Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Exactly. The word compromise sounds good, but it's really only a compromise which addresses the facade they are presenting, not their actual motives. And as such, I think it would be a compromise with a meaningless effect.

What we want is to protect the integrity of science education and minimize the expenditure of public funds to do so. Science is under attack, so it will cost time/money to defend it. But offering a compromise which does not assuage the attacker will not deter them from continued attacks.

The Art of War is to defeat the opponent's strategy first. At the moment their strategy is to pretend to be something they are not (academic freedom), so our goal should be to expose them for what they are.

fm wrote-



There's no need for you anti-IDers to buy into anything. You can remain the oddballs for as long as you wish. When you point blank refuse to answer simple questions put to you, as you have been doing for three years on here, nobody is going to pay you the slightest attention. It is you lot science needs protecting from.

You can ride your eccentric, subversive, fantasy hobby-horse for as long as you like. It gives us all a good laugh.

What compromise can an atheist possibly envisage?

Even Walter Pater discovered by 25 that attacking Christianity was futile. You have neither the wit, courage nor knowledge to promote anti-ID. All you can manage is a negative and easy campaign against ID. Booing in effect.

What do you propose as a basis for morality?

When are you going to stand for election as atheists? Do you not know how popular surrendering to the impulses of the moment is? I'll write your election address if you want.

ros wrote-



Bollocks. What overweening arrogance. As if IDers don't want that as well when it is possible. IDers live fully in science. Love it. Are grateful for it. Depend on it. Support it. Who do you think you are using "we" in that way.



I've exposed you for what you are not. You are not anti-IDers. You are dissident puritans with the dissidence in the service of noise making and you won't go near the subject of sex and that is what the debate is all about. Your iconoclasm is a joke.

What are lingerie shops for ros?

What are politicians supposed to do if they believe that atheism runs us into the buffers.

What morality can science offer?

Answer the bloody questions. Let's see this vaunted scientific integrity.

You don't even know de Sade because it was kept from you by your mummy. You use these high flown words in the same way you shoot your cuffs. They don't kid me even though they might have served you in the little pond you evidently swim in.

You are insulting the intelligence of A2Kers.

anybody seen spendius? Ever since this thread lockout feature has been put into service < Ive not seen anything in the que from him. I hope hes alright? the poor lad.

What's that all about fm?

Are you getting confused at a few simple questions and making ga-ga noises.

When did I go missing?

Isn't it great that A2K has a new feature that allows us to selectively block out posts from individual members?

I know, nowI dont have to wade through endless piles of spendigrams to find the beef posted by mnore serious threaders.
I suppose hes over on the Brit thread or the trivian boards

wande wrote-



What's great about it? It's pathetic. I don't even believe it. A2K would never do a thing like that. It's like when little girls hide their face in horror movies. It's worse. It's getting Mummy to do it for you. Choosing to have an authority figure to render yourself blind and deaf just because you have no answers. How scientific is that?

The Senator referred to "controversial issues" and when we touch on one or two of them these big-time scientific academics go all wobbly at the knees. It's a good job they were only touched upon. Our education experts might have fainted otherwise.

It's a form of capitulation. Like Bob Dylan said- "You can't look at much can you man?"

And they are a gang with only one opponent. It's a petulant demand that everybody agree with them or else they are not speaking.

I knew they hated free speech unless they defined it.

If Science has toes to curl in embarrassment they will be bent double with defenders such as these in the camp.

I think there was an intelligent recall by the factory that designed spendi--Faulty latches.

T
K
O

It was the Old Man who had the faulty latches.

You're supposed to be ignoring me TKO.

I guess pretending to ignore spendi has it's own entertainment value.

T
K
O

I'm gonna end up like that guy on the pavement in Midnight Cowboy who so perplexes the country boy experiencing the big city for the first time. Joe soon came to terms with it.

You'll be okay TKO. Which phrase reminds me of Yoko Ono's English nickname.

I just nipped over to the Brit thread and the mention there reminded me that I once wrote to Lord Archer and he replied that he didn't know what I was talking about. I had only said that certain aspects of his history reminded me of Frank Harris. Which was a compliment coming from me.

So there you are. You're in high class company.

As I said before--"I don't believe it".

But what I do believe is the type of track these closed minds run upon which their recent posts have so delightfully shone the lights on.


When they present a hypothesis they only want it testing and peer-reviewing by those they approve of. Anybody else and it's shut-ears and blindfolds. The only answers they could think of. How to get a fin turned into a wing the easy way.

Wonderful.

easy way?

Books like the bible give us easy ways. Scientists aren't trying to make shortcuts, their trying to take the right roads.

T
K
O

wande quoted-



I refuse to read any furthur.

I was impressed by Mr Murtagh rallying Duke of Marmalade in the last 100 yards of the King George and Queen Elizabeth stakes after having kidded the French jockey of Papal Bull into come too soon.

Blind cave organisms are for the scientifically illiterate.

Weren't you just soapboxing about not being heard and how evolutionists are ignoring others?

T
K
O

I don't blot posts out sight unseen but I do ones that start like that one did wande. I give them a chance.

You missed the point TKO.

When a post starts out with an arresting stupidity of the nature wande's last quote did there is no point in reading on. More stupidities inexorably will follow.

I never said I had screened wande's posts out. I complimented his Washington Post post.

His last post screened itself out. I only give to beggars when they look like they need it and Hitchens is a long way from my cut-off point.

He is begging in case you don't know. He is not only grinding the organ but he's the monkey as well. Saves money you see. Why feed a monkey when you can do it yourself.

That's one bare-assed lie if I ever saw one. He's impressed at you silly sods being impressed that he's impressed.

Cyd Charisse impressed me in my formative years.

Are blind cave organisms where it's at these days. I consider that seriously heretical.

And what about a cheese and tomato butty?