Posted on 12/20/2005 7:54:38 AM PST by snarks_when_bored
Fox News alert a few minutes ago says the Dover School Board lost their bid to have Intelligent Design introduced into high school biology classes. The federal judge ruled that their case was based on the premise that Darwin's Theory of Evolution was incompatible with religion, and that this premise is false.
I do appreciate your leading me to another source to read, and after the Christmas activites, I will be doing a good deal of researching given to me by many different sources...
However, I disagree with what you have said, in the end of your post #2144...you state that the evolution cirriculum ridicules creationism, and the Christian faith...now some 'individuals' may do that, but the evolution cirriculum itself, does not 'ridicule'...that assumption of being 'ridiculed' is in the eye of the one who believes it to be so...
The mistake that you seem to make, is in believing that anyone who believes in evolution, must also be an atheist...that is a leap that many make, and its just wrong...and I do not believe, for even one little second, that because ones children are taught evolution, that somehow their behavior is going to be rotten behavior...I am quite positive that whether a child is taught evolution or creationism, that particular belief that is taught will have little influence on the childs behavior...you, however, do seem to be believing that if one raise a child to believe in evolution, that somehow they are going to be horrible children, and on the opposite side, you seem to belief that a child taught to believe in creationism will be a wonderful child...well, I disagree...you have your 'opinion' on this matter, and so do I...we disagree and thats fine...I just think you are completely wrong...
A great deal of thought has been given, and there is no conflict. Even creationsists accept this. Check out Answers in Genesis.
the remedy is to remove the board, not to make a Federal Case out of it.
I'm not looking to debate with you, but in case you didn't know, the board was recently removed by the voters. The lawsuit and the local and national publicity it generated likely played a role in the voters' ouster of the board. So it appears the judge ruled in favor of the majority of the voters.
And, IIRC, the Dover voters replaced a lot of Republicans on the board with Democrats. So the outcome of this whole affair is not what Republicans would have preferred. Some bumbling clueless Republicans on a local school board created a mess and the end result was a federal case they lost, a national embarrassment for Dover, and a bunch of Republicans on the school board replaced by Democrats.
This does not bode well for other such Republicans around the country pursuing other such policies.
No theory can be proved; they are only confirmed. Their power is in their susceptibility to disproof. Name a religionist willing to accept disproof of their beliefs. Now name one of those holes that disproves evolution.
Well, since you dont want to even follow Patrick Henrys link, that says to me, that you dont want to read anything which might contradict your beliefs...Thankfully I like to read the literature from both sides...you seem to want to read only the literature that reinforces your beliefs...I on the other hand, like to read the literature from both sides, so that I can make an informed decision...
I dont need to wise up, as you put it, because I am willing to listen to both sides of this issue, am willing to read the literature from both sides, am willing to listen to what people from both sides have to say...
So, I think I am the one with the open mind, willing to listen to both sides...you, however are willing to listen only to the side which reinforces your own beliefs, which would indicate to me, that your mind is the one that is not open to all the information...
You advice to me that I should 'wise up', is advice I would send back to you...
I never said they don't. What I'm sick and tired of is the attitude displayed by evolutionists who act as if anyone who thinks that there is at least an apparent conflict between an intuitive understanding of the second law and evolutionary claims is some kind of unscientific charlatan trying to undo Western civilization.
The fact is that there has been a great amount of work done to develop our understanding of entropy, in open and closed systems, and how it applies to the biological world. Evolutionists constantly cover this up and act like there never was any perceived issue here ever at all.
And that's an outright lie on your part.
Yes, I understand both the 1st and 2nd law ...the question is do you? And please point me to scientific FACTS or REAL SCIENTISTS who say that evolutionary theory somehow escapes the 2nd ????
One of the biggest lies by evolutionists is to claim their "theory" is somehow exempt because the universe is not a closed system?
Now rather than try and insult people, try bringing some real science to the table.
I'm afraid that's something you'll have to get used to. Apparent conflicts and intuitive insights are rather common in the wastbasket of science.
Don't try to patronize me on the nature of science. You haven't earned the right. If anything, it's vice-verse.
Anyway, you've completely dodged the point. (Surprise!) What I have gotten used to is evolutionists slandering people as fools for making observations that parallel those once made by respected scientists just because science has (apparently) moved on.
You could, of course, simply say something like: "you know, the point you raise was actually considered as a a serious objection at such-and-such time, but the work of so-and-so people is considered to be a satisfactory resolution of the problem."
But no, instead we have: you're a bunch of scientifiically illerate moron liars who want to destroy education and civilization.
Why do you think that is? Probably because you're so darned confident that the facts on your side, right?
Then the citizens have spoken and this whole lawsuit was a waste of time. If those parents who objected had simply gone through the political process rather than improperly bringing the Federal Court into this mess, then this whole trial could have been avoided. But they didn't want that, they wanted to make a federal case out of it from the get-go and they apparently had the blessings of most of the evos on this forum.
Well you got your victory. It will likely be a death knell for the test which brought this victory to your door. Once the Lemon Test is gone, you guys will have to play out your political battles on the political playing field.
This does not bode well for other such Republicans around the country pursuing other such policies.
So what? That still does not answer the question of how the Dover School board improperly "established a religion."
It would be nice if, when you guys don't have any actual constitutional arguments in this matter, you would simply admit that what the Dover School board did was stupid but it was not unconstitutional.
I don't necessarily agree that it was stupid, but, even if I were to conceed that point, it clearly wasn't unconstitional. So far no one has provided me with any legitimate "constitutional" arguments as to why it was.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D4FEC-7D5B-1D07-8E49809EC588EEDF&pageNumber=4&catID=2
[Thanks to the "list-o-links"]
From an article aptly titled "15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense "
"9. The Second Law of Thermodynamics says that systems must become more disordered over time. Living cells therefore could not have evolved from inanimate chemicals, and multicellular life could not have evolved from protozoa.
This argument derives from a misunderstanding of the Second Law. If it were valid, mineral crystals and snowflakes would also be impossible, because they, too, are complex structures that form spontaneously from disordered parts.
The Second Law actually states that the total entropy of a closed system (one that no energy or matter leaves or enters) cannot decrease. Entropy is a physical concept often casually described as disorder, but it differs significantly from the conversational use of the word.
More important, however, the Second Law permits parts of a system to decrease in entropy as long as other parts experience an offsetting increase. Thus, our planet as a whole can grow more complex because the sun pours heat and light onto it, and the greater entropy associated with the sun's nuclear fusion more than rebalances the scales. Simple organisms can fuel their rise toward complexity by consuming other forms of life and nonliving materials. "
..this whole lawsuit was a waste of time.
That's what the judge said. He also said it was a waste of taxpayers money.
For the life of me, I can't understand why the concept of the Sun is so difficult to communciate to some folks.
"Why do you think that is? "
I think it is because evidence, facts, scientific studies, etc have been placed in evidence many, many, many times, in this and similar threads, only to see the same debunked arguments be brought up again and again, whack-a-mole-like. It's simple frustration, really.
Wrong. Your hypothesis is untestable unless you intend to sift through and eliminate an infinity of possibilities. Science does not work that way.
Do you understand me? Please don't just repeat the same dumb wrong thing again. You have a hypothesis that abiogenesis cannot happen by any scenario at all. You will never be able to test that. If you think you can, please sumbmit a test plan. Stop faking it. If you can't do it, grow up and admit it. If you can, submit plan.
Is that clear enough?
1) You seem to have confused the Wheel of Fortune with Philosophy 101.
2) You don't know the difference between a logical fallacy and a false assumption.
3) You don't seem to be familiar with even introductory level philosophy of God.
4) You don't seem to have read my posts on a previous thread regarding Alvin Plantinga's "Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism" in which I believe we established that if you accept evolution you have destroyed it because there is no plausible basis for believing evolution equipped homo sapiens with reliable reasoning faculties (crude summary). (Before offering the trite schoolyard non-rebuttals off the top of your head, go back and read the thread, or any other discussion of the argument.)
[WHACK!!!] Another mole pops up....
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.