its a matter of making every Evangelical vote count and each of their votes cancels a pro- rational-science vote. At the state and local levels, the Democratic process does actually come into play. So we have no one but ourselves to blame for really dumb legislatures.

Bollocks ye of little faith.

You do not understand Faustians.

The world is on the brink of tomorrow.

Lola- My mum and dad were both complete idiots and I never identified with either of the silly sods except possibly when I was on the tit and I don't remember that.

Are you and Bernie having a do? Throw the pots at him girl. That usually works.

spendi, It's obvious you don't remember anything about your mummy's tits, because you're trying to make up for it with your daily attendance to the pub.

fm wrote-



Gee! You'll be telling me next that the earth goes round the sun in 24.00000243269 hours and that there's no need to adjust out clocks until about 6,369 AD and even then it won't be all that inconvenient.

Will it?

c.i. wrote-



Not at all. I think that if you don't go to pubs you are letting freedom dribble away a drop at a time. There no pubs in Iran. I bet Hixbollah are wound up to f**k for no other reason than that they have no pubs.

Pubs are the last bastion of freedom. Boozers of the World UNITE!

I'm not having it said that he let freedom die because the f****ing Oscars was (were) on. F*** the Oscars.

Battle of Britain pilots didn't die for f***ing Oscars. Or f****ing smoking bans either.Or to bring f****ing traffic f****ing wardens in.

shpendi, the malt licker said, you shouldnt use the preposition "about" unless you wish to continue living in a chaotic chronologically challenged ST continuum




"We endeavor to be accurate"

Christianity manufactured conscience? What about Buddhism. You keep ignoring other religions that have nearly the same aspects as Buddhism.



No, you are talking about Eugenics, which is a result of a poor understanding in evolution. Teaching an counter-evolution lie will not prevent eugenics. Teaching evolution and defining it properly will.



Wrong. Training gives an advantage which is there naturally. You're not adding anything to your body that wasn't there before.



Nor can I, because counter-evolution is not science.



I thought you meant evolution and nothing else. No mathematics, no English, no religious education. I wasn't aware that you meant teaching non-science in science classes.

I'm arguing for there to be no Intelligent Design in science because it isn't science. I'm arguing that Intelligent Design does nothing to save the grace of Christianity, that even if Christianity were to disappear, the moral fabric of society would decay.



There's nothing adult about it, because religious education is already taught in schools to counter any idiotic ideas people might get from a Principle that describes how we came to be, not how we should live.

You'll always get idiots that use something they learnt to justify their bigoted ideas, no matter what it is. Removing evolution from the curriculum won't stop anything.



And here your ignorance of the Buddhist population really shows. They're quite capable of growing their own food and turning their lights on, Spendi.

Lola wrote-



You two are being too crude for the high standards this thread is noted for.

Lola-

Your piece about conscience does have some flaws. I will see if I can find the time tonight to suggest what they might be.

In the meantime I hope your tiff has been defused.

wolf-

I don't think you and I are singing from the same hymn sheet.

Perhaps it would be for the best if we content ourselves with that. I'm not being disrespectful but I cannot keep going over the same points. Your position is the usual one I meet and that does give it a certain credibility.

These are highly complex matters which cannot be even touched with broad brushstrokes. I tried that yesterday and it is obvious how ineffective it was.

But good luck.

That was obvious from the very beginning and should never have been an issue.



And I cannot keep going over the same counterpoints. You make it sound as if it's my fault, when it's clearly not. All I do is try to counter you whenever you make a factual error.

no tiffing spendi, just play.

I'll be interested to read your opinion about flaws in my piece about conscience. In the meantime, since it cannot be demonstrated that religion, specifically the Christian religion, is necessary for the development of conscience, I'll also look for a new argument in favor of ID.

My "factual errors" ( an assertion ) are self-referenced up the thread the whole of which I have read. A thread is a continuous thing, a string, a bit like a book. One might apply the same principle to the cross threads of a forum or even to the tangle of threads which is A2K which, I will admit, is a bit severe. On one of the threads in Trivia an educated lady and myself arrived at the word "lork" and we have been using the word in other threads ever since. Anyone reading those other threads would only know what a "lork" is from our original as it isn't in the dictionary. It becomes an "in" joke and binds the two participants a bit closer together and thus separates them from the common throng in each other's eyes. One might call it cyber seduction although I'm not sure, in this case, which of us is the evil seducer which is entirely as it should be in the fabulously mysterious Yinyang two-step. That is an intellectual frivolity engaged in by those who have wrung every last drop from the Knees Up Mother Brown. Or, at least, the last useful drop.

If one began a thread dealing with historical psuedomorphoses and exploring the concept using a current issue which generates activity one would at some point early in the proceedings provide an explanation of the geological concept of psuedomorphosis and link it to the historical concept of human life. It may not be a valid analogy but that is simply the literary conceit of the author and his right to do it is sacrosanct. The reader decides what to do about it. The use of the ID/anti ID concept chose itself by chance which is always the best way. Other issues, ladies garments for example, which references back before this creation by wande, are equally suitable, in the example here possibly more so. (wande will hate me using the word "creation" there because he will know that I'm hinting that as God is to the Universe wande is to this thread and the fact that his creation has run amok at times might give him a vague idea of how God feels after all this time after setting in motion his works in an idealistic frame of mind.)

Other ideas will appear later and explanations given if appropriate. If a reader opens the confection somewhere in the middle and finds what she thinks are errors she again decides what to do about it.

If she decides to start arguing with the author she can hardly expect him to begin his explanations all over again and in the event that she does expect that this author will tell her to start at the beginning despite him knowing that to do so will fix her in outer limbo for a while and probably leave her more confused that she is at present.

This is the hallmark of a good book. If you are not confused with a book you are either a brilliant reader or the author is one of two things:hopeless or guilty of writing down to flatter you into thinking you are a brilliant reader which is a bit patronising when you think about it. And quite dangerous as confusion is a route to sickness. What you do when it is a good book is read it again. And again.

A reasonable guide when choosing a good book to read is the literary skill of the author which he will invariably display, often to mighty effect, on the first page or even in the first sentence. "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." for example.

Now Dylan says- "wasted words that prove to warn that he not busy being born is busy dying." If one accepts that proposition, and I do, one can confidently proceed to the next sentence of The Bible and one can, with equal confidence, dump The Da Vinci code in the trash after a very short appraisal. As things stand with me now I allow one wasted word. When I come to a second that's it. With books I mean. Not conversations. Gee I'd have to be a hermit otherwise.

It always amuses me when I hear someone say that they have "read" a book I mention positively. That's an affectation where a good book is concerned. They are the sort of people who count everybody they know as friends.

I was reading The Serpent chapter the other night and I guffawed at half a dozen jokes I hadn't twigged before and I must have read it at least twenty times.

Lola-

I'm glad you are just at play. I had thought for a moment, the "piss off" moment, that all those good wishes A2Kers had annointed your friendship with in the times of tribulation had been to no avail.

From a social dynamics point of view those blessings by witnesses are more or less the same as the happenings at a proper wedding. The essence of a wedding is the approval and good wishes of the congregation. The priest's role is merely to provide a focus and a setting and to ensure that no important rules are broken which is to say any that can't be fixed with a confession. You are cyber husband and wife. So get into that kitchen and wash them pots and pans.

One needs to be at odds with the priest on the important rules to call into question the procedure because the rest is just tradition.

I am short of time. Thursday night is brainstorming night. (You know what I mean.)

The conscience is a fixture in a culture. In some cultures they would be mortified with guilt had they not done their stint as a temple prostitute or had their plates lips fitted. Warriors who came across an injured enemy and didn't torture him to death and then eat his liver, or other ceremonial parts depending on which conscience he had been landed with, would hide their heads in shame were it to become known.Even in sub-cultures this happens. Some families in our society think great shame applies to a prison sentence whilst other see it as a badge of manhood and a matter of pride. In our youth culture there are parts where an ASBO (Anti-social behaviour order) is a necessary ticket of acceptance.

When what you call an atheist is socialised s/he is being socialised by consciences more or less proper to our culture and in which the important mass is conditioned by Christian values which drift over the generations in response to various other conditions in that culture. So though it might look like Christian values are not necessary to provide the sort of conscience we approve of they indubitably are but at removes getting vaguer as times pass on.

If Christian values are removed, and that is a very long way off, other sources of conscience creation become required and the likeliest that I can see, assuming the electricity grid is fully functioning, is that of guilt at not worshipping The Great Leader who has the immediate disadvantage of being able to do something in the here and now about infractions to his very elaborate rules.

I think it is necessary to view the whole process rather than just the bit one happens to be in and with some degree of objectivity.

Has Bernie read the Hughes yet? Or seen M and A?

I'm neglecting my Trivia pals.

The only argument I can see for ID is that society isn't yet ready for its disappearence. When it is there will be no arguments for it. And the world will have a form you wouldn't recognise.

It's up to those of us with benevolent and uncritical consciences, those of us who are not too frightened to think in abstractions, to help society become ready for the disappearance of ID and the sooner the better. Apparently, as the Kansas phenomenon exemplifies, the world is more ready than you seem to believe. Enjoy your brainstorming tonight.

No. You have this all wrong.

Over here, the suffix "off" is used to refer to some sort of contest, as in "face off" or "stand off".

Lola was advancing a challenge.

It's actually about the thirtieth instance of this particular challenge. She's hoping, apparently, that the law of averages will sooner or later fall her way.

Never listen to a braggart.......you know where it leads.