Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'Intelligent design' supporters gather (700 Scientists agree ID is "step beyond Darwin")
Seattle PI ^ | 24 Oct 2005 | ONDREJ HEJMA (AP)

Posted on 10/24/2005 5:27:52 PM PDT by gobucks

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-192 next last
"Vaclav Paces, chairman of the Czech Academy of Sciences, called the conference "useless."

Hey hey hey there Bub ... think about the impact to the local ecomony at the least. Remember, the Red Tanks used to be the ones holding a 'conference' in Czech - how 'useful' was that?

1 posted on 10/24/2005 5:27:55 PM PDT by gobucks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

This AP story was not fully extracted from the wires in Seattle. They missed this section which I found elsewhere:

Pavel Kabrt, a Czech who served on the committee that organized the event, said the capital of the ex-communist country _ now a highly secular republic _ was a fitting backdrop for the debate.

"Communism is gone, but its main pillar, Darwin's theory, is still here ... the evolution theory is taught as dogma here starting in nursery school," said Kabrt, an electrician who lectures on intelligent design at Czech high schools.

2 posted on 10/24/2005 5:31:32 PM PDT by gobucks (Blissful Marriage: A result of a worldly husband's transformation into the Word's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman
Here we go again ===> Placemarker <===
3 posted on 10/24/2005 5:36:25 PM PDT by Coyoteman (I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gobucks

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

There aren't 700 scientists anywhere in the world
who believe in ID. I know. I've read it on the Free
Republic. This is obviously made up out of whole
cloth.


4 posted on 10/24/2005 5:39:48 PM PDT by aMorePerfectUnion (outside a good dog, a book is your best friend. inside a dog it's too dark to read)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gobucks

With the way even the president of Cornell University has decided to get involved in this by making a major speech decrying it, I have to say that the way I'm seeing this now is fully explained by -

(Scientific Community):(ID) :: (Catholic Church):(Copernicus)

The scientific community really has to get down and dirty involved in this discussion, with facts and figures instead of obstruction and name calling, or their battle is lost.


5 posted on 10/24/2005 5:42:37 PM PDT by AFPhys ((.Praying for President Bush, our troops, their families, and all my American neighbors..))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: gobucks

Unless the designer appears at the meeting how are they going to prove it


6 posted on 10/24/2005 5:46:02 PM PDT by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

LOLOLOLOLOL!!!


I keep reading the same thing, and gee, I just want to shake these hapless reporters and direct them here, the safe place for the evos!!


7 posted on 10/24/2005 5:47:22 PM PDT by gobucks (Blissful Marriage: A result of a worldly husband's transformation into the Word's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: uncbob

"Unless the designer appears at the meeting how are they going to prove it"

Well, I suppose they are trying to figure out how to prove it as we speak. After all, ID is just theory for now ... not a fact.


8 posted on 10/24/2005 5:48:50 PM PDT by gobucks (Blissful Marriage: A result of a worldly husband's transformation into the Word's wife.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: gobucks

Some things are observable, and observation does not support the theory that everything degenerates into chaos.

Consider a cloud of Hydrogen; instead of homogeniously spreading throughout the galaxy, it forms a cloud. The colective gravity of this cloud attracts other Hydrogen atoms; eventually the gravity causes this could to condense into a STAR (dis-order into order). The Star burns with nuclear Fission, until the star consumes the fissionable material, then turns into a Neutron Star (more order), this star then explodes, spewing more sophisticated molecules (ie. atomic weight greater than Hydrogen), which then form planets (again more order).

Or, biologically speaking, Dinosaurs were primitive comared to early mammals. Early mammals became more sophisticated (compare primitive hearts found in reptiles to the hearts in mammals).

Simply stated, Intelligent Design is a quantifiable, verifiable, observable fact.


9 posted on 10/24/2005 5:51:23 PM PDT by Hodar (With Rights, come Responsibilities. Don't assume one, without assuming the other.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gobucks
Among the panelists was Stephen C. Meyer, director of Cambridge University's Center for Science and Culture, who said intelligent design was "based upon scientific evidence and discoveries in fields such as biochemistry, molecular biology, paleontology and astrophysics."

How could he be appointed a professor in Cambridge? Interesting... some universities seem to have a little bit more open mind than others... Science is not dogma. If we don't allow a tiny possibility that what we believe may be wrong, it's not science. It's called faith.

10 posted on 10/24/2005 5:51:37 PM PDT by paudio (Four More Years..... Let's Use Them Wisely...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion
How many are named Steve, I wonder.
11 posted on 10/24/2005 5:53:12 PM PDT by Wormwood (Iä! Iä! Cthulhu fhtagn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman
For the local perspective from the Prague Post...

Faith requires no rewriting of science

Postview

October 19, 2005
To Europeans, and to a predominantly agnostic nation like the Czech Republic, the American fascination with religious conservatism might seem a bit of a mystery — and the truth is, it's a bit of a mystery to many Americans as well. But what is generally not a mystery is the underlying difference between science and religion, between questions of fact and questions of faith.

But that distinction has grown alarmingly ambiguous to some, to the point that a few public school districts in the United States are already considering incorporating theological pseudoscience into their educational curricula.
The latest sheep's clothing for this movement has taken the name Intelligent Design, a phrase that would seem more comfortable on an Ikea catalog than a course catalog. In what appears to be an effort at a kinder, gentler counterpoint to the Scopes monkey trial, followers of this doctrine speculate that since Darwin's theory of natural selection lacks the ease of proof of, say, mathematics or basic chemistry, any other notion on evolution must be treated as equally legitimate science — such as the belief that the ascent of man has been traced through time by the finger of God.

Advocates of this belief have even sought to export it to Europe and elsewhere, and Intelligent Design acolytes will hold a conference here in Prague Oct. 22 to spread faith in their new word.
Many respected scientists have no quarrel with the notion that superior intelligence created the universe as a religious doctrine, nor can there be any objection to a conference that scrutinizes the merits of the concept as a science. After all, it's through open academic debate that bad ideas are dismantled and good ideas reinforced.

And, at the end of the day, most people have no serious expectation that Intelligent Design will seize the imagination of the scientific world and force Darwinism to share shoulder-space with it. More likely, in a few years, Intelligent Design will be little more than a curious historical detour on the road to knowledge, like a giant ball of twine on a long highway's roadside, interesting only for its oddity.

But it is surprising in this day and age that some religious theorists continue to feel compelled to impose theological concepts on the scientific world — a practice just as preposterous as if physics tried to explain the difference between good and evil or the meaning of life. And in a way, needing to cloak a religious doctrine with the veneer of science is almost an admission of its defect — true faith doesn't require scientific proof, since the definition of faith is to have belief in the absence of proof.

Ultimately, then, perhaps it's appropriate for the Intelligent Design conference to take place in Prague, the final resting place of astronomer Tycho Brahe, eternally ensconced in the Ty´n Church on Old Town Square. Brahe spent years trying to force a mathematical model of the universe into harmony with the theological teachings of the Catholic Church, to no avail. Galileo and Copernicus found their scientific discoveries equally at odds with religious teachings — which at times put them in peril. Perhaps, as Intelligent Design advocates visit Europe to spread their teachings, they can look to religion's own history and learn something as well.
12 posted on 10/24/2005 5:54:45 PM PDT by jonathanmo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: gobucks
What do you call a janitor in a room full of creationists?

The smart one.

13 posted on 10/24/2005 5:54:58 PM PDT by WestVirginiaRebel (The Democratic Party-Jackass symbol, jackass leaders, jackass supporters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: uncbob
Unless the designer appears at the meeting how are they going to prove it

They can't "prove it" anymore than a Darwinist can prove his theory. What they say is the evidence points to a higher intelligence having designed what we see.

Now one can argue that it's not necessary, that spontaneous generation actually is real, but they can't prove that either.

14 posted on 10/24/2005 5:55:04 PM PDT by ThirstyMan (hysteria: the elixir of the Left that trumps all reason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: uncbob

"Unless the designer appears at the meeting how are they going to prove it"

I suppose the "missing link" shows up at all the evolutionists' meetings.


15 posted on 10/24/2005 5:55:17 PM PDT by almcbean
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: almcbean

Neither side can PROVE ANYTHING at this point in time


16 posted on 10/24/2005 6:00:31 PM PDT by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: gobucks
How many Intelligent designers can dance on the head of a Czechoslovakian pin ping
17 posted on 10/24/2005 6:07:41 PM PDT by shuckmaster (Bring back SeaLion and ModernMan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WestVirginiaRebel

LOL!!!


18 posted on 10/24/2005 6:08:47 PM PDT by shuckmaster (Bring back SeaLion and ModernMan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; <1/1,000,000th%; balrog666; BMCDA; Condorman; Dimensio; Doctor Stochastic; ...

How many Intelligent designers can dance on the head of a Czechoslovakian pin ping


19 posted on 10/24/2005 6:11:38 PM PDT by shuckmaster (Bring back SeaLion and ModernMan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

Stars don't use nuclear fission, they use fusion. Solar systems don't form in any way that resmbles your assertion about exploding neutron stars, so forgive me if I ignore whatever point you were trying to make in the first 2 paragraphs

In what way were dinosaurs more "primitive" than contemporaneous mammals? The only fossilized dinosaur heart known is four-chambered, as bird and mammal hearts are (you could find this in 2 seconds with google).

Please post the quantifiable (meaning measurement, math and numbers) facts of intelligent design as an explanation for biology, how they were verified, and how they were observed.
AFAIK NO elements of the intelligent design "theory" have ever been applied to any real biological system, observation, or measurement.






20 posted on 10/24/2005 6:14:49 PM PDT by chrisg2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-192 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson