Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

farmerman wrote:

Time for spendi to remove his head from out his butt so he can see and hear. (Remember that communication is a two way street, unless youre just here to preach ). The entire ID issue was started by a bunch of religious loonies who would have their way into science classes.

NOVA TONITE 8PM EST--BE THERE!!.

I found the first hour of the show to be a bit slow, mostly a 9th grade introduction to evolution. The second half of the show was much better.

I laughed when they found the transition "fossil" from Creationism to ID in that weird cut/pasted word in the Panda's document (I can't remember the two words which got squashed together, damn, what was it).

Another point I found interesting was in how much the restriction of evolution in schools through the 30's, 40's and 50's, may have contributed to the current populations lack of knowledge on the subject. Lawyers in the courtroom were amazed and enthralled by the detail of current biological knowledge, someone said, "why haven't I heard about all this before, this is amazing!". I've often considered the potential damage that can be done to scientific knowledge of future generations, but I hadn't considered the fact that much of the situation we find ourselves in now (with such a large portion of the population not agreeing with evolution) may be a direct result of an undercurrent of evolution prejudice in schools prior to the 60's (and in certain areas of the country). Information on evolution was specifically suppressed in biology textbooks throughout that time (and maybe even today in some cases).

0 Replies

ros wrote-

Quote:

I laughed when they found the transition "fossil" from Creationism to ID in that weird cut/pasted word in the Panda's document (I can't remember the two words which got squashed together, damn, what was it).

What you should do ros when you watch a programme with a view to having your say on here is get a pen and paper at the ready. You could then make notes and that would save you from being laughed at by viewers on here. If you can't remember the thing that made you laugh we can hardly expect you to rememember the rest.

You do have a buggy running around on Mars sending back live (well nearly) pictures and you can shoot fire and brimstone into anybody's back yard. You have a long list of Nobel prize winners. Your engineering feats astound. As do your medical achievements. You can grow food like it has never been grown before. Your currency is valid everywhere in the world. MIT is at the cutting edge of scientific research. Your movie and TV productions leave the rest standing. Your Silicon Valley is bordering on the miraculous. You are the only Superpower. Your aircraft carriers make the pyramids look like sand castles on the beach. Your planes fly faster and higher and more stealthily than ever known before and with payloads equivalent to Bomber Command's entire efforts. You have franchises for various things in every city in the world and a large proportion of towns. You poofed Rock and Roll. You can do Thanksgiving dinner on the front line with the President as guest of honour.

(That's enough of that spendi -Ed)

I suppose most of that was done by people educated in the 30's, 40's and 50's.

Quote:

Lawyers in the courtroom were amazed and enthralled by the detail of current biological knowledge, someone said, "why haven't I heard about all this before, this is amazing!".

We know about lawyers ros. I can answer his question-- he couldn't be arsed keeping up.

Your post is ridiculous ros. Infantile. Are you auditioning for the part of Job? All anti-IDers are pessimists and defeatists and scaremongers and self-pitiers.

0 Replies

The poor man's Stephen Hawking has spoken Ros, now tremble in your boots.

0 Replies

I agree about theinitial pace of the show and the time spent on elementary evolution. Ive asked Eugenie SCott last year for possible copies or scans of the word "suitable for framing". She said that maybe NCSE would do that. HAdnt heard back , Im sure that everybody mildly involved with the case would want one.

The show made a good use of dramatization since it was not televised.
STilla and all, it was a show that needed to be aired to show the "breathless inanity" employed by the IDers in precipitating this controversy.

Our previous discussions with RL ,where he claims that it was "all evolution, all the time" was nicely shown in how the textbook publishers were intimidated during the pre 1960's (which is why Epperson was a major issue). Ive got a small collection of science books and biology texts from the 20's through the 50" and use these as teaching aids about the fallout that Scopes had on the primary information sources available to kids. I also have a first edition of Ehrlich's EVolution text, in which he admits , in the foreword, that , "their excursions into teleonomy (were) a rigorous defense of modern science ..." Even an early advanced college text , in use at Stanford, was sensitive enough to try to not have to justify its own existence in a heterodoxical sense.

Religious tentacles were all over in their control of market responses. I remember , as a kid, some of the priests were still preaching an issue of "special Creation" . When I was 9 years old, we were lectured by our "circuit scince clergy" anbout how God intervened in the creation of man while allowing (and directing) that animals be allowed to change with time. (The CAtholic Church was quite advanced in accepting and preaching an Old Earth Doctrine--even though most kids had no ide of what the hell these priests were even talking about).

Then, when I was around 11, (when Pope John P XXIII was on the job) , all our teachings were again changing to accomodate the post Epperson world (ie, textbook publishers had a massoive injection of cojone fluid and werent intimidated by the Evangelicals any further)

There ws lot NOT said in last nights show that could have filled the time with history rather than elementary biology.
The biology ws talking down to the audience, while the case presentation was presented almost in a CSI fashion.

I was satisfied and had already sent for a bunch of copies for class review and (Just cuz Im a prick) to donate to our local library.

0 Replies

Spendi's a non-issue.

0 Replies

Quote:

and (Just cuz Im a prick) to donate to our local library.

As Tennessee Williams' uncle Nigel put it, "You see, you've got your bad pricks and then you've got your good pricks."

Wife and I last night celebrated her successful result of a 4 1/2 hour professional examination. We'll find a re broadcast of the show.

Nova...evolved tv.

0 Replies

Sglass wrote:

The poor man's Stephen Hawking has spoken Ros, now tremble in your boots.

Just ignore him Sglass. He trolls threads so he can derail the topics, stoke his own pitiful ego, drool puerile nonsense, make sexist comments, slur venomous innuendo at people, quote irrelevant german philosophy and fawn over old songwriters. Other than that he's great fun to have around.

0 Replies

fm wrote-

Quote:

Spendi's a non-issue.

Aren't we all? When did I ever say I was an issue?

Are you an issue fm? Gee!! Take it easy man.

Nice bit of name dropping though. I'm impressed. I know a cyber man who says he has had a conversation with Eugenie SCott. Wow.

What does " scans of the word "suitable for framing" "mean?

Only "good" use eh? We call that damning with faint praise.

What was "not televised"? You can't even write decent English fm.

Why did the show "need" to be aired. There must be billions, including millions of Americans, who have started the day with this "need" not catered for.

Did anybody actually stop breathing when confronted by the "inanity". Are 94% of Americans "inane"?

All "inanity" means there is anything fm wishes it to mean. i.e. things he doesn't agree with. That's how beta minus women talk fm.

Teleonomy is concerned with the "apparent" purpose and directedness (the escalator of self-improvers) of biological structures and not the purpose and directedness of same which they cannot possibly have to an anti-IDer.

The IDers didn't "precipitate" this controversy. It's been going on for thousands of years and will continue into the calculable future.

I must have at least 200 first editions. Maybe more. I don't care for bragging although I will admit to having a large collection of science books. How small is small fm. Two qualifies your remark as true. And they probably all bat on the same side. And they might not be scientific either.

Since when did Stanford become the benchmark?

You have quietly segued from IDers to Evangelicals. That's naughty fm.
That assumes you are above us intellectually which may well be true but it doesn't excuse underhand strokes of such crudity.

One supposes it is necessary to talk down to the audience which has an average IQ of 100 and with fm and ros watching a bit lower than that.

Is CSI Crime scene investigation or Construction Specification Institute or something to do with computers or Canada or is it Commodity Systems Inc which is fair enough as the programme is a commodity just like the smoked kippers in the freezer at the Mart. To be consumed with at least one pinch of salt.

But at least there was some science in your last sentence.

The rest was undiluted cowflop.

0 Replies

You know Ros, if you make it to the Hawaii a2k meet there is a great observatory on top of Mauna Loa.

0 Replies

That's funny ros. You tell Sglass to ignore me and then you write a whole post fantasising about me.

Bernie-

Pass on to your wife my hearty congratulations on her success and my best wishes for her future.

Quote:

Nova...evolved tv.

Nah. It's another assertion. Evolved TV is something quite different. It is a species of broadcasting, common in Europe, in which Evolutionary principles are followed closely and where religious inhibitions are scoffed at often with a degree of hubris which defies description. Scattered in the wild wind one might say without exaggeration. Trust an American of a certain age to be flattered by such drivel.

Judging from some of the above Nova specialises in the entertainment of the gobsmacked chatterers which category has a seeming need to believe it knows what's going on.

0 Replies

Oh, you mean Spendi is a mascot?

Well get yourself over here honey and I'll give you a little scratch behind the ear. Gout and all.

0 Replies

spendi

It is unbecoming to speak about that concerning which a person ain't gots familiarities.

0 Replies

Bernie-

Your lack of familiarity with that I spoke of so delicately is most likely due to the efforts of your Evangelicals which is a good enough reason on its own, without any of this other airy-fairy nonsense about cichlids and stuff,
for you to long, yearn possibly, to see the back of them.

I was thinking about fm saying I was a "non-issue". Such a statement could only be blurted by someone who thinks I'm unique in that regard. Snowden was such a "non-issue" that his morphine got sold off and he was a war hero (fictional I know) for eff's sake. Maybe I was receptive at the time to the realisation that I was a "non-issue", due to factors beyond my control which I would love to describe in detail sometime if the opportunity arises, but when I saw that scene the notion fossilised and I was thereafter unable to stop tittering everytime I thought about my state when I had thought myself to be an "issue" and thus, by obvious extension, and Faustians are extenders if nothing else, why I don't know, the jury's out on that, I guffawed whenever I saw anybody who thought he was an "issue". I used "he" there because ladies are always an "issue" as Frank Harris explained in his most famous one-liner.

So fm has opened up the possibility that some men are an "issue". He can only have arrived at such a conclusion, and flying in the face of the first principle of evolutionary science, by never having had such an epiphany as I had reading Catch 22 which might be due to him having read it, which I assume he has, and thus thinking himself to be an "issue" or at least not a "non-issue".

That might be why he doesn't appreciate those writers who, like me, accepted that they were a "non-issue" and could report on the world accordingly and prefers instead those writers who themselves think themselves an "issue", or are possibly taking the piss good enough for only members of the category I belong to to indulge a good jolly. We have a comic in England called VIZ. ZIT disappeared for some reason or other.

Anyway- the writers fm must scrutinise fortify his sense of himself as an "issue" which he must have to know what a "non-issue" is. For himself I mean.

As Germaine Greer said- men are like carrots- cheap and plentiful and easily cooked. You're overdone fm.

You don't even know what this debate is about.

0 Replies

It ain't gout I've got Sglass- it's the Worried Blues.

I've been Down To New Orleans with Bob a few times.

0 Replies

FLORIDA UPDATE

Quote:

School Official Opposes Evolution Standards Plan
(By John Chambliss, The Ledger, November 13, 2007)

A Polk County School Board member said Monday she wants the district to consider opposing proposed new science standards for Florida schools that would include specific mention of evolution for the first time.

The proposed standards intended to strengthen science education in Florida have widespread backing from the scientific community and have generated limited opposition statewide.

However, Polk board member Kay Fields objects to the portion of the standards that includes evolution, and she said she will talk with Superintendent Gail McKinzie this week about possible action the district can take.

"There needs to be intelligent design as well," Fields said. "You need to show both sides."

Fields said she's only received one phone call from a parent opposed to the new standards. The mother of two children who attend Polk schools told Fields she favored teaching intelligent design.

Response to the proposed standards has been generally favorable if a state Department of Education Web site seeking public comment is an indication.

As of Nov. 5, at least 70 percent of more than 4,000 people who rated the state standards at the Web site - www.flstandards.org - endorsed the new standards. The Web site lets people rate changes for each of the new science benchmarks, said Jonathan Smith, a Lakeland resident and a representative of the National Center for Science Education. Science teachers or science administrators accounted for the 3,076 of the comments.

About two-thirds of the comments left on the site were related to evolution, Smith said.

Smith's group supports the proposed standards and says there is overwhelming support in the scientific community for teaching evolution, while the idea of intelligent design is not scientifically valid.

Evolution is only a part of the new science standards, which were re-written to bolster science education in Florida. The proposed standards list evolution and biological diversity as one of the "big ideas" in which science education should be grounded.

Current state standards do not use the word evolution, preferring the term "biological changes over time." They will, if the standards are adopted by the state Board of Education in January.

Evolutionary science says life, including plants, animals and humans, developed through a series of small changes over a long period of time. The theory conflicts with the biblical interpretation of the Earth's creation and is strongly opposed by many conservative Christians.

The new standards do not include intelligent design, the idea that life began as a result of an intelligent force or being.

People have had limited opportunity to voice their opinions to state officials in person. Two meetings about the new standards were canceled.

The second and last meeting for the public to attend will be on Thursday in Orlando.

At the first meeting Saturday in Tallahassee, Wakulla County Board member Greg Thomas spoke out against the new standards.

"This will run afoul of many students and teachers," Thomas said Monday. "When I was taught this in public schools it was Darwin's theory of evolution."

Thomas called the changes "radical" and recommended the state continue to use the current standards.

Some others at the meeting approved of the changes.

A 45-member committee appointed by the state Department of Education began revising the science standards in May in response to a 2005 report on Florida's public school science curriculum by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a Washington-based nonprofit group.

The Fordham study said Florida's standards are "sorely lacking in content" and that life sciences and evolution are given "shorter shrift than any of the other" science topics.

0 Replies

Bernie-

What happens sociologically is that some smart lad finds his Dad's viewing card and then when the latter is away he takes advantage of it. Then he tells his mates and then they make a recording and pass it round the school. In every school. Year after year.

Then the young prim New England teacher comes in for the Mechanics of Copulation lesson, a liberal initiative, with a cucumber and a milk bottle (I didn't make that up--it's too corny for me--it actually happened at a school near me) and the kids all snigger, like they always did, and they are SAVED.

Hey-I just made up a joke. Off the cuff.

Why is a retort called a retort.

Because the vessel of reaction is a non-stop retorter.

0 Replies

Since you fain to recognize feminist writers, Spendius are you familiar with Gloria Steinham who wrote "A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle".

Now totter off to your hot bath, and don't spill the scotch.

0 Replies

There are many ideas bandied about on this thread that I am confident continue to perplex even many of the apparently convinced advocates of various fixed positions on the subject of this thread. I am one. The challenge of other points of view and the attendant test of one's own interpretation of these questions is, in my view, the chief attraction of this thread. In addition, the sometimes cranky characters of the principal contenders adds an entertaining sauce to the whole thing. However, I believe the latter has gone too far.

It is unfortunate that otherwise very interesting spokesmen for the contending points of view here have degenerated to mere name-calling and personal affront - too often without any of the detectable wit or humor that might make it all worthwhile. I see little that is either entertaining or enlightening in that stuff. The persistent return of these contending parties to the thread, while offering little more than the same old mud-slinging raises interesting questions of its own. This is doubly unfortunate because I believe all those involved have a lot to offer us.

Mutual toleration and, if it is possible, respect are necessary if we are to either enlighten or just entertain each other in this thing. Absent those, I find it very difficult to understand why one would return to it at all.

0 Replies

I never said I was " fain to recognize feminist writers". I'm not sure what it means.

I have read a lot of their stuff in the manner that MI6 reads the middle-east electronic chatter. You might have mesmerised this lot on here but you haven't mesmerised me. There are distinct signs that the reaction is setting in.

Your quote has been spotted before somewhere as also have a number of variations.

0 Replies

George-

Is it alright if we keep our trousers up for the whacking.

We are an undiscplined rag-tag-and-bobtailed bunch of clunks.

What else do you expect?

But your points have been noted and I for one will bear them in mind from now on.

But I have the utmost toleration of my pals and respect them without reserve and they have enlightened and entertained me no end. Perhaps we are not all enlightened and entertained in the same way.

And you must admit, you would have to because it's all on the record, that the mud-slinging has been all in my direction initially and if I have thrown some back I can assure you it was half-heartedly.

0 Replies

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know