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.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Nonresponsive, Sir. The issue is teaching standards, and if education is to be financed by government, then the standards must be subject to public policy."

No, the issue was reality. If you want to talk teaching standards, you should have mentioned them.

"If you don’t want to play, then say so. Or just don’t respond. Your actual response is so empty, it’s embarrassing."

That projection thing again. I responded to your semi-coherent post, you just weren't up to it. You posted to me responding to this phrase of mine to someone else,

"”The creationists do think that science is a democratic process.”

I said science isn't a democratic process, and I stand by that. It isn't, because reality doesn't answer to a vote. That was the context of what I was talking about. If you are going to chime in to a post I make to someone else, know what the hell we were talking about.

You said that reality answers to the majority vote all the time. This is delusional. You said *Your angst is a classic example*; when I have no angst. Your post was all over the place. Put down the bottle and try writing something a little more coherent, or don't bother posting to me again.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

I wish you guys were more explicit in what you are talking about. I made a lot of posts after talking to you yesterday, and it would be nice if you could say exactly what it is that you are responding to. Luckily I was able to track down the last things I posted to you. It was a request for YOU to answer MY critique of one of your links in post #579, and I also wondered why Pinker and Bloom's article was included in the anti-evolution list when their conclusions were that natural selection was perfectly adequate to produce language.
I wondered what other padding is on the list.

So no, I won't change the subject. Please answer or walk away.

BTW, I don't give a rat's ass what that moonie Wells thinks. The Unification Church wanted someone to help destroy evolution, so Wells got a degree and tried his best to do *Father's* work. Not much of a source.

[whispering out loud]

thank you this is the very statement, I've been trying to make, "there is no real evidence of Darwinism".

And back by popular demand, ..(dimensio) you want to follow me to my mail box, fine then, I'm back. And once again I turn the burden of proof back to you, If you don't want creationism taught in schools, than by shear lack of proof, I think that they should exclude the Darwinian theory as well. I don't send my children to school to be taught contrary to their Christian faith. Once again I state, what are you afraid of, does the creationist theory hold such a threat to you that You can't even hold place for any competition to your proof lacking theory?

and by the way, (curiosity) If one is a Christian, then they should believe the word of God "and God created Adam from the dust of the earth"

[whispering out loud]

Hey I'm back, dimensio came to harass me at my mail box. A total lack of CLASS if you ask me, but then he's not shown any so far, so what did I expect?

[js1138]

and by the way, (curiosity) If one is a Christian, then they should believe the word of God "and God created Adam from the dust of the earth"

Evolution also creates living things from the dust of the earth. What makes you so smart that your particular imagination is the only one that fits reality?

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"and by the way, (curiosity) If one is a Christian, then they should believe the word of God "and God created Adam from the dust of the earth"

They should also believe the evidence of the physical Creation that indicates the world is billions of years old and that life evolved. Anything else is a blasphemy against His Creation.

[RunningWolf]

Are you serious?? I guess you are. Sorry to hear that.

Has what you've been handed here met your expectations?

Wolf

[RunningWolf]

Sun

broken _____ lives under many delusions (as seen here) lol.

Now me, you, or anyone does not give a rats ass to his demands for you to walk away. Nor does me, you, or anyone give a rats ass of concern to his or any of these other goofballs dismissal of your contributions.

If you have noticed (and I am sure you have) that is one piece in the operandi of their gambit.

Wolf

[He Rides A White Horse]

Even the notion that the universe was created Last Thursday by the cat Queen Maeve? Are they narrow-minded to not let that be taught as an "idea" in public school science classrooms?

...because I was around before last Thursday.

Why is that silly? I thought that "most open minded scientists consider everything." Were you lying when you made that statement?

Your idiocy speaks for itself.

[js1138]

...because I was around before last Thursday.

If a tree is created, will it have growth rings?

[He Rides A White Horse]

As it grows from a seed. What's your point?

[js1138]

That wasn't the question.

[He Rides A White Horse]

That's the answer you're getting....because it is the accurate one.

[RunningWolf]

Darwinism has enjoyed a taxpayer-supported monopoly in the biological sciences. Scores of journals dedicated to advancing it have churned out literally tons of articles. Anyone who actually reads the literature of evolutionary biology with an open mind, however, soon realizes that almost all of it simply assumes that the theory is true. What is "overwhelming" is not the evidence, but the faith it takes to call Darwinian evolution a fact even after 150 years of failing to find much of any evidence for its core tenets.

Well said Sun. Thank You.

Wolf

[VadeRetro]

[Regarding my tagline:] How so?

Here's something I posted online here on a thread where creationists were squealing at being the target of a crowd of liberal glitterati one enchanted evening at a fund-raiser for the American Museum of Natural History:

I've been telling you creationists not to give the Tom Brokaws of the world a chance to save science and science education from you. Going after science and science education was a bad idea.

Here's the theory. Don't do a bad thing. If you don't, then the Bad Guys don't get to play Good Guy while stopping you. They don't get to tar all of conservatism with the brush of being composed of antiscience witch doctors.

This is becoming the national issue I've wanted to somehow prevent. You're going to kill us in 06 or 08 or both.

[Dimensio]

...because I was around before last Thursday.

No, you only remember being around before last Thursday because your memories of such were created Last Thursday as well.

Your idiocy speaks for itself.

Answer the question. Were you lying when you said that "most open minded scientists consider everything.", or are you just trying to furiously backtrack now that you see that your comment has been exposed as absurd?

[Dimensio]

If you don't want creationism taught in schools, than by shear lack of proof, I think that they should exclude the Darwinian theory as well.

Claiming that there is no evidence of the theory of evolution is lying. Why are you lying?

[RunningWolf]

He did answer nutball and it is

Your idiocy speaks for itself.

Wolf

[YHAOS]

“If you want to talk teaching standards, you should have mentioned them.”

Post #891: . . . “it’s clear that in Kansas, as it is in the whole of the US, educational standards, including standards for the teaching of science, are a democratic process, as they have been for well over a century.”

“I said science isn't a democratic process, and I stand by that”

And what a brave stand it is, too, since it addresses nothing, as I pointed out in the same post cited above and just prior to the excerpt quoted: “Though it’s surely a bit too melodramatic to assert that anyone thinks science is a democratic process . . .” An attempt to pull you out of the illusion that you can take your eyes out of focus and utter a cultish incantation “science are facts, not a democratic exercise,” and thereby evade the understanding that you can’t escape public policy impacting science until you get science’s front feet out of the public trough. There’s a reality that won’t answer to your veto when you refuse to even look at a rational way to deal with the fundamental issue.

“That projection thing again.”

Psycho-babble. Buba-uba-uba-uba-uba-uba-uba (rapid finger motion across the lips). Blowing great quantities of smoke and wanting to have your cake and eat it too, is not rational behavior for a scientist. Only a Liberal would believe such tactics can fool anyone.

“If you are going to chime in to a post I make to someone else, know what the hell we were talking about.”

A peculiar attitude for someone who himself had ‘chimed’ in to a post made to someone else. I know ‘what the hell’ I’m talking about, and so do you (know what I'm talking about). You just can’t bring yourself to deal with it. If you don't want me 'chiming in' just ignore me and I'll go away soon enough

“. . . I have no angst.”

What?! You’re a FReeping poster child for angst. Your present angst is that you can't have your cake and eat it too. Your posts throb with angst.

(now, gentle lurkers, brace yourselves for another round of "yeah!?! so's your old man")

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Post #891"

I don't give a rat's behind about post 891. When I said that science isn't a democratic process I was talking to someone else, about something else. YOUR point about teaching standards was never the subject of my original post to someone else, no matter how much you want it to be. Go trolling for a fight somewhere else.

"Psycho-babble. Buba-uba-uba-uba-uba-uba-uba (rapid finger motion across the lips)"

You need to see someone about that. Now go away and don't post to me again.