Intelligent Design Might Be Meeting Its Maker

The New York Times ^ | December 4, 2005 | LAURIE GOODSTEIN

[Right Wing Professor]

TO read the headlines, intelligent design as a challenge to evolution seems to be building momentum.

...

Behind the headlines, however, intelligent design as a field of inquiry is failing to gain the traction its supporters had hoped for. It has gained little support among the academics who should have been its natural allies. And if the intelligent design proponents lose the case in Dover, there could be serious consequences for the movement's credibility.

On college campuses, the movement's theorists are academic pariahs, publicly denounced by their own colleagues. Design proponents have published few papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

[Liberty Wins]

Maybe I didn't make myself clear. Alfred Kinsey, Karl Marx, Sigmund Freud, Ted Kennedy and other liberals currently alive in the U.S. have all expressed a firm belief in evolution. THAT is the uncomfortable philosophical bed you must share with them.

[Dimensio]

Can I answer any other questions for you?

Yes. Why did you dishonestly claim that all who accept evolution are atheists? Are you really so ignorant as to not understand that this is not the case, meaning that you have no credibility in this discussion, or are you just lying, meaning that you have no credibility in this discussion.

[Dimensio]

So because I accept a theory in biology that is well-supported by evidence, I'm sharing the philosophy of Karl Marx? What an utterly absurd connection.

[Liberty Wins]

"all claims of ID are subjective"

Does that invalidate all other scientific theories without tangible evidence? String theory? The theory of gravity? (We still don't know what gravity is, though we can see it at work.)

[RussP]

"Mathematicians agree that any requisite number beyond 1050 has, statistically, a zero probability of occurrence..."

"No, were that true, it would falsify the Battle of Hastings."

Could you honestly not figure out that he meant 10^50?

[phantomworker]

I am not an atheist and I embrace evolution.

What is wrong with Sigmund Freud, btw? Never heard him being dis'd like that before. Wasn't he super moralistic with his ego, id, and super-ego (conscience)?

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Senator Bedfellow]

Jim Jones, the Taliban, al Qaeda, David Koresh, Sun Myung Moon, and the Nuwaubians all expressed a firm belief in creationism. How's that bed fit you?

[phantomworker]

I am a mathematician, and I do not agree that 1050 or 10 to the 50th power has, statistically, a zero probability of occurrence!

[Dimensio]

What is wrong with Sigmund Freud, btw? Never heard him being dis'd like that before.

Mysogynistic coke addict. Despite his reputation amongst some as the "father" of modern psychology, his techniques and "theories" don't come close to actual professional research and work.

(One of the people for whom I do tech support is a psychologist who does not care much for Freud).

[RussP]

"So because I accept a theory in biology that is well-supported by evidence, I'm sharing the philosophy of Karl Marx? What an utterly absurd connection."

You should at least be aware that Marx wrote this:

"Although it is developed in the crude English style, this [On the Origin of Species] is the book which contains the basis in natural history for our view."

In other words, Karl Marx saw Darwinian evolution as one of the keys to the communist revolution that would take over the world. You did know that, right?

I'd say old Karl was quite the visionary.

And we haven't even gotten to the Nazis yet.

You views share interesting company.

[Oztrich Boy]

How many species have occured from a single common ancestor since the last mass extinction?

It ususally takes two ancestora

[phantomworker]

My undergraduate degree is in Psych, and I totally agree that his theories are flawed, but I couldn't connect how he is associated with evolution.

Coke addict, no doubt. LOL!!!

[Dimensio]

In other words, Karl Marx saw Darwinian evolution as one of the keys to the communist revolution that would take over the world. You did know that, right?

Marx was an opportunist. The theory of evolution has no political implications whatsoever. Only an idiot or a liar tries to claim that a theory in biology logically lends credence to any political system and only someone truly dishonest tries to bring up communism in a discussion of evolution. It shows that you don't actually have a sound argument against the biological theory and are attempting to smear it through guilt by association.

The theory of evolution does not, in any way, suggest that communism is a good political or economic system. Marx claiming to like the theory does not create connections that the theory does not make.

And we haven't even gotten to the Nazis yet.

Oh, I eagerly await the dishonesty you spew when you attempt to "prove" that the theory of evolution logically leads to Nazism.

You views share interesting company.

As do you, considering that you share beliefs with Islamic terrorists.

[Dimensio]

My undergraduate degree is in Psych, and I totally agree that his theories are flawed, but I couldn't connect how he is associated with evolution.

Creationists frequently try to dishonestly associate the theory of evolution with unpopular people. Whether or not those people actually were strong supporters of the theory is irrelevant. They don't have a rational argument, so they try "guilt by association" as though the fact that Marx liked the theory of evolution somehow makes it less valid.

[Liberty Wins]

"What is wrong with Sigmund Freud, btw?"

Actually, Sigmund Freud is in the process of being discredited along with other 20th century liberal heroes. Like Marxism, nobody believes in psychoanalysis anymore except people incarcerated in various university departments.

The problem with Freud's work was his lack of scientific rigor. Throughout his writings, there are no clear, objective standards by which psychoanalytic assertions can be independently tested and evaluated.

Studies have confirmed that psychoanalysis doesn't cure people of psychiatric illnesses any better than leaving them to recover at home alone.

Have you heard of the study where they sent undercover doctors to a mental hospital to pretend they were psychiatric patients? No matter how sane and reasonable they were, the "pretenders" were still evaluated as sick by their attending psychiatrists. Something funny about that.

[phantomworker]

Mysogynistic- OK, he hated women. I hate going to dictionary.com because I always end up with some extra spyware and downloads attached to my computer.

Of course, your entire life is based on how your mother treated you as a kid. LOL!!! Oedipus complex. LOL!

[Oztrich Boy]

You left out tne Raelians and the Moonies

[phantomworker]

Well, duh! I don't think anyone is a Freudian anymore.

As you know, psychology has evolved quite a bit since Freud first made it popular in the 20th century.

[Sun]

"No, were that true, it would falsify the Battle of Hastings."

Is that it?

cute, it think.