Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

How do you work that out Ed? He didn't say anything.

We all know that whatever effemm disagrees with or has no answer to is "tripe" by definition. He's a scientist don't you know?

There was no need, it was on telly here.

That where I saw it Steve. It was topical at the time. Now they are on a six-months (last estimate) stoppage. Not salaries though.

So you went to Geneva to see this prog?

Don't be so bloody silly Steve. Me going to Geneva? Are you pissed again?

No, it was just your ambiguous phrase which prompted a mischievous question...but of course you know that and deliberately ignored it...Geneva is a nice place btw you should go there. Now.

well, Now that EXPELLED has been released in DVD, has everyone managed to see it? What are the opinions of those who did?.

I posted this on another thread but I thought it a useful addition to this one.

Writing in the 1880s of "liberals" who criticised him for not embracing any of their idealistic causes, Anton Chekhov, who suspected them of actually being in cahoots with the State system, wrote-



Dr Hingley, who quotes this passage in his biography of Chekhov, comments-



Perhaps it is considerations of this nature which causes people to be wary of the liberal agenda. After all, Narrow-mindedness, enormous pretensions, excessive self-importance and a total absence of any literal or social conscience are characteristics of much of the fevered outpourings of the pro-evolution brigade.

Well, the lack of response is deafening. However, my feeling re: Expelled is that, while it attempts to portray ID as a theory, equal in evidential status with anything "else", it hedges its presentation with an assertion that anything related to EVolutionary thought is Godless, and is closely aligned with Eugenics, Nazis and Communism.
Quite a mouthful .

Evolution is a sinister plot, and ID is a victim of the plot.

ID is an eually valid "theory' and has several branches of evidence to support it.
My only comment is that, If ID does have evidence, why havent the proponents been able to present it as part of the movie? It would have been a slam dunk to have countered evolutionary theory with good scientific evidence, rather than silly syllogisms and crappy comparisons to Hitler , Treblinka, the Long March, and the presentation of Darwin as the FAther of eugenics.


When we get to the credits we see the AHA moment. The movies principals, Walt Ruloff, Logan Craft, and John Sullivan are unapologetic followers of the Deeply evangelical side of the road, and theyve been peddling this movie through the Southern Baptist Conference Network . To date, the movie has earned a gross (after production costs ) of about 1 to 3 million. The Baptist Conference states that the movie "raked in" 7 million . Not mentioning that it cost 4 to 6 to make and advertise. (The advert budget was quite modest because it was "networked " through volunteer Baptists(Sort of like a sectarian Blair Witch Project).

LIke many pieces of propoganda, Expelled loves to take video clips of tanks rolling through the Sudentenland and Clips of Stalin and Kruschev passionately speaking to their assembled, and , at the same time, present the movies point that Evolution is as dangerous as these.

I think Expelled will die a quiet death as more important topics, like Obamas lack of citizenship or APlins extensive wardrobe , supllant Mr Stein in our collective spans of attention.

Thats my take, and I dont think the movie requires any more analysis.
I think that even Joe the Plumber had greater staying power than "Expelled".

Wait a minute effemm. What have the proponents of ID got to do with this movie which has provided you with your straw man to rant about. Somebody makes a movie to cash in--so what? What does that have to do with ID?

You sure ain't no scientist.

I guess effemm can't answer that because he has me on Ignore. It saves him having to admit he can't think of a reply.

This is just a fascinating topic and I watched the PBS documentary Intelligent design on trial part 1 last night. I don't agree with Intelligent Design as being a theory - I think it is religious and to some extent - superstititous. On account of this, it is not science.

One of the main arguments of ID supporters is that evolution is not a fact - it is only a theory. However, as Ken Miller testified in the trial - nothing in science is fact - all are well tested and continually improved theories only. To degrade theory for fact is in fact offensive as in science, theories hold more value than fact does.

How pragmatic of you to say so

ros has found a newbie so he can start again at the beginning with the simple stuff. I bet he's over the moon. Effortless posting.

spendi, Other than your snide ramarks, what have you really contributed to any thread?

I'm not the judge of that ci. The thread is there for anybody to read. They will decide on your pointless question?

Anybody who does read it with attention cannot but notice the glaring fact that I have raised many issues which none of you anti-IDers have been able to provide answers for. Your side were Ignoring long before the facility was formalised.

On snide remarks you lot beat me hands down. You're just hoping nobody reads the thread so that your snide remark stand on its own.

Ah yes, Spendi.. accuse them of ignoring your questions. Which question about ID as science did you raise?

You are ignored because you are a "drunk" standing up in calculus class demanding that the instructor give a mathematical answer to the question of adding Chekov to Hitler. When told you are a drunken fool you bleat that no one can answer your question so calculus doesn't exist.

On the other thread just now-



To which I responded-

So what institutions are in play for mandating how people should behave?

Care to answer my question parados or ci.



Drunk!!!??? On 2 1/2 pints of John Smith's Extra Smooth and a chat with my pals. Are you kidding? Do you know what drunk means? That's less than a glass of wine. And a dose recommended by most doctors. Drinking the harvest. The food of the Gods.

You've got that puritan prohibitionist head on mate. Did you have to swear off yourself at some point due to either not being able to control your intake or being unable to afford it? Maybe you're a bit windy of the rough and tumble in pubs.

And your Hitler/Chekov/ calculus stuff is incoherent.

My whole position is based upon calculus, a Christian concept, not only existing but being the very bedrock of our science and our success. You silly moo. I think Jesus invented it but an explanation of that would go right over your head as it did the others when I did bring it up.

You should read better stuff than you obviously do.

I am ignored because you lot have no answers.