97
   

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

 
 
spendius
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 09:17 am
Isn't Setanta witty girls?

I quite understand your position on my efforts, being ladies and all, but chaps are supposed to get to grips with them not echo your comments.
0 Replies
 
smorgs
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 09:25 am
Spendius!

(smorgs gives spendius a big clout to the back of his head))

Don't be like that!

You can't try and bait women in such a manner - it just won't work - not subtle enough.

You'll have to do much better than that to get the female attention you so obviously crave?
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 09:27 am
smorgie-

Thank you for gracing our prestigious thread with your presence and most delightful avvie but I have to inform you that if you can't spell onanymity it is unlikely you will be able to understand the complex problems we are ,well I am at least,grappling with on here nor is it expected of you as you are bound to be distracted by other considerations.

Dottie-

And thank you also for same and for your profound comments which I know you have thought up unaided.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 09:30 am
spendi wrote:
I didn't know wande and timber had had the handbags at 2000 paces once upon a time. Has togetherness in anti-ID healed the wounds. What got timber the 6 months? I'm sure we would all love to see it. I think I'll put it on the "I Love" thread.

Oh, I do so wish you would. That would be just soooo special.

Having evidently waded through a bit of spendispeak, peevishly and admonishingly - understandably so - Dorothy P wrote:
Don't talk rubbish Spendius.


Then, in superclious mysogynist condescention, spendi wrote:
Ladies are not supposed to read this thread. Lola has special privileges which it is bootless to explicate.

It's man's talk.


Whereupon smorgs wrote:
...probably why it's boring and pointless

Oh, not really, not the bits that are not from, to, or about spendi, anyway. His peurile predeliction to post atopical, irelevant, torturedly amaturish pseudo-Joycian rants and rambles designed purely to focus attention on himself to the detriment of substantive topical discourse is a distracting irritant, to be sure, but need not be entirely off-putting. A fortunate circumstance of web forum discussions is that they are not real time, they are in a sense recorded. As opposed to a live discussion, in which each participant by turn must fully be heard out before the next may begin, a web forum discussion permits a observer or participant to use a scroll button in much the same fashion one employs the fast-forward button to skip over pointless breaks in the action while watching a recorded video. On the web, one need put up with only so much "... boring and pointless" blather as one cares to inflict on oneself. Judicious use of the scroll button can significantly enhance one's overall experience when followig web discussions. Sometimes, its the only way to actually follow a real discussion, spendi's participation in this and other discussions here taken as particularly illustrative case in point.
0 Replies
 
smorgs
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 09:32 am
Spendius, how kind of you to point out my grammer and spelling errors.

See? I knew you were a nice guy...

Shall I return the favour, as I have spotted the odd one or two. I had thought it best not to add further to your esteem issues.

(((Smooches)))
0 Replies
 
smorgs
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 09:37 am
It isn't really boring and pointless, Timber.

I do read it and I am interested in the subject.

Just thought it was a good retort, but obviously - it wasn't...

Please accept my apologies.

Sarah
x
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 09:37 am
smorgie wrote-

Quote:
You'll have to do much better than that to get the female attention you so obviously crave?


All I ever got from female attention was a long series of expensive intractable difficulties associated with dishonesty and trepidation.

My subtleties require careful study and are aimed at teasing out the potential which has been somewhat inhibited by Sunday schools and feminist literature. (I know my Greer and a few others). I can only be goaded by fearless honesty.

I am well aware that ladies crave the "capture" most.
0 Replies
 
smorgs
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 09:40 am
Are you English, spendius?

I only ask as your posts never seem to 'scan' well...
0 Replies
 
smorgs
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 09:44 am
Sorry everyone - I won't reply further, I am aware that this is disrupting an interesting thread. Crying or Very sad
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 09:47 am
timber wrote-

Quote:
Oh, I do so wish you would. That would be just soooo special.


I already did but unfortunately I made an error with the alphabetical series and had to apologise to the strict Lady who has given our thread such a divine appearence of late.

Our cricket club has had to admit ladies to the games room recently in order to qualify for a Lottery grant. These disbursements are in the gift of feminists as you might expect and by using them they have stormed the last bastion of male surpemacy, apart from the Gents, namely, the Long Room at Lords.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 09:50 am
Don't let it bother you smorgs - you're no distraction at all for those of us accustomed to coping with spendi's incessant non sequitur self gratification in these discussions. Its mostly a matter of practice; the more experience one has, the better one is able to accommodate the rough spots.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 10:05 am
I had been hoping for a response to Post 2222173 but all that has appeared so far are drivellous, pointless and long-winded variations of Ms Parker's comment.

I fear that this ostentatious display of fatuity is designed solely for the purpose of hiding the fact that no response is to be forthcoming either because the post was too difficult or that it hit on a raw nerve in the anti-IDers central nervous system.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 10:19 am
UK UPDATE

Quote:
How did we get here?
(Harriet Swain, The Guardian, August 15, 2006)

Chris Parker, a final-year English student at Hertford College, Oxford, believes God made the world. Ask him why, and he talks cogently about the gaps in evolutionary theory and how explanations involving intelligent design are unsatisfactory. But, ultimately, it is because: "As a Christian, I have believed in it for a long time and I have no reason to doubt it."

Kim Nicholas, who is studying to be a primary school teacher at the University of Hertfordshire, agrees. "I have grown up in a family that goes to church and I have become a Christian," she says. "When I look at things in the world I think it is amazing that God has created it for us. If you have faith in God you can believe he has done it, whether there is evidence or not."

Annie Nawaz, a second-year law student at Hertfordshire, distinguishes between scientific and "natural" evidence written in stone in the holy books. "As a practising Muslim, the holy Qur'an - that's our proper evidence," she says. It does bother her when this conflicts with other kinds of evidence, but "it just comes down to the way you have been brought up and your beliefs and values and how strong they are".

Such views are less unusual among UK students than you might think. In a survey last month, more than 12% questioned preferred creationism - the idea God created us within the past 10,000 years - to any other explanation of how we got here. Another 19% favoured the theory of intelligent design - that some features of living things are due to a supernatural being such as God. This means more than 30% believe our origins have more to do with God than with Darwin - evolution theory rang true for only 56%.

Opinionpanel Research's survey of more than 1,000 students found a third of those who said they were Muslims and more than a quarter of those who said they were Christians supported creationism. Nearly a third of Christians and 10% of those with no particular religion favoured intelligent design. Women were more likely to choose spiritual explanations: less than half chose evolution, with 14% preferring creationism and 22% intelligent design.

While three years of learning how to weigh evidence appears to make students slightly more inclined towards evolution, with 57% of third-years choosing it compared with 54% of first-years, it does not appear to put them off belief in God. As many third-years as first-years believed in creationism, although slightly fewer supported intelligent design.

The findings come as little surprise to Roger Downie, professor of zoological education at Glasgow University. Two years ago he surveyed the views on evolution of biology and medical students there. "What was extremely worrying for students embarking on evidence- and science-based disciplines was that they were perfectly prepared to say they had rejected it not on the basis of evidence but on the basis of their religious beliefs," he says.

He says schools and universities need to be clearer about how science differs from other evidence, such as that provided by religion. "The impression people get is that science is about accumulating a lot of facts in your head rather than testing of evidence and fine-tuning what you find."

Scientists have recently expressed growing concern about creationism being taught alongside evolution in schools, particularly at the new academies run by the Christian Vardy Foundation. In April, a Royal Society statement opposed the misrepresentation of evolution in schools to promote particular religious beliefs.

Steve Jones, professor of genetics at University College London, who gave a public lecture on "Why evolution is right and creationism is wrong" at the time, has been talking about evolutionary biology in schools for 20 years. For the first 10 of those he was lucky to find one student in 1,000 expressing creationist beliefs. "Now in any school I go to I meet a student who says they are a creationist or delude themselves that they are."

He blames the influence of Christian fundamentalists in America and political correctness among teachers here who, he says, feel they have to give a reasonable hearing to beliefs held by people from other cultures, particularly Muslims.

In the Opinionpanel survey, nearly 20% said they had been taught creationism as fact by their main school. Most thought it would be best to teach a range of theories, but nearly 30% of those who supported creationism felt that pupils should learn about creationism alone.

According to Linda Woodhead, professor in the sociology of religion at Lancaster University, religious studies is now the biggest growth subject in schools. She suggests that this reflects pupils' interest in philosophical and moral questions - questions that are likely to persist into their undergraduate years. "I don't think there is anywhere in the curriculum where most university students get these sorts of questions addressed," she says.

Some universities are beginning to recognise this. Jeremy Rayner, professor of zoology at Leeds University, which is to incorporate lectures on creationism and intelligent design into its second-year course for zoology and genetics next year, says the idea is to teach students about the creationism hypothesis "so they are in a position to make their own rational judgment and counter it".

While he has seen no evidence that students are more inclined to believe in creationism, he perceives a growing willingness within the creation movement to be prepared to cause disruption by promoting its views. "The best thing we can do," he says, "is what universities should be doing anyway - producing bright, intelligent young minds with the confidence to be advocates for science."
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 11:24 am
Good article, wande. Understandably, the ID-iot crowd are in a panic, the herd's leaders pulling out all stops in futile, functionally counter-productive, effectively self-defeating last-ditch effort to stave off the inevitable implosion of the proposition central to the fundie religionist mindset.

In other business,
Demonstrating predictable gullibility, over on [url=http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2220974#2220974]Another Thread[/url], spendi wrote:
I love the idea of seeing what timberlandko said about wandel that got him banned off the forums for 6 long months ...

You're a hoot, spendi - taken in like a well-hooked fish Laughing
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 11:32 am
timberlandko wrote:
Demonstrating predictable gullibility, over on [url=http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2220974#2220974]Another Thread[/url], spendi wrote:
I love the idea of seeing what timberlandko said about wandel that got him banned off the forums for 6 long months ...

You're a hoot, spendi - taken in like a well-hooked fish Laughing


I am sorry that my joke ended up on another thread, timber. I hope that the others know not to take spendi seriously.

spendi: I was joking around and reminiscing about the older evolution threads with timber and setanta.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 11:51 am
NP, wande; you merely handed our dear spendi a petard by which he managed to hoist himself. I'm sure most out there view the poor sod's gaffe with nearly as much amusement as do I.

A bit guiltily, I admit I was pleased he went for it.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 12:52 pm
The nutcase said in wande's pointless quote-

Quote:
and how explanations involving intelligent design are unsatisfactory.


There you are- from the horse's mouth. No connection. Not only no connection. Deadly enemies.

Anti-IDers love Creationists like kids love "Hook a Duck" at the fairs.They take turns at being hooker and being duck.

Neither can understand ID and they have a symbiosis which allows them to get some repressed invective off their chests in mutual co-operation. Mutual catharsis. As soon as an IDer comes on the Creationists gallop off and the anti-IDers argue for the above reason thinking they are arguing with a Creationist which they are not. It's one of the many forms of self-delusion. None of them have ever met a proper IDer.

The argument gets out of their box you see.

I'm sorry that my innocent credulity is a subject for derisive amusement.
They must have done the "There's a bogeyman behind you" trick to little girls when they were in short pants and can't kick the habit. It's with going to mixed sex schools I think and being taught by ladies who were moonlighting to get more "up" in the soft furnishing department. At a single sex school being taught by dedicated priests a whole other world exists which Viagra passes by.

Anyway dear viewers- you can rely on me not to pull strokes as simple as that. Didn't once Orson Wells have American's en masse rushing into the streets and kissing each a last goodbye. And that's when Caractacus was a lad.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 01:09 pm
wande wrote-

Quote:
spendi: I was joking around and reminiscing about the older evolution threads with timber and setanta.


And joking now I suppose. Maybe all the time.

Take note dear viewers. You can't trust an anti-IDer as far as the length of a sausage they would make with a diameter of 200 miles.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 01:35 pm
spendius wrote:

I'm sorry that my innocent credulity is a subject for derisive amusement.

Pity, that, if true; one ought be able to celebrate, as opposed to regret, that which most characterize's ones contribution to the human condition.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Tue 22 Aug, 2006 02:09 pm
Is that all you can come up with timber?

There's lovely English Roses watching now you know. You can't pull the wool over their eyes.

One has a witch's hat on, and doesn't she look a treat in it, and they are firm IDers in the intellectual sense.

It had to happen. I orchestrated it. You don't think I play mindless word games do you. I play to win the heart of fair lady. Those big machines are toys.

Quote:
Madame Sosostris, famous clairvoyante,
Had a bad cold, nevertheless
Is known to be the wisest woman in Europe,
With a wicked pack of cards. Here, said she,
Is your card, the drowned Phoenician Sailor,
(Those are pearls that were his eyes. Look!)
Here is Belladonna, The Lady of the Rocks, The lady of situations.
Here is the man with three staves, and here the Wheel,
And here is the one-eyed merchant, and this card,
Which is blank, is something he carries on his back,
Which I am forbidden to see. I do not find
The Hanged Man. Fear death by water.
I see crowds of people, walking round in a ring.
Thank you. If you see dear Mrs. Equitone,
Tell her I bring the horoscope myself:
One must be so careful these days.



Oh me, Oh my, Love that country pie.

It's from The Waste Land as you no doubt know.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.12 seconds on 10/09/2024 at 04:22:16