97
   

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

 
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 02:11 am
How dare you imply magic is the same as ID, magic is much more powerful than ID!
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 04:58 am
NEW LEGISLATION IN MISSOURI

Quote:
Intellectual Diversity or Intellectual Insult?
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 05:51 am
Well have to have a Department of Flying Spaghetti Monsterology, if this goes through.
They seem to equate diversity with stupidity in this legislation.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 05:56 am
If the senate passes this bill, I hope prospective students to their universities consider going outside their state for their "higher education."

Does this also mean all MO colleges would lose federal funds?
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 08:10 am
Eorl wrote:
Eorl edited that which Foxfyre wrote:

No, it is more than faith. It is knowledge obtained through experience, but it is an experience that cannot be taught to another--each person has to experience it to know it. If I was the only one professing such an experience, it could neither be verified nor falsified using any scientific principle, but it could reasonably be suspect. But when you draw in that 'cloud of witnesses', millions and millions of them, who share the same kind of experience, then a conclusion can be reasonably drawn that magic is at least a popular theory of the origins and evolution of the universe.

Again, acknowledging that millions of people believe in magic based on their individual experiences is still not a reasoned argument for teaching magic as science. And I will continue to strongly object to it being taught as science.

It is, however, a reasoned argument for allowing magic and Darwin to co-exist peacefully without getting our knickers in a twist about it. It also is a reasoned argument for accepting that magic and Darwin do not need to cancel each other out or be in conflict.


Smile

Well done Eorl. An elegant demonstration.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 08:16 am
farmerman wrote:
Well have to have a Department of Flying Spaghetti Monsterology, if this goes through.
They seem to equate diversity with stupidity in this legislation.


And we'll have to spend billions--billions, i tell you--on the entirely reasonable and devastating revelation by the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster that global warming has increased inversely proportional to the number of pirates.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ee/Pchart.jpg/776px-Pchart.jpg
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 08:21 am
ros wrote-

(Edited by spendi)

Quote:
Terrible Eorl. A shite demonstration.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 08:40 am
Lola wrote-

Quote:
But obviously, if certain scientific knowledge or activity is clearly immoral or destructive, then efforts should be made to control or regulate how or if it is used.


So you are in favour of muzzling science then thou elegant purveyor of magical charm trinkets and the raids on bloke's wallets. Just those who need their ladies made over I mean.

Who is to decide what is "immoral or destructive". The unreconstructed, not incompletely baked IDer such as Dr Frankenstein might well fancy a go at cloning human beings and would be reduced to uncontrollabe tittering at the idea of banning subliminal advertising.

We are agreed again Lola. We both, obviously, are in favour of muzzling science. And we haven't mentioned the steamies yet.

Is anybody against muzzling science? Are any of these so-called anti-IDers against muzzling science or are they incompletely baked as I have said all along. If they are trimmers, which they are, it is only a matter of debating the moving interface. Not the principle.

Fossils are pretty neutral and easy to get all scientifically methodisty about.

At least IDers principles are trustworthy. And iders more so. Anti-IDers are scientific methodisty when it suits their purposes.

(Gets out snake-oil display case).
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 08:47 am
You have to laugh.

One anti-IDer sneakily messes with someone's text ( a disgraceful act), another congratulates him/her for the brilliance of thinking up such a brilliant trick and another ruins the page width.

Brilliant.

Imagine the train timetables with anti-ID in charge.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 08:47 am
cicerone imposter wrote:
Does this also mean all MO colleges would lose federal funds?


Good point, c.i. I hope someone in the Missouri Senate brings up this point in debate. The Missouri House of Representatives version states: "intellectual diversity concerns in the institution's guidelines on teaching and program development and such concerns shall include but not be limited to the protection of religious freedom including the viewpoint that the Bible is inerrant."

Protecting viewpoints that the Bible is inerrant seems to violate the establishment clause and may prevent federal funding to Missouri state schools. Furthermore, the establishment clause extends to state legislation by virtue of the fourteenth amendment.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 08:54 am
wande wrote-

Quote:
Protecting viewpoints that the Bible is inerrant seems to violate the establishment clause...


I hope they have taken the Song of Solomon aka the Song of Songs into account. Maybe they are trimmers too.

That sounds good. A debate between two sets of trimmers in which only personal interest remains to be considered.

Perhaps you should all decamp to Spirituality and Religion. This is Science and Mathematics and trimming is anathema to both according to the scientific method.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 09:00 am
fm wrote-

Quote:
They seem to equate diversity with stupidity in this legislation.


Loved the "seem" fm. Very scientific what? Did you want to avoid committing yourself.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 09:02 am
wandeljw wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
Does this also mean all MO colleges would lose federal funds?


Good point, c.i. I hope someone in the Missouri Senate brings up this point in debate. The Missouri House of Representatives version states: "intellectual diversity concerns in the institution's guidelines on teaching and program development and such concerns shall include but not be limited to the protection of religious freedom including the viewpoint that the Bible is inerrant."

Protecting viewpoints that the Bible is inerrant seems to violate the establishment clause and may prevent federal funding to Missouri state schools. Furthermore, the establishment clause extends to state legislation by virtue of the fourteenth amendment.


I am sorry for posting the same thing again. I only wanted to move it to a new page.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 09:35 am
Thanks wande. Do you work in the cleansing department?

fm wrote-

Quote:
So where does spendi go? is there even some application to all this IDism?


There is indeed and I dealt with it only a day or two ago but I presume it either escaped your notice or you didn't understand the albumin metaphor. In either case I'm not sure the education of our bed-pan changers is entirely safe in your hands.
0 Replies
 
wandeljw
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 01:37 pm
Here is the text of Missouri's "Intellectual Diversity Bill":

Quote:
MISSOURI HOUSE BILL NO. 213
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the state of Missouri, as follows:
Section A. Chapter 173, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto one new section, to be known as section 173.057, to read as follows:
1. The provisions of this section shall be known and cited as the "Emily Brooker Intellectual Diversity Act". As used in this section, "intellectual diversity" is defined as the foundation of a learning environment that exposes students to a variety of political, ideological, religious, and other perspectives, when such perspectives relate to the subject matter being taught or issues being discussed.
2. The coordinating board for higher education shall require each public institution to report annually to the general assembly detailing the steps the institution is taking to ensure intellectual diversity and the free exchange of ideas.
(1) The report required in this subsection shall address the specific measures taken by the institution to ensure and promote intellectual diversity and academic freedom. The report may include steps taken by the institution to:
(a) Conduct a study to assess the current state of intellectual diversity on its campus, including diversity-related criteria used in admissions, scholarship awards, and hiring which shall include racial and gender diversity;
(b) Incorporate intellectual diversity into institution statements, grievance procedures, which may include filing a complaint directly with the governing board, and activities on diversity;
(c) Encourage a balanced variety of campus-wide panels and speakers and annually publish the names of panelists and speakers;
(d) Establish clear campus policies that ensure that hecklers or threats of violence do not prevent speakers from speaking;
(e) Include intellectual diversity concerns in the institution's guidelines on teaching and program development and such concerns shall include but not be limited to the protection of religious freedom including the viewpoint that the Bible is inerrant;
(f) Include intellectual diversity issues in student course evaluations;
(g) Develop hiring, tenure, and promotion policies that protect individuals against viewpoint discrimination and track any reported grievances in that regard;
(h) Establish clear campus policies to ensure freedom of the press for students and report any incidents of student newspaper thefts or destruction;
(i) Establish clear campus policies to prohibit viewpoint discrimination in the distribution of student fee funds;
(j) Develop methods for disseminating best practices to ensure that conflicts between personal beliefs and classroom assignments that may contradict such beliefs can be resolved in a manner that achieves educational objectives without requiring a student to act against his or her conscience;
(k) Eliminate any speech codes that restrict the freedom of speech;
(l) Hold meetings periodically with students to determine if the students believe they are receiving a sound and respectful education; or
(m) Create an institutional ombudsman on intellectual diversity.
(2) The report shall be distributed to the members of the general assembly no later than December thirty-first of each year, beginning in 2008.
(3) The report shall be posted on each public higher education institution's web site.
3. Each public higher education institution shall ensure that students are notified that measures to promote intellectual diversity are in place and how to report alleged violations of policy. When any student asks how to pursue filing a grievance about an alleged violation of policy or expresses the belief to an instructor that his or her viewpoint has been discriminated against, the instructor shall inform the student of all the options available for resolving the student's grievance.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 01:59 pm
spendi
Quote:

There is indeed and I dealt with it only a day or two ago but I presume it either escaped your notice
Whenever your posts get over 2 paragraphs of wattle, I totally ignore them so, yeh, in effect, it escaped my notice.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 02:31 pm
Referring to my posts, or rather the first 2 paragraphs, which is the same thing really, as "wattle" is a solipsistically inspired assertion.

On a scale of 0 to 10, we might as well keep this scientific, regarding measurement of solipistically inspired assertions for style and content, like they do in the diving, the pointer is firmy stuck on its rest with narry a wobble.

Some viewers may disagree. You cannot prove otherwise and it follows quite logically from that that "wattle" is a real SIA and thus exists in the world, the MToMers claim as a physical object, and therefore is a justifiable subject for scientific scrutiny. The effect is there and we might investigate its cause.

I hardly think even fm fans would dare suggest that the pointer jumped a bit. One might well have a "cloud of witnesses".

Would you "unmuzzle" Science fm?
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 02:47 pm
farmerman wrote:
spendi
Quote:

There is indeed and I dealt with it only a day or two ago but I presume it either escaped your notice
Whenever your posts get over 2 paragraphs of wattle, I totally ignore them so, yeh, in effect, it escaped my notice.


Hey FM, you spelled "Puerile Asinine Gibberish" incorrectly, somehow it came out looking like the word "wattle".
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 03:08 pm
ros wrote, in the SIA party's interest-

Quote:
Hey FM, you spelled "Puerile Asinine Gibberish" incorrectly, somehow it came out looking like the word "wattle".


Oh- how they will chortle in the halls of wit tonight.
0 Replies
 
Eorl
 
  1  
Mon 16 Apr, 2007 08:14 pm
Quote:
(e) Include intellectual diversity concerns in the institution's guidelines on teaching and program development and such concerns shall include but not be limited to the protection of religious freedom including the viewpoint that the Bible is inerrant.


This is the interesting clause, one I suspect may be all that's needed to destroy this stupid bill.

Mr. Li Hongzhi, claims that, at age of eight, had acquired supernatural powers, among which included levitation and invisibility. Possibly as many as 21 million people believe this is true.

Between Falun Gong and the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (SBUH), it shouldn't be hard to scupper this ark.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.11 seconds on 01/13/2025 at 01:46:57