Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

spendius wrote:

Fancy dance steps are not what Mr Mailer had in mind when he wrote Tough Guys Don't Dance.

No Sir!

Your kind of exegesis is what we call in the desert southwest jumping through hoops.

0 Replies

I've seen better than that.

I once saw a barmaid down the Gut in Malta get on a table and.......I wish I had a video of it.

But I liked it mesquite.

I saw a video once where a Turkish guy suspended a young lady from a harness fastened to his neck and he gave her one by raising his head up and down and without her moving a muscle. Or any we could see at least.

0 Replies

I'd like to point out to Spendius that eugenics goes mostly contrary to the Evolution Theory. To ensure the proper survival of the species, you must have a wide range of varieties and a large gene pool. Eugenic actions consistently decrease the gene pool and thus is detrimental to our survival as a species.

Secondly, the Theory of Evolution is a model that describes how things are. How things are, are not how things should be.

Thirdly, in terms of eugenics, Intelligent Design is no different from the Theory of Evolution. Both state that the "fittest" survive. Fittest being defined as that organism that has phenotypic attributes that allow it to survive the processes of natural selection. If Evolution promotes eugenics (which is utterly bollocks) then so does ID, so your claims, spendius, that ID would alleviate the "problems" of Evolutionary Theory are absolutely unfounded.

And I'll tell you why ID is poor theology. It basically states that God can't do anything. It basically states that he is not omnipotent and that he is the most incompetent God in existence, as he can't create a naturalistic system that would be able to create all the adaptations that are necessary for an organism's survival. Likewise for Creationism.

0 Replies

Darwin himslf stated fairly reasonably that eugenics is contrary to natural selection. In fact Darwin spent about a third of his first volume and (more in later editions) to differentiate artificial from natural selection. He distinguished the selection for favorable phenotypic traits in selective breeding programs and personally learned a little bit from quite a few years of breeding fancy pigeons.

He ws totally ignorant of Mendelian genetics , however he could at least, gotten an inkling from the results of his own coop. The troublw with DArwin, as a scientist was that he was unable to get quantitative with results. He was of an age where being a good artist(able to render biological specimens) was more important than analytical skills

0 Replies

FLORIDA UPDATE

Quote:

School Science Bill Evolves To Squelch Religion Angle
(By CATHERINE DOLINSKI and RUSSELL RAY, The Tampa Tribune, April 12, 2008)

House lawmakers have rewritten a proposal allowing science teachers to question or contradict the theory of evolution in class. The changes, they say, will ensure it doesn't usher religious proselytizing into public schools.

The revision is unlikely, however, to tamp down controversy over the bill, which responds to a new state requirement that requires the teaching of Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. The complaints continued Friday from opponents who argue that the changes still leave open the door to religiously motivated attacks on evolution.

As first introduced, the "Academic Freedom Act" from House sponsor Alan Hays and Senate sponsor Ronda Storms protects teachers who present "scientific information relevant to the full range of scientific views regarding biological and chemical evolution in connection with teaching any prescribed curriculum regarding chemical or biological origins."

That version already has cleared two Senate committees and awaits debate in the full chamber. Storms has said repeatedly that the bill's purpose is to protect academic freedom and promote critical thinking. She notes that the bill states it "shall not be construed to promote any religious doctrine, promote discrimination for or against a particular set of religious beliefs, or promote discrimination for or against religion or non-religion."

But groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union charge that it opens the definition of "scientific information" and "scientific views" so wide as to include theories rejected by the mainstream scientific community.

On Friday, Hays introduced an amendment during a House Schools and Learning Council meeting that struck out nearly all of the bill's original language. In its place, the bill requires that instructional staff in public schools provide students with "a thorough presentation and critical analysis of the scientific theory of evolution."

Hays, a Republican dentist from Umatilla, said afterward the change is significant.

"The amendment was offered because we felt that the original language had a greater risk of opening the door for religious teaching," he said. "We felt like the language narrowed it down, as the amendment says, to teaching the theory of evolution in a thorough way, with critical analysis of it."

All Hays wants, he said, is for students to learn "how to think, not just what to think" and for teachers to have the freedom to "pick apart and analyze" theories in class. It was clear Friday that his revisions had not quelled those concerns.

"It opens the door to the teaching of religious beliefs as a science in the classroom," said Courtenay Strickland, public policy director of ACLU Florida. "Calling something science doesn't necessarily make it science."

Rep. Martin Kiar tried unsuccessfully to convince the House council to remove the phrase "critical analysis," which he thinks would allow teachers to present creationism and other religious interpretations in class, in violation of the constitutional separation of church and state.

"If a teacher is able to critically analyze evolution in her classroom, many of our teachers are going to bring up creationism and they're going to espouse their ideas concerning that," said Kiar, D-Parkland.

Hays said he thought the language would not violate the state or federal Constitutions. Later, he said he does not want religious teaching in science classrooms, and does not think his proposal would permit that to happen.

Asked about the prospect of teaching intelligent design - an alternative hypothesis to the theory of evolution that has been embraced by many religious activists - as science, he said, "As far I'm concerned, it's not allowed. I think the courts have been pretty clear on that."

Hays said he had consulted once with Storms about the revisions he was making to the bill, and that "her first impression was favorable." Storms did not return phone calls Friday.

0 Replies

When you get down to it, all this amending and "minor changing" is like picking flyshit from the pepper. After a while, the context and the whole meaning is lost except to a bunch of attornies who will , no doubt, try to fish up a client no matter how this thing lands. It sounds that, with all this amending , that this thing has a chance of passage?
HAs the governor come out with any statement about whether hed sign it?

0 Replies

Wolf-

I wasn't making any of the points you have referred to all of which are subjective and much too simplified.

As fm has pointed out I am an impressionist poster.

We have no way of knowing what "success" means. Only the future will decide such things. We don't really know what "Creationism" means.

When Lenin said that there are those who do and those to whom it is done it might well be that "Creationism" or ID or Evolution Theory means something entirely different to those two categories of humankind. And what it means to those who do is far and away more important than what it means to those it is done to.

We have no way of knowing what "fittest" means. It may well be that a higher IQ may be required to survive in difficult circumstances than to get a double first at Oxbridge. And particularly in Darwin's day.

A population which culls economically, as we see in parts of Africa and elsewhere, may well be "fitter" than a population which keeps alive biologically problematic individuals and allows them to breed which is what we have in Christian Western society. Such a consideration could be the base line of Mr Mugabe's policies. A generalised policy, say, based on the ancient method of exposing infants. Mr Mugabe is a Marxist I think.

There is a negative correlation between social status and family size in our societies. This led J.B.S. Haldane to point out the wisdom of " Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth".

It is not really a question of what Darwin said. It is a question of the possible misapplication of his theories and the eugenics movement, elitist to the core, is the best known example. I am suggesting that teaching Darwin in classrooms where there are students with IQs higher that those he shows is a potentially dangerous experiment. The President and his/her advisors of, say, 2040 are now in those classrooms. As are the CEOs of the future.

I am also suggesting that these matters are far too complex to be understood by members of school boards, journalists and most politicians as well as posters on here, myself included. Hence the oversimplifications. At least I am aware of my ignorance which does not seem to be the case with AIDs-ers and especially not with those who presume out of some fancy of their own that the term AIDs-er refers to a disease rather than to Artificial Insemination by Donor which is a nice metaphor for what AIDs-ers are seeking to do with the kid's heads.

In order to bury ideas relating to selective breeding of domesticated animals it should be noted that success in that field results from a long series of trial and error where duds are culled ruthlessly and that the improvement sought is in only one respect and at the cost of variability and adaptability. Had the US Cavalry been riding Derby winners the ponies of the Indians would have run rings around them.

We know what desireable characteristics we are breeding for in domestication but the jury is out on that in the case of humans. We require cattle and pigs and chickens to put on body weight rapidly and hens to have increased egg-laying capacities. Anything falling short is culled in the supermarkets on the price mechanism. The subject has nothing to do with humans and thus nothing to do with this debate. High bred domesticated animals are actually monstrosities in nature.

0 Replies

wande-

I note that fm has now come round to my view that your quotes from newspapers are a waste of time. "Picking flyshit out of the pepper" he calls it and offers only the aggrandisment of lawyers and the machinations of their social networks as an explanation and we all know that nothing of that sort is covered in what I prefer calling throwing shovels full of bullshit onto the reader's tables.

Quote:

The Tampa Tribune, published in Tampa, Florida, is one of two major newspapers published in the Tampa Bay area, second in circulation and readership to the St. Petersburg Times. The paper's tagline is "Life. Printed Daily." The Tribune, as well as the Richmond Times-Dispatch, are the flagship newspapers under the Media General banner.

Daily publication of the Tribune started in 1895 when Wallace Stovall upgraded printing from once a week. In 1958, the struggling evening newspaper, the Tampa Daily Times, was bought out by the Tribune Company and was published until 1982. The Tampa Tribune would eventually be purchased by Media General Corp.

Since 2000, the Tribune has partnered with WFLA-TV and TBO.com in a converged arrangement, all connected with one another under owner Media General. The large media complex is located on Parker Street in Downtown Tampa.

The Tampa Tribune's editorial leanings are decidedly conservative to moderate, as opposed to the aforementioned Times, its generally liberal to moderate competitor.

The current executive editor of the paper is Janet Coats. The Tampa Tribune also operates Hernando Today and Highlands Today, local offshoots of the Tribune located in Brooksville and Sebring, respectively.

The fourth paragraph is interesting don't you think. Media General simply covering the ground in the service of marketing wood pulp.

As I said- the only science concerns the cause of these effects you burnish our eyeballs with.

I don't suppose that Mr Hays has the same definition of "critical thinking" as AIDs-ers on here do. Hence the term becomes meaningless and merely a matter of who has a hold on the megaphone at any particular time. It does sound good though I will admit.

0 Replies

wandel, as usual , spendi's comp skill are lacking. I was referring to the finer and finer "tweaking" of legislation so as to render it uncontestable. No matter, (unless its defeated in committee, on vote, or the gov refuses to sign) whatever will result will catalyze another expensive lawsuit.

0 Replies

For young viewers an "expensive lawsuit" is a process whereby large numbers of small amounts of taxpayer's hard earned wages are converted into small numbers of large amounts of fees earned by incantations. It's like alchemy really except that it works.

0 Replies

Spendi dropped the soap in the evolutionary prison shower one too many times.

0 Replies

I don't allow my skin contact with soap Chum except in unusual circumstances which might occur rarely. Nor perfume and suchlike.

I read in the Sunday Times that the economy of Vancouver is based upon marijuana production. Is that correct Chum?

It would be an explanation for your jabbering.

What would be the acceptable number of times to drop the soap before it was reasonable to say that it was one too many?

0 Replies

Let's just say that soap dropping is a reproductive dead end.

0 Replies

Is it possible that no mutations would exist without a mutagenic agent being involved.

Has science shown that mutations are a matter of chance rather than as a result of such agents?

There's a thread next door about sensitivity to things in the environment but it relates to conscious awareness of them and not to unconscious awareness, such as to slight changes in radiations reaching the earth's surface or trace compounds unknown to nature which modern life has injected into the atmosphere and the waters and the land, to which bodies react without the knowledge of doing so.

0 Replies

The randomization of sexual reproduction assures change irrelative of external agents.

0 Replies

and "another expensive lawsuit" is one more of a chain of lawsuits that result from Creationis/IDjits seeking to have their way prevail in schools science classes, and the taxpayers have to ffot the bill. However, in the case of Dover, the court settled on a reduced award and trial fees. Of course , there are still the punatives to deal with and I feel that the aggrieved wont be so magnanimous where some of the plaintiffs had actually lost their jobs where they worked for establishments that felt that ID was "God's way"

0 Replies

chumly

Quote:

Spendi dropped the soap in the evolutionary prison shower one too many times.

Quote:

Let's just say that soap dropping is a reproductive dead end

0 Replies

Share fm. You know how thick I am. I don't get the joke and with four whole emotes I feel sure I'm missing something.

Why don't you start a campaign to disenfranchise IDjits. They can't vote here. That would solve all your problems.

You could run the schools and media then and you could do it Your Way.

It doesn't make any sense to allow people with the characteristics you have given IDjits to have any say in running a superpower. As the initiator of the policy you would be placed in charge and you could use the position to decide who are not IDjits and the way to the very top is all plain sailing from there as Stalin found.

What about the mutagen hypothesis. I hope your position in the industry which creates mutagens on a grand scale isn't inhibiting you discussing a hypothesis or do you now only discuss those hypotheses you have yourself brought to the meeting. If that's the sort of thing Mr Hays means by critical thinking I can well understand that you don't approve.

I didn't give it the status of a theory. Unless you can offer some coherent explanation we will be required to think that random chance alternatives are nothing but assertions.

Let's say, for the purposes of argument, no small matter, that at the instant of fertilisation the embryo, as it is at that instant, is more or less identical with every other one and it becomes changed insensibly as it grows under inputs from the environment in ways it can pass on in its turn.

I read a review of a book by an American lady about a woman with a fairground freak-show pitch who drank bleach and disinfectant during her pregnancies in order to people her pantomime. I didn't dare read the book itself. The review, by an English lady, was quite enough for me. It was fiction I ought to add. Science fiction I suppose.

What do you have to say?

Crikey--it isn't even my idea. I've read lots about that sort of thing in various types of scientific publications. It's pretty old hat what with 3 Mile Island and Chernobyl. I've heard it discussed in pubs. Sometimes with ladies present.

0 Replies

With ducking questions in mind I'm wondering why Chum ducked the one about marijuana production in his hometown. It's no big secret. There's loads of stuff on Google even including maps of the Hastings area with pick-up points pointed out with little arrows. I was surprised they didn't show the trade routes into the outlying regions.

Maybe he's scared of starting a mass influx of A2Kers into Vancouver with the obvious disadvantages that would cause.

0 Replies

fm wrote-

Quote:

and "another expensive lawsuit" is one more of a chain of lawsuits that result from Creationis/IDjits seeking to have their way prevail in schools science classes, and the taxpayers have to ffot the bill.

As we don't get this sort of thing in the Yookay it is reasonable to suggest, as a working hypothesis, if only to exercise our critical thinking centres in the brain, that the expensive lawsuits are a direct and inevitable consequence of the school board system just like expensive gasoline is a direct and inevitable consequence of driving. You might as well plead for free gasoline as plead for free school boards.

And that comparison does work unlike those with the multiplication tables and algebra and thus presents a real stupidity rather than an imagined one.

And I cannot speak for Creationists but a real IDjit doesn't plead for anything except to keep an influx of atheist militants from preaching their "one shot" doctrines in classrooms. Real ID is pluralistic. It gives parents a choice. How can science have choices. It only deals in facts.

Well some of them I mean. The chosen ones.

0 Replies

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know