Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

That's all very well fm but you must realise that your "relegate" is an assertion when applied to "we".

And science improving itself cannot be compared to matters designated "charming". Things charming improve with age like fine wines do whereas science is like fizzy pop, a one trick city. One might relegate the former if one had just crawled through a dusty desert staggering and blear-eyed for two hot days and a night since the bottle ran dry but not, I suspect, if one was warming up for an afternoon in the summer house with Belinda, and her charming actress friend, whilst her parents are touring the cathedrals and the more interesting churches of Europe, The Middle East, (weather permitting), China, countries of the ex-Soviet Empire and, hopefully, taking in the Pacific rim and there being held hostage until the UN organised their release and passed them safely home through quarantine with a Mau Mau heebie-jeebie scare in full media froth.

Fizzy pop soon goes flat once you open it.

It depends where one is standing what constitutes "relegation".

I don't think we dare relegate those charming legends to the trash can of scientific error. I'm not sure it is within our power as things stand. They are in our cultural DNA deep within us. Our very thoughts run along the tracks. As do those of the peoples of other cultures. And cultures are odd things.

There's a culture that relegates these charming tales in the department in which you work and the social circles you choose to be in and which would agree with your remark.

I'm in favour of promoting those charming legends. Belinda and her friend are partial to an hour or two of that stuff. It charms them you see.

And Belinda and her friend are charming so charming them with charming stories is a polite and charming way of arriving at the Darwinian bit in the absence of which the latter would have to be brought forward and we all know how crude and animalistic that is and how calculated to diminish our sense of self worth. What the hell else would charm them? It would be a business deal without the charm.

0 Replies

whatever. I was talking to wandel.

0 Replies

Quote:

Scientists speak out on their religious beliefs
(Franklin Kanin, Brown University Daily Herald, 3/6/07)

Though tension between scientific discovery and religious belief can prove divisive, Brown students and professors say the two are not mutually exclusive - studying one can drive interest in the other. Many scientists maintain their faith because, they say, they believe texts such as the Bible and tools like microscopes hold different, but equally valid, truths.

Joses Ho '08, a neuroscience concentrator and member of College Hill for Christ, said part of his reason for studying neuroscience is his faith.

"I believe that man is made in the image of God, so there's definitely something special about the brain that makes us different from animals and from chimpanzees," he said. "Science has definitely got me thinking about the soul because I believe that we all have souls. Is the soul found in the brain or is this something found outside? That is where science is pushing me."

Luke Renick '08, an engineering concentrator and another member of College Hill for Christ, said many elements of science lead people to religion. He cited the writing of Francis Crick, a Nobel Prize winner for his work on DNA.

"(Crick's) thing is when you delve deeper and deeper into a cell, and into the origin of human life, and the building blocks of our life, it's so incredibly complex," Renick said. "Scientists are just baffled by the complexity, and so it leads a lot of people to say, 'well, maybe there is a God behind this, maybe there is a designer.'"

Professor of Biology Ken Miller '70 P'02, who is a devout Catholic, said he sees no contradiction in his professional and private beliefs.

"I think both science and religion are reflections of our very human inclination to try to make sense of the world in one way or another," Miller said.

Miller has written textbooks about the theory of evolution and has publicly defended the theory over creationism or intelligent design.

"Creationism, creation science, intelligent design, call it whatever you will, is scientifically unsupported - flat out wrong," Miller said. "Evolutionary science is as good a theory as we have to explain the origin and species and the natural history of life on this planet, and it stands on overwhelming scientific evidence."

Ho said he believes some principles of evolution, but natural selection remains a theory. Ho said he thinks intelligent design is as valid as evolution and should be taught alongside it.

"I think evolution as a scientific theory is a perfectly fine scientific theory, and as any scientific theory it should be willing to stand up to the scrutiny of evidence and the scrutiny of experimentation," he said.

Renick said belief in evolution by natural selection still requires faith beyond reason.

"Let's say evolution works to a certain extent. How did it start? What is the origin of life? How did life come about?" Renick said. "Whether you're a Christian or an atheist it will take a leap of faith."

Despite their different views of evolution, both Ho and Miller said people look to both religion and science to find different kinds of truth.

"The religious tradition in which I was raised, and in which I still find myself, encloses the idea that faith and reason are both gifts from God," Miller said.

Ho compared the realms of science and religion to a Venn diagram - "two spheres that kind of intersect at one point."

"There are still areas that science doesn't share with religion and religion doesn't share with science," he said.

Rumee Ahmed, the associate university chaplain for the Muslim community, said interpretation accounts for a lot of disagreement. Two people could observe the same phenomenon and interpret it either as a divine miracle or the result of natural laws depending on their personal background, he said. Just as understanding of the world is subjective, so is religion, Ahmed added.

"When you see words on the page, as soon as you construe them in your mind, you have conducted interpretation. Recognizing human subjectivity is the first step to understanding a text," Ahmed said.

The Rev. Henry Bodah, associate university chaplain for the Roman Catholic community, said science and religion cannot truthfully contradict each other. Bodah cited St. Thomas Aquinas as saying "if science and the scriptures seem to contradict, it's usually because we've misunderstood the scriptures."

"So if science can demonstrate, for example, that the earth is five-and-a-half, four-and-a-half billion years old, then it's true," Bodah said. "As far as I'm concerned, there is no conflict between science and religion."

0 Replies

Since the "culture wars" had so prominently featured KAnsas and its seesawing State Ed Board, consider , if you will, the fact that , no matter what the Kansas state ed board's pronouncements about evolution, their directives are merely "guidelines". They have no official weight of law. What the ed board pronounces for students to demonstrate proficiency in a subject like biology, the local school districts can(and do) tell em to go stuff it. The local school districts of Kansas , are populated with the same type of muscle headed trogs and thugs that , until last election, ran the Dover Pa schools. But unlike Dover, these local school boards, are totally autonamous(so if the case was brought up say, in LAwrence instead of Dover,the Judges decision would have reached only about 35 miles in radius. As far as the Kansas elections. Im surprised that anyone even bothered to get all hot , when all the pronouncements they would ever make are purely symbolic and without the power of any state laws. Ive heard from some colleagues in the state of KAnsas, who were informing the various professional councils and scientific organizations that the local Kansas school district in which resides the great museum of the Niobrara Formation , that all these fossil mosasaurs of the shallow Cretaceous chalk sea, were all being considered to be changed to " evidence a designer who worked it all out only about 10000 years ago". If this is not wallowing in ignorance, then I dont know what is. It still shows that the IDiots (and I use the term reluctantly and only in a tone of deep frustration) still claim that they are being "persecuted" while all along they swing a mighty ax of ignorance, fraud, deceipt, and dishonesty, all in the name of a Christian God of "Love and Goodness". Seems kind of like a joy-ride through the looking glass.

0 Replies

Mention of the "culture wars" conjures up matters of far deeper import than the Niobrara Formation has to offer.

Wikipedia offers these sub headings for the seminal disputes between the two sides-

Quote:

Battleground issues in the "culture wars"
Abortion
Adolescent sexuality
Affirmative action
Creation-evolution controversy including Intelligent Design
Censorship, Video game controversy
Capital punishment
Drug Prohibition
English-only movement
Family values
Feminism, Abortion, Reproductive rights and the Feminist movement
Homosexuality, Lesbian and gay rights and Gay marriage
Identity politics
Iraq War
Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse
Illegal Immigration
Opposition to immigration

The fossil mosasaurs of the shallow Cretaceous chalk sea could hardly be said to have the political significance of any of these issue let alone the totality of them.

Saying that- "while all along they swing a mighty ax of ignorance, fraud, deceipt, and dishonesty, all in the name of a Christian God of "Love and Goodness" is oversimplified to falsehood. The axe is swung, if such it is, in the name of positions relating to the quoted subjects.

What is the AIDser's position on adolescent sexuality say, or the English-only movement.

If we buy into the AIDser's position on the basis of some chalk deposits do we get sexual promiscuity merely as a side effect? And are we aware of the effects of that and which institutions benefit from it and who is hurt by it?

Are AIDsers, like Marxists, swinging the axe of deceit (and oversimplification is a form of deceit) for the destruction of family values?

Which is fair enough so long as they provide a picture of their proposed alternatives and have it judged by the electorate. In-house peer-reviewing is insufficient. Relying on that will produce a cultural elite controlling entrance into its ranks of only approved persons and with media and the legal profession in the alliance, for obvious commercial gain, what price democracy and free speech?

Your statue fm is far too massive for the pedestal it is resting upon.

0 Replies

Spendi, and your point is?

Quote:

Saying that- "while all along they swing a mighty ax of ignorance, fraud, deceipt, and dishonesty, all in the name of a Christian God of "Love and Goodness" is oversimplified to falsehood.

. If Ive oversimplified, what words would you add to describe these criminals?

0 Replies

If they are criminals oughtn't you to call the cops?

My point, which was bare-assed obvious, is that AIDserism is about a lot more than the remnants of shallow Cretaceous chalk seas just like Communism is about a lot more than the dictatorship of the proletariat.

It has been my point since I started on here.

Agreed that there is divergence on those issues within each coalition but that is normal in two party polarisation.

The violence of some of your expression does no credit to your side.

Don't you think that charges of ignorance, fraud, deceit, and dishonesty somewhat underestimates the public and gives the lie to the theory of the wisdom of large groups? And are you claiming that only ID-iots engage in such strategies. Are you suggesting that the result of your last general election should be set aside on the basis that ignorance, fraud, deceit, and dishonesty were at work according to many posters on A2K and in many other organs of communication.

"To live outside the law you must be honest". Bob Dylan.

Without a measure of ignorance, fraud, deceit, and dishonesty I doubt our systems would function at all.

0 Replies

Is it not obvious that every product competing in a field where there is a fixed limit to the expenditure of potential consumers will maliciously obstruct the chances of other productions and isn't it therfore equally obvious that ignorance, fraud, deceit, and dishonesty will be in play on a grand scale.

The retailers of ladies fashions and those who they pay to promote their works will be continually obstructing their counterparts in the tobacco, alcohol and gambling industries as a matter of course. They will search for methods by which to ambush the public into preferring their wares.

They will focus their attack on the negative effects of those competitors whilst carefully avoiding any mention of the deliterious effects of vast and expensive wardrobes full of fancy sacks and shame covers. No mention will be made of the fruits of the emasculation of the forceful sex which may very well embrace, some say will embrace, the ruination of a once vigourous nation which the consumption of tobacco, alcohol and gambling could never do because not only are they cheap to supply, easy to control and also have limits to their take up whereas ladies fashions are expensive, impossible to control and have no upper limits.

If you wish fm to address yourself to ignorance, fraud, deceit, and dishonesty it would be more responsible to raise your sights above the sitting ducks of religious tomfoolery associated with non-celibate forms of flock shearing.

It is well known that true wisdom has to make its way slowly against the forces of ignorance, fraud, deceit, prejudice and dishonesty just as animals of longest life are observed not too soon to attain maturity.

0 Replies

spendi

Quote:

Don't you think that charges of ignorance, fraud, deceit, and dishonesty somewhat underestimates the public and gives the lie to the theory of the wisdom of large groups? And are you claiming that only ID-iots engage in such strategies

. I am never surprised at what the public will or will not buy. "The Great Commoner" had them eating the pseudocientific drivvle out of his hand, and, by your past posts you wish to makesuchIDiotic crap the center pieces of "morality ". More damage to truth has been done by these so-called Christians than all the " AIDsers" that you can conjure.
As I keep reminding you re: DOver, and you keep spitting out, is that the deceit and fraud was perpetrated by the "Evangelical" President and Vice President of the Dover SChool Boards , Messrs Buckingham and Bonsell. Along with their "familiars", they attemptred, by deceit of means, to lure the entire school district into the comfortable untruths of Evangelical Christianity, and they did it by first telling eeveryone that they were only interested in controlling costs for textbooks. When they finally threatened the science teachesr with firing due to insubordination because they wouldnbt endorse an ID lesson plan, the only things left to the reasonable people of Dover were to sue. So the errors all lie with the school boards criminal acts (PS, the state board is still reviewing to see whether further individual sanctions shouldnt be levied against the leaders of the school board and the School Superintendent for fraud. Now these are facts to which everyone stipulates (except you apparently).

"Beware the jub-jub bird and shun,
The Frumious Bandersnatch"--not Bob Dylan

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

When they finally threatened the science teachers with firing due to insubordination because they wouldn't endorse an ID lesson plan, the only things left to the reasonable people of Dover were to sue.

farmerman,
You mentioned that local Kansas school boards were not really threatened by the ID plans of the State Board. However, I believe Kansas science teachers also felt intimidated or at least confused by state endorsement of ID.

0 Replies

KENYA UPDATE

Quote:

Church Has No Right to Gag Beliefs in Evolution
(Editorial, The East African Standard, March 6, 2007)

A renovated National Museums of Kenya will open its doors later this year. It is understood that it will house a comprehensive display of the hominid evolution. This is as it should be for evolution took place in the eastern half of Africa and the most complete fossil record was found in Kenya.

Thanks to the Museums, the original of the entire collection, every scrap of hominid fossil found in Kenya, is housed in the Museum. This collection is the most outstanding of its kind in the world and its scientific importance is inestimable.

One trusts that the display will be instructive and comprehensive to laymen and children. This is what creationists seem to fear: That well explained scientific evidence might be more convincing than assertions promulgated from the pulpit.

A Pentecostal bishop, speaking on behalf of the Evangelical Churches, objected to the planned display, claiming that it would confuse children. According to the reports, he threatened unspecified action and demanded that the Government curtail the Museum's plan.

This is a preposterous demand. What would the bishop say if scientists tried to pressurise the Government to erect signs in front of every Pentecostal church, bearing the message: 'Warning to parents. The teachings in this establishment consist of mere assertions and may confuse your children, causing lasting damage to their ways of thinking'.

What is appalling is that faiths sheltering under the constitutional guarantee of religious tolerance behave in an increasingly intolerant manner. While Islam is accused of intolerance and radicalisation, the intolerance and bigotry of the American fundamentalist movement has arrived in Africa.

The bishop's utterances and threats, as reported in the Press, are evidence that some religious organisations do not intend to rely on proselytising, inviting people to join them and convincing people that they teach the truth. No, they campaign to suppress other people's rights and access to information.

Without belabouring definitions, the evangelicals are fundamentalists embracing creationism, the belief that the words of Moses in Genesis have to be taken word for word: The Lord created every single species in six days. Belief in creation, as described by Moses, was, of course, one hallmark of Christianity for at least 1,500 years.

The evangelical movement is a recent phenomenon traceable to a preacher by the name of Seymour who founded the Pentecostals in Los Angeles, US, in 1906. The belief in the veracity of the details of Moses' creation report began to crumble during the Renaissance when science emerged. The doubts had nothing to do with evolution - Michelangelo portrayed in the Sistine Chapel the moment of hominification, the Lord creating Adam - but rather with geology.

The earth was suspected to be much older than earlier believed and the geological processes were witness to a continuous change notably to land formation and disappearance, incongruent with the assertion that the Lord has divided land and water once and for all. People who studied stones stumbled on fossils and as they learned to recognise the sequence of geological formations, they observed that countless species have occurred and disappeared.

To reconcile faith with facts, 'special creationism' came into vogue - the belief that God, indeed, created every species not in one week, but throughout the millennia, again and again, and that he may do so, at his pleasure, any day. This would mean, for instance, that the mutation of the avian flu virus into one that is transmitted from human to human is an act of creation as was the mutation of the Simian Immunodeficiency Virus into the new species, HIV.

That species evolves from each other was suspected by many early 19th century scientists. Darwin's contribution was to provide partial explanation of the mechanism: Competition for survival. Darwin did not know anything about genes. No wonder he was proven wrong in many details.

Evolution is a fact like gravity and the solar system. The mainstay churches, led by Protestants, have realised this and adjusted their teaching accordingly: They embrace science and regard Moses' report as a masterly synopsis, but not a factual report.

The creationists, driven by faith, reject evidence, not only with regard to evolution, but also anything that, however remotely, may seem to contradict the words of the Scriptures.

Their stance is anti-science. One should feel sorry for them for closing their minds.

They have the right to do so and have the right to be tolerated. What cannot be tolerated is their attempt to suppress the dissemination of information they do not like. The Government should make it clear to the bishop that his threats are in breach of the law.

0 Replies

Wandel, what I meant wrt Kansas, and its my fault for the misunderstanding, was that despite the vote at the State Board level, the local school districts could do whatever they wished and most were omitting evolution, using books that were evolution-free , and setting local policy not in line with state guidelines . I didnt mean to make it sound that local teachesr were not concerned, they were,(and are) indeed. The new fight for the Niobrara geology museum is one where the teachers should be concerned because , by setting new labels that do not conform with standard science, it affects the kids lesson plans from physics , chemistry, all the way to mathematics of inequalities.

0 Replies

fm-

I hold no brief for the The Boy Orator of the Platte nor for the other persons you mention.

Perhaps deceit and fraud were practiced at Dover. But sometimes leadership requires that "comfortable untruths" result in more amenity to the public than uncomfortable truths and there are many of those in the scientific rigour of empirical evidence which it is wise to allow to appear in people's imaginations when each of them separately are ready to assimilate them.

Which is not to say that those officials didn't overstep the boundaries of their power or their competance. It does surprise me though that the whole school district was "lured" into the position you say.

I did not know that they had threatened to dispense with the services of some science teachers and nor do I know how many or for what exact reason. I do know that I could teach science to kids with nothing but the truth and be run out of the state on a pole. Perhaps the teachers concerned were too beligerent. One cannot pass judgement in such cases from the sidelines.

Officials are appointed to make the judgements they see fit and if some sleight of hand is involved in putting them into effect so be it. That is the nature of human life. It goes on all the time. As you well know.

And a teacher is a servant of the paymaster.

It is a well known fact that capacity of understanding (IQ if you like) is distributed randomly in all fairly large groups.

Are you not in danger of discouraging or even disqualifying a large number of the intelligent youth in religious communities from the pursuit of science and thus having your future scientists chosen from a lesser number than you need to the obvious detriment of Science? And wouldn't your future scientists find it necessary to choose a wife or husband from a similarly restricted group.

These are a high price to pay in order to provide uncomfortable truths in one narrow speciality of what is a vast area of study in which religious belief is no hindrance in most of it.

0 Replies

Quote:

I do know that I could teach science to kids with nothing but the truth and be run out of the state on a pole. Perhaps the teachers concerned were too beligerent. One cannot pass judgement in such cases from the sidelines.

. Thats been my point all along. Youre so far from the sidelines that you couldnt even see the stadium.

Quote:

Perhaps deceit and fraud were practiced at Dover. But sometimes leadership requires that "comfortable untruths" result in more amenity to the public than uncomfortable truths and there are many of those in the scientific rigour of empirical evidence which it is wise to allow to appear in people's imaginations when each of them separately are ready to assimilate them.

. I do not wish to live in your world, mines difficult enough. If you give up on a point then you deserve no better than the uncomfortable "UN truths

Quote:

Officials are appointed to make the judgements they see fit and if some sleight of hand is involved in putting them into effect so be it. That is the nature of human life.

Quote:

In Pa , they are voted in, and voted out. If they come with agendas that the community doesnt care for, their tenure is in jeopardy. As these "officials" learned." They tried to foist a religious worldview onto naturalistic science, and they got their asses handed to them , and they lost a lot of money for the school district.

And a teacher is a servant of the paymaster.

Quote:

And, in Dover, as in the rest of Pa, its the community to whom they are answerable, not the crooked schoolboard directors or the Discovery Institute, or the IDers joined at the hip.

It is a well known fact that capacity of understanding (IQ if you like) is distributed randomly in all fairly large groups.

Quote:

And this means what in the context of our discussion?

Are you not in danger of discouraging or even disqualifying a large number of the intelligent youth in religious communities from the pursuit of science and thus having your future scientists chosen from a lesser number than you need to the obvious detriment of Science?

Quote:

So, by making this statement, is it your opinion that we should teach the kids about phlogiston, or heliocentrism? How about that dinosaurs and men lived together in sin? or that time cant be recorded accurately and isotopes dont exist?
yeh, in a spendi world we'd have a really goofy science curriculum.

And wouldn't your future scientists find it necessary to choose a wife or husband from a similarly restricted group.

Quote:

Now youve just been out in the noonday sun a bit too long. You should go inside behind the Englishman.

These are a high price to pay in order to provide uncomfortable truths in one narrow speciality of what is a vast area of study in which religious belief is no hindrance in most of it.

Quote:

That was never part of the discussion. Everyone has stipulated that there is no conflist between science and religion save for a very small minority of Evangelical Christians, and Orthodox Jews and Muslims. May you all live happily at each others throats.

0 Replies

Somewhere abopve, I missed the Quote mark so spendi, your quotes appear as my comments and my posts are in the box. I must admit, this will really spiff up the quality of your posts a league. Very Happy

0 Replies

fm wrote-

Quote:

Youre so far from the sidelines that you couldnt even see the stadium.

On the matter at issue I think we all are. If you were up close tell us the details. Teachers can get beligerent. I've seen them fighting.

You said they were threatened with the sack. I asked how many and were they awkward squad members. Your cheap jibe has glossed over those questions.

Quote:

I do not wish to live in your world, mines difficult enough. If you give up on a point then you deserve no better than the uncomfortable "UN truths

What point am I supposed to have given up on.

I don't think you see the point that what is good enough for you and me, and I have already confessed to being far more extreme an AIDser than you will ever be, is not suitable for large numbers of people. One doesn't frequent pubs for years without realising that most people are not ready for scientific rigour and that it does them no good. Not in biology, psychology and sociology emphatically. Not only do they prefer to be snowed but they need to be.

And my world is a piece of cake.

Quote:

And this means what in the context of our discussion?

The discussion is posited on whether or not American science will suffer and I think my context suggested the possibility of it suffering by reducing the base from which scientists are recruited by bringing in an anti-religious qualification which has no effect on most areas of study.

Quote:

So, by making this statement, is it your opinion that we should teach the kids about phlogiston, or heliocentrism? How about that dinosaurs and men lived together in sin? or that time cant be recorded accurately and isotopes dont exist?
yeh, in a spendi world we'd have a really goofy science curriculum.

That's ridiculous. I would have things as they are except for evolution theory and a few other things in sociology and psychology which won't be in the curriculum anyway. What American authors are studied in literature classes? Any Burroughs? Any Selby? Any Mailer even and he is pretty cosy. Any Henry Miller?

Quote:

Now youve just been out in the noonday sun a bit too long. You should go inside behind the Englishman.

Darwin had serious trouble with his wife's religious beliefs. And plenty others do who adhere to the scientific method. You are certainly no sociologist fm. Start with 300m people. How many in courting phase (forgetting divorcees of course) at any one time. How many young ladies can take the scientific method. Don't you know that the vast majority of ladies hate science and with good reason. You should try going out in the sun every once in a while. Ben Johnson labours the point.

Quote:

Somewhere abopve, I missed the Quote mark so spendi, your quotes appear as my comments and my posts are in the box. I must admit, this will really spiff up the quality of your posts a league.

I take it from that that you had to show your grandma how to suck eggs.

Spliff up my posts eh. The Belinda and her charming actress friend was composed with the above point in view. And I didn't explain that. Do you really think I'm so thick I needed guidance through your errors. I assumed they were due to your arm problem.

0 Replies

round II of the Farmerman/spendi discussion

Quote:

You said they were threatened with the sack. I asked how many and were they awkward squad members. Your cheap jibe has glossed over those questions.

You did not specifically ask how many. All you stated that you were unaware how many. I didnt take that as a question. However, since youve now asked, it was the entire science faculty, they were all considered to be in collusion and subordinate. One of the ID members of the board, seeing that the teacers wouldnt endorse a printed statement to be read to the students. They also were against the "resource book" Of Pandas and People being part of the standard texts. This book had been published in a former life with the words "creation" and "Creation Science" used throughout. In the version being preented for consideration for Dover) , the later edition had creation exchanged by Intelligent Design.

Quote:

and I have already confessed to being f ar more extreme an AIDser than you will ever be

Quote:

Darwin had serious trouble with his wife's religious beliefs.

I nelieve it was the other way around. Darwins wife was certain that they would not be joined as husband and wife in eternity. Huxley had always said that Darwins growth into agnosticism was due to the untimely death of his favorite child, rather than all his data.

Quote:

Don't you know that the vast majority of ladies hate science and with good reason

You spek with authority on this How?. Someone should tell all these PhD candidates , that youve discovered their hidden disinterest in all things scientific. How do you expect to be taken seriously with such bullcrap between your Punctuation marks?.

Quote:

One doesn't frequent pubs for years without realising that most people are not ready for scientific rigour and that it does them no good. Not in biology, psychology and sociology emphatically. Not only do they prefer to be snowed but they need to be.

Wow, are you that cynical a dude? Or are you merely an insufferable snob? You'd make a gentle student of eugenics.

0 Replies

fm wrote-

Quote:

You did not specifically ask how many. All you stated that you were unaware how many.

Awlrightee. You're spot on. I'll ask my legal team to check my posts in future. I consider that squirming.

Quote:

it was the entire science faculty, they were all considered to be in collusion and subordinate.

Subordinate to who? Which implies collusion.

Quote:

One of the ID members of the board, seeing that the teacers wouldnt endorse a printed statement to be read to the students.

What happened?

Quote:

They also were against the "resource book" Of Pandas and People being part of the standard texts. This book had been published in a former life with the words "creation" and "Creation Science" used throughout. In the version being preented for consideration for Dover) , the later edition had creation exchanged by Intelligent Design.

Good job they don't work for the CIA eh?

Pub time now. I'll answer the other bits later.

0 Replies

fm wrote-

Quote:

I believe it was the other way around. Darwins wife was certain that they would not be joined as husband and wife in eternity.

That is as I understand it too. She thought he was going to hell and that she wasn't. Women are wimps fm. Put the snake bite on them and they'll tell you anything.

Quote:

Huxley had always said that Darwin's growth into agnosticism was due to the untimely death of his favorite child, rather than all his data.

Fancy having a "favorite child". How silly can silly get. What a monstrous ego it must be to embrace such a concept. And Huxley too to even be able to imagine it.

What a revelation.

Quote:

Don't you know that the vast majority of ladies hate science and with good reason
You spek with authority on this How?.

A bit yes.

Quote:

Wow, are you that cynical a dude? Or are you merely an insufferable snob? You'd make a gentle student of eugenics.

I agree that most people consider me to be a bit cynical. Only a few a snob. And none would ever think of me in terms of eugenics.

I know my Veblen. "The illegitimacy rate represents the triumph of the hormones over the propriteries." Is that Darwinian enough for you? Or are you a social climber?

0 Replies

Quote:

it was the entire science faculty, they were all considered to be in collusion and subordinate.

. I was in a hurry, I meant to say that they were considered INSUBORDINATE, meaning that, because they didnt tow the mark that the school board president wanted, a toady school board member suggested that theentire science faculty be fired for insubordination. This was clearly not followed because , had they been fired, the teachers unions would have carved up the schoolboard president in a court case and he would have been in translucent sheets of meat like finely sliced mortadella.
The reign of intimidation, deception and thuggery by the Buckingham/Bonsell regime was not done without clear remonstrance by all the schools solicitors. Both law firms warned against taking any actions that could be considered to be using a religious agenda to push Creationism/ID.The solicitors issued several memos warning against the possibility of unwinnable lawsuits of a constitutional nature. The Thomas More law center, eager to get a case testing ID under their belt was eager and offered to handle the defense costs of the schoolboard. (what they didnt say was that they would not cover all the coasts of experts and any civil penalties levied against the schoolboard)
.Like the SCopes trial, this case was surely a setup except this time by the IDers. The rubes in this case were the schoolboard and the members , were clearly not saavy enough to realize that the costs of such a trial would be in the millions and someone would lose(probably the school district), and if it were so, the schoolboard would there be no way in hell be an appeal if the case decided that the merits of the ID case were included under the clear definition produced by the majority decision of
Edwards v Aguillard

Actually spendi, Im interested in your misogynistic views regarding the science interests and educability of women. You say you have experience in assessing their interests, I assert that it must be purely tangential because, in my university, women occupy an increasing but significant and minority of the science and engineering College student body. In biology, they are already a majority and also chemistry. In my area we have about 25% women seeking MS's and PhD's in applied economic geology, which includes training (rather thanbelly button ruminating). Training is in research levels of applied field geology, geophysics and includes such diverse areas as tunneling , slope stability, high grading, deposits evaluation, claim development, drilling and blasting.
Wherever your opinion is derived , I assert its more likely from a liberal arts perspective.

0 Replies

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know