Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

I've enough to read fm. There's books all over the place here with bookmarks in and some left open. He's not that interesting a character to me. Silver spoon an all that. I don't mean he is uninteresting. Everybody is interesting in that way. He could have shagged his way through the daughters of the country gentry and looked for more variation in his progeny. That's what stud owners practice in the main using evolution theory as their guide. If you practice that sort of thing you don't need to know it is labelled "Evolution Theory". In fact most of those who have practiced it as a matter of course probably never heard of it as they lived before Darwin was born or are too busy and those who talk about it don't practice it themselves.

Anyway- you're a geologist. If the centre of the earth is molten won't it be tidal like the waters are and thus the plates ride up and down a bit with the lunar cycles. Maybe more sluggishly. Gravity only falls off with distance and can't be screened out. The plates would be like boats in the dock? What do you think fm? I never read that anywhere. It came up from something in the pub but I've forgotten what.

Are there studies of it?

0 Replies

wande-

The second letter is utter piffle from front to back.

He even sets up an opposition between scientific method and free speech and popular opinion. Which justifies the 1st letter's use of "fascist".

And the usual red herrings about alchemy, the mother of chemistry, and astrology, the mother of astronomy and fine measurement.

And I think his economics can be refuted as well. Junior and support staff might well make a better workforce for a scientific company in an area such as that. The senior staff, few in number by definition, seeing as how it is a status symbol to have a lot of support staff, can be flown in from wherever attracted by the salary and the sunshine and the looser way of life. Imagine a support staff like you lot if you will for a brief moment.

I know which I would prefer to try to sell to a prospective client.

0 Replies

Quote:

Evolution in the Classroom? It's about the Teachers

0 Replies

Quote:

Making the questions easy is the name of the game. Questions about evolution fit the bill for that goodstyle. Then they all pass, the little loves, and they all get to think they are scientists, and get a diploma with some fancy caligraphy impressed into some decent quality flattened out wood-pulp with pinked edgings, get a cap and gown (from $299.99), a video of the ceremony (from $39.99,) group photographs with various dignitaries ( from $9.99. Frames extra), photograph frames ($19.99 to how much is the little bugger worth to its proud Mom and Pop).

You see- it's hard work studying and to get the little monsters to do it, what with all the temptations the evolutionary process has landed them with, is very difficult without whacking them. So once whacking them is criminalised they have you by the shorts.

Hence you have to devise ways of making lazy, idle, good-for-nothings look good then you don't have to admit you are responsible for bringing up such specimens as it would reflect badly upon you and your neighbours would arch their brows when they passed you in the streets.

Evolution theory is perfect. Promotors of bringing it to the classroom, under the guise of providing a sound scientific education (asserted of course) are engaged in dumbing down the kids without anybody noticing because a dumbed down population is easier to manage and hypnotise with scientific mumbo-jumbo, and especially when it thinks it has a scentific intellectuality and thus a duty to defend science against its enemies who keep asking awkward questions about one thing and another.

0 Replies

wande quoted, in a rare readable piece,

Quote:

Our study suggests that requiring all teachers to complete a course in evolutionary biology would have a substantial impact on the emphasis on evolution and its centrality in high school biology courses. In the long run, the impact of such a change could have a more far reaching effect than the victories in courts and in state governments.

I've been telling you all along that you were making mountains out of molehills with the court cases and debates in assemblies. I told you it was a recruitment problem years ago.

Now you have a scientific source confirming what I have been telling you about those things and amply justifying my be-littling of them and my charge that you were using them for your own purposes which, as we all know, is a distinctly unscientific activity.

0 Replies

Quote:

I've been telling you all along that you were making mountains out of molehills with the court cases and debates in assemblies. I told you it was a recruitment problem years ago.

Unfortunately for your world, our system allows the examination of ideas from many angles. Where there are prsocriptions, anyone is entitled to "end run" them (like the IDjits).
Courts are full of cases where you feel there should have been "indoctrination at an early age". If you could explain how this could be accomplished without youre making a stain on the rug, Id like to hear it.

Your logic is circular

0 Replies

And-

Science is now such an abstruse subject that it can only be understood by the few enthusiasts and they don't need whacking because they love it.

And more than a few are not necessary.

0 Replies

fm wrote, in his usual style-

Quote:

Your logic is circular

Possibly, fm, you didn't quite understand wande's last quote.

Our system also allows the examination of ideas from many angles, whatever that might mean looked at critically.

I don't see what I need to explain. It isn't so much that I am in favour of "indoctrination at an early age." I just don't see how it is possible to avoid it in a civilised society. Pretending you have avoided it because it is seen as a fault to have been indoctrinated is simply a conceit and anyone embracing such a conceit is no scientist.

And him thinking himself a scientist when he thinks there's anything wrong with having been indoctrinated is spinning-jenny logic.

0 Replies

Not a successful rebuttal to my claim that your logic is circular.

0 Replies

wandels article

Quote:

A theory has all the evidence in support and none that refutes. SO by definition, Cretinsim/ID arent theories, they are myths. Like Manitou

0 Replies

MAINE UPDATE

Quote:

No school district vote on evolution question
(Kennebec Morning Sentinel, May 15, 2008)

School Administrative District 59 directors will not address revising the district's science curriculum at their Monday meeting, Superintendent Michael Gallagher said Tuesday.

At their April 29 meeting, they tabled consideration of a revised curriculum that could include changes in how evolution was taught.

Board member Matthew Linkletter of Athens last month suggested that the district remove evolution from its science curriculum, for which the district has received increased news-media attention. Linkletter said that evolution is not proven, and thus should not be taught as science.

Gallagher said that the board has no specific timetable regarding discussion or a vote on a revised curriculum. Such a vote might not happen during the current school year, he said.

0 Replies

There's nobody on here fm arguing that they are not myths.

How can I rebut your assertion that my logic is circular when you offer no explanation of why you think it is.

I couldn't really understand your post of 9.16 am. The first sentence of it contains six unsupported assertions which isn't bad in 14 words.

The second sentence is only correct if you limit "proscriptions" to those you are reasonably comfortable with. So it's a circularity. Nobody is in the courts doing an "end run" on violent revolution for a start.

And the "Courts are full of cases" sentence is incomprehensible to me although I feel sure you know what you meant.

Where is there not ""indoctrination at an early age"? Your sentence is as wooly as "unfortunately", " your world", "our system", " allows", "examination", "ideas", " many" and "angles". Those represent spinning-jenny circularities with you as the axle.

0 Replies

wandeljw wrote:

MAINE UPDATE

Quote:
No school district vote on evolution question
(Kennebec Morning Sentinel, May 15, 2008)

School Administrative District 59 directors will not address revising the district's science curriculum at their Monday meeting, Superintendent Michael Gallagher said Tuesday.

At their April 29 meeting, they tabled consideration of a revised curriculum that could include changes in how evolution was taught.

Board member Matthew Linkletter of Athens last month suggested that the district remove evolution from its science curriculum, for which the district has received increased news-media attention. Linkletter said that evolution is not proven, and thus should not be taught as science.

Gallagher said that the board has no specific timetable regarding discussion or a vote on a revised curriculum. Such a vote might not happen during the current school year, he said.

Here's a comment from someone who lives in Maine...

Quote:

I live in Maine as well, and this makes me want to cry. Our state already hemorrhages jobs like crazy, and it's difficult enough for people to earn a living up here - now this idiot wants to prevent kids from having a well-rounded education, which will eventually make the entire situation worse as these kids won't be accepted by any colleges because they haven't had any real science classes...and they'll wind up working at gas stations or fast-food restaurants for the rest of their lives because of Matthew Linkletter.

F***ing brilliant, that's what he is.

0 Replies

There are a series of votes in the House of Commons tonight on reducing the limit for abortion from 24 to 20 weeks.

A scientist has just been on the "News" representing a group of scientific organisations the upper echelons of which are staffed by the great and the good. He looked very distinguished. He said that there is no scientific case for reducing the limit.

Maybe. Maybe not. But even allowing him to be right, which I don't, the fact of the debate is ample proof that not everybody thinks that the scientific case is the only one there is. And if it isn't you're up a gum tree.

There is only one scientific case. And only scientists can decide what it is and when they can they'll have all the best bints, flashiest houses and biggest cars and send their sons to expensive scientific schools to consolidate their grip.

Last time MPs did vote a reduction from 28 to 24 weeks.

Maybe only quantum scientists and fossil hunters who leap from one bone to another millions of years apart cannot understand that there is no time in the womb and think that there is a way of defining a cut off point in the life of a defenceless human life. A tick of a clock started ticking in some bed-sit or back of a car roughly 23 weeks ago + or- a few days.

0 Replies

Let's see what Linkletter's personal motivations might be...

Here's his profile on Amazon.

If it hand-waves like a creationist and spouts nonesense like a creationist, it's probably a creationist.

0 Replies

ros. How did you do that? can anyone just post as someone else and get a dump of their books on MAzon? Im confused .

Ive always wanted to see the stuff that my brother-in-law has stacked up. on his wish list. Very Happy

, You know, birthday and Christmas gifts

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

ros. How did you do that? can anyone just post as someone else and get a dump of their books on MAzon? Im confused .

I think it's a public profile. You just look up the name.

0 Replies

I've seen ladies talking rapidly amongst themselves about curtains, or somesuch, when a good smelly fart introduces itself into their nostrils when recognising that there are such things as farts at all, never mind smelly ones, is considered low and common and not something a well brought up lady would ever think,or allow, even existed.

And understandably so I must say.

You don't necessarily need to get a frilly frock and a garter belt to be in drag. There's intellectual drag as well. Tart's knickers counterpanes logic.

Brokeback Mountain was it?

0 Replies

Not that I would ever watch such a movie after reading one review of it.

The jokes would be far too ancient for me.

The ladies would soon be in security fenced compounds if that stuff was any good. Given our capacity to deploy superior force.

0 Replies

Fancy giving your precious time to Behe and Dawkins rather than Rabelais and Balzac. That's serious dumbing down.

0 Replies

Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know