Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Hey, Spendi, is it really my fault if RL insists on asking the same questions over and over again, and if you insist on being vague on where you want this thread to go?

Sure. Let's talk about education. What about it?

You want ID to be taught in schools? Where? In what class. Why? What will teaching ID do? Why would it do what you think it does?

Ah, but haven't we already covered those questions? What else is there to talk about concerning ID and education?

0 Replies

Lemme try to catch up .... lessee now, what do we have here - rl has no idea how evolution works, and spendi has no idea this thread isn't about him - have I missed anything?

0 Replies

I am afraid that's about it, timber.

0 Replies

Wolf_ODonnell wrote:

real life wrote:
If my kids are taller and stronger than I and are more resistant to the flu, is it because they have 'evolved'? They show distinguishable differences with their ancestors, don't they?

In a way yes, but in a way no. They're not a different species, if that's what you mean. They have evolved resistance to the flu.

How do you know that the development of resistance to this flu is not a result of genetic information that was ALREADY present instead of a mutation/change in genetic information?

Most scientists, even evolutionists, will readily admit that the function of 95% of the genome is unknown.

How can you confidently assert that the genetic information for this was not already present, and thus HAD to be evolution?

0 Replies

timberlandko wrote:

Lemme try to catch up .... lessee now, what do we have here - rl has no idea how evolution works, and spendi has no idea this thread isn't about him - have I missed anything?

And timber is contributing nothing to the discussion except thinly veiled insults. No change there, sorry to say.

0 Replies

Jeezus H Christ. I just stopped in for a minutes rest from coiling and uncoiling my lines, and RL is still on his "half evolved " structures garbage. Remember when record needles would stick in a groove ? Are we seeing the A2K equivalent?

Ill look in again on SAt as we approach Portsmouth or the Cape Cod Canal(wherever we decide to park Iapetus )

0 Replies

real life wrote:

And timber is contributing nothing to the discussion except thinly veiled insults.

Nonsense - no veil there at all, thin or otherwise.

Quote:

No change there, sorry to say.

Nonsense again - what IS unchanging is the disinformation and absurdity comprising your participation in this discussion and the irrelevance and narcistic inanity comprising spendi's. In your defense, rl, I'll allow as much as the simple-minded, easilly and continually exposed and refuted bullshit you persistently shovel onto this thread may stem from honest ignorance wrapped in fervent delusion; spendi has no excuse.

0 Replies

Truly sad, timber. You're such a smart guy, with absolutely nothing but insults to offer.

Maybe you'd like to pitch in with Wolfie on the line of discussion current. If not, we'll simply let you talk to yourself from here on out.

0 Replies

rosborne979 wrote:

real life wrote:
It also necessitates that non-birds produced birds and non-mammals produced mammals as their direct offspring, etc.

Not as direct offspring, not in a single generation. The theory of Evolution does not claim this or imply this.

If you've found this claim somewhere in a textbook, then please give us the source and we'll discuss it. Otherwise shake the cobwebs from your brain and realize that this is just something *you* think is implied by evolution, even though we have repeatedly explained to you why it is not.

Didn't say it all happened in one generation.

This is a strawman that you continually throw out there.

0 Replies

Why Teaching Evolution Is Important

Quote:

Any therapy for infectious diseases is predicated on a profound understanding of the evolutionary processes by which the bacteria or viruses acquire resistance to the agents that are used against them. And if one doesn't understand the evolution of resistance, one is not going to be a very effective physician.

Source: Kenneth Miller testifying at Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Didn't say it all happened in one generation.

This is a strawman that you continually throw out there.

Yes, you did. You said evolution necessitates that fact. Yet evolution does not state that. You made a strawman, ros refuted that strawman, and then you claim that ros is throwing out a strawman?

He's attacking a strawman, the one you came up with.

real life wrote:

How do you know that the development of resistance to this flu is not a result of genetic information that was ALREADY present instead of a mutation/change in genetic information?

We can always check the genes of their family, RL. If the specific mutation isn't there, guess what? That means they've got a new mutation that gives them resistance to flu.

Of course, I'm assuming in your example that you're referring to a mutation that prevents the Influenza Virus from binding to its target cells, and not a mutation that gives rise to different antibodies.

The latter is not an example of evolution, because the latter cannot be passed on to the next generation. Furthermore, the latter occurs pretty much all the time.

Quote:

Most scientists, even evolutionists, will readily admit that the function of 95% of the genome is unknown.

How can you confidently assert that the genetic information for this was not already present, and thus HAD to be evolution?

We do not know the function of 95% of the genome. That does not mean we do not know what 95% of the genome looks like. We completed the human genome project. If you want to read the genetic code, you can go to the Sanger Institute's website.

Let's say you sequenced the DNA of the new mutation, which might or might not have been "caused by evolution". How do you know it's a completely new gene? Simple.

You perform a simple search BLAST search. It's a program that allows you to find matches between your DNA sequence and a known DNA sequence. If there is no good match, that means the gene is new.

0 Replies

Wolf wrote-

Quote:

Yes, you did. You said evolution necessitates that fact. Yet evolution does not state that. You made a strawman, ros refuted that strawman, and then you claim that ros is throwing out a strawman?

He's attacking a strawman, the one you came up with.

That's a classic. One can almost sense the foot stamp and the glaring eyes. I could never get Wolf that mad.

What does it mean though. Just who exactly is the owner, at the moment, of this strawman. Is it a hot potato?

We've all forgotton. One of you must be right. If I remember correctly when ros refuted the strawman he only asserted it was a strawman just so he could refute it and it wasn't a strawman at all; but ros made you think he had refuted his own strawman. Maybe you didn't check eh?

0 Replies

wande quoted-

Quote:

Why Teaching Evolution Is Important

Quote:
Any therapy for infectious diseases is predicated on a profound understanding of the evolutionary processes by which the bacteria or viruses acquire resistance to the agents that are used against them. And if one doesn't understand the evolution of resistance, one is not going to be a very effective physician.

Source: Kenneth Miller testifying at Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District

That's just the sort of stuff that gets past lazy minds unhindered.

There's nothing profound in what goes on in schools. That whole statement hinges on what "profound" means. It means post-grad research for a number of years in some narrow specialism of one "type"
of bacterium.

The schools are full of them are they?

The school is to provide the setting for lift off into any number of occupations for which a profound understanding (fat chance) of evolutionary processes is not always useful.

No doubt Mr Miller waved his arm graciously over the hushed court with a good whiff of the spray-on Ivory Tower fragrance in it.

0 Replies

Wolf wrote-

Quote:

You want ID to be taught in schools? Where? In what class. Why? What will teaching ID do? Why would it do what you think it does?

For the last time Wolf-- you don't teach intelligent design. What it comprises is everything. It doesn't fit into your specimin cases or under "I" in the filing cabinet. It is the contribution the school makes to the character which, of course, has other aspects of life outside school either reinforcing it or weakening it to some degree.

That involves the recruitment of staff and that involves salaries and a certain type of leadership. With traditions.

You could see that a Christian teaching a subject would be different from an atheist teaching it. Even science.

It's a real strawman that I said I wanted ID teaching in schools. I want people who haven't written God off running schools rather than those who have because I think a better character is produced. I know that is an opinion. I said so when I said "I think". I find I need to emphasise obvious things quite often.

But one does have to have an opinion on a thing like that and I may be wrong and it may be that an atheistic education will prepare people better for the future they will have to live in.

One thing you can't do is think such a thing won't have social consequences. I think they will be quite dramatic. To an extent they already are.

Everytime media touches education it trivialises it. It shows two schoolgirls having hysterics 'cos they've passed and the minister saying that 99% have passed and we've all had our IQs uprated again. Big smiles all round and they're up 2 points in the next poll. Then the catch the Deputy PM shagging in Admiralty House and they're down 8 just to show how educated we are.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Truly sad, timber. You're such a smart guy, with absolutely nothing but insults to offer.

Maybe you'd like to pitch in with Wolfie on the line of discussion current. If not, we'll simply let you talk to yourself from here on out.

More nonsense - I direct ridicule and derision as appropriate; the luddite blatherings posted under your username and the irrelevancies posted under spendi's qualifying handsomely as perfect targets, receiving the consideration they merit. You post as though you were stuck on stupid, spendi's posting style is that of one stuck on that one's self.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

rosborne979 wrote:
real life wrote:
It also necessitates that non-birds produced birds and non-mammals produced mammals as their direct offspring, etc.

Not as direct offspring, not in a single generation. The theory of Evolution does not claim this or imply this.

If you've found this claim somewhere in a textbook, then please give us the source and we'll discuss it. Otherwise shake the cobwebs from your brain and realize that this is just something *you* think is implied by evolution, even though we have repeatedly explained to you why it is not.

Didn't say it all happened in one generation.

Then please explain what you mean by "direct offspring".

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Wolf_ODonnell wrote:
real life wrote:
If my kids are taller and stronger than I and are more resistant to the flu, is it because they have 'evolved'? They show distinguishable differences with their ancestors, don't they?

In a way yes, but in a way no. They're not a different species, if that's what you mean. They have evolved resistance to the flu.

How do you know that the development of resistance to this flu is not a result of genetic information that was ALREADY present instead of a mutation/change in genetic information?

Mutation is not the only source of variation in the gene pool. Mixing through sexual reproduction is a large contributing factor to variety.

As a matter of fact, mutation is probably not even a significant contributor to variation at this point in the history of life on Earth. The gene pool for most organisms is just full of available material for variation.

So yes, resistance to flu (in the example above) may have come from reconbinations of existing genes, but that's still a standard process of evolution. Do you have a problem with that?

0 Replies

Here's RL's Strawman Smile

http://shoutluton.com/attractions/images/strawman.jpg

0 Replies

hey ros. You make that? Its what we call "outsider art".
I started a thread on the new oil find in the Gulf Of Mexico. Ill check in the AM to see if gungasnake wants to play. Then we shove off for Woods Hole.

0 Replies

timber wrote-

Quote:

spendi's posting style is that of one stuck on that one's self.

How do you work that out? You don't know anything about me. When you can't answer a point you start all that stuff and as you can't answer any of the points, and it's all on the record, you turn the thread on me and then you say I've done it. Such a base and underhand trick might work in your milieux but it doesn't wash with me.

There's some stuff about your goodself though here and there. And fm feels the need to tell us his plans and which elite bodies he's on and plenty more.

0 Replies

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know