Posted on 09/22/2006 2:09:33 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
Free Republic is currently running a poll on this subject:
Do you think creationism or intelligent design should be taught in science classes in secondary public schools as a competing scientific theory to evolution?You can find the poll at the bottom of your "self search" page, also titled "My Comments," where you go to look for posts you've received.
I don't know what effect -- if any -- the poll will have on the future of this website's science threads. But it's certainly worth while to know the general attitude of the people who frequent this website.
Science isn't a democracy, and the value of scientific theories isn't something that's voted upon. The outcome of this poll won't have any scientific importance. But the poll is important because this is a political website. How we decide to educate our children is a very important issue. It's also important whether the political parties decide to take a position on this. (I don't think they should, but it may be happening anyway.)
If you have an opinion on this subject, go ahead and vote.
Frankly, I consider you guys who worship Evolution as being undifferentiated from the Animists out in the jungle ~ filled with superstitious fear, and fixated on cooking missionaries.
That's why you decided to attack me with your anti-Evo shots ~ fear and ignorance.
You are aware that the Islamic radicals are creationists. Even the Kansas Conservatives hired a member of Harun Yahya as an expert during their attempt to suppress science in Kansas.
And now I know that you enjoy insulting those of whom you have no knowledge of. Pity for you.
Time is a coordinate. There is no arrow, or direction to time in flat space. Time is symmetrical there. I think you are referring to unsymmetrical dynamics of an assembly, or arrangement which is progressing from one state to another. The state properties change. Those are the observables. Now any to systems with the same state properties are the same, regardless of time. That's why any two, or more systems can be compared and be noted to have the same state properties. Even one system can be measured repeatedly and found to have the same values. The values for any particular elements of the system are irrelevant.
"the late, great Harvard biologist Gaylord Simpson (among others) has noted that living systems are precisely those systems which are not fully subject to the second law of thermodynamics."
Regardless of his greatness, he's wrong. The 2nd law applies to all living systems. The fact that part of the system has been ignored is very important to note here, because the whole system shows that the 2nd law does in fact apply.
"I submit the answer to this question cannot be given by a precise and exhaustive inventory of the parts, or subsystems, taken singly or in any combination."
I'll have to stick with my original statement, because there's still no reason to doubt it. What's missing in the the above quote is that the elements of the set of parts have properties which determine the interactions and dynamics that are the essence of life. Conservation of energy, the consistency of essence of the particles at this temperature and reversability in the observables of the configuraiton leave no room for doubt, that the machinery of life is physical and that no nonphysical life giving force is required, or needed to result in "being alive".
Perhaps not. I just assumed you were C0, since you were ~H1 (A reasonable assumption).
Frankly, I consider you guys who worship Evolution as being undifferentiated from the Animists out in the jungle ~ filled with superstitious fear, and fixated on cooking missionaries.
Well, whatever makes you feel good about yourself, ignorant though it may be. The only thing we "fear" is the voodoo of religion that will destroy the observatory so that a comet will never again hit Springfield.
That's why you decided to attack me with your anti-Evo shots ~ fear and ignorance.
We have an open invitation -- reiterated again and again and again (that's why we say "reiterated"): Please provide proof for any valid alternative to TToE that explains the literally billions of pieces of evidence in existence. We await the peer-reviewed journal links.
Go ahead. We are awaiting (and since if you can do it, you will be rich, I want to be the first to hit you up for a loan).
"I see you get your thinking points (and "facts") from AnswersInCreation or a similar anti-science site"
Never heard of the above and I've never visited any anti-science website. I'm a believer in science, just not junk science.
Like Physics and Chemistry and (my favorite since it is anti-Biblical) Astronomy.
They're attacking you too? Funny how they feel so threatened by such bigoted and uneducated persons who don't know an acorn from a squirrel. You'd think that since they are so much more intelligent they would just ignore those who are ignorant.
You also have to come up with some sort of explanation for why so much bedrock in this planet is literally impregnated with a vast biomas consisting of living single cell archaeobacter.
They, like, didn't dig their way in eh!
Remember, if life could originate on Earth, which is a mere 4 billion years old, it certainly could do so elsewhere in this vast universe which is 13 billion years old.
Your "fear" of religious people is, as I said, something that leaves you in the same category as the primitives and their witch-doctors in the deep woods.
It's very obvious that religious people, per se, are not your enemies ~ and they most certainly are not dragging you out back the barn for a good head-knocking.
The problem is you guys are bunch of whiners, just like the AlQaida types. Whine, whine, whine ~ all day long, into the night. And you want to manipulate our kids to the nth degree in government operated schools.
You don't need to be some sort of fundie evo to see that you people have a serious personality disorder.
Huh? How did you come to that conclusion?
They fear being ridiculed over their "Evo Worship", and they don't particularly like it when I denigrate their demigod, Natural Selection.
And I am waiting for you to support that "junk science" assertion. The fact you can't understand it isn't quite enough.
A "can't stand the heat" situation to be sure.
We find people who flaunt thir Willful Ignorance as being irritating and embarrasing to intelligent Conservatives.
Our own little moonbats, analagous to the 9/11 Conspiracy buffs.
Except that If you've actually paid attention to my posts you'd know I don't "preach" the 6000 year old claim in any form. And I've already explained my "junk science position. If you didn't catch it, not my problem.
You mean, with creation stories like this? (I'm partial to Old Man Coyote stories. Got a problem with that?
In the beginning, Old Man Coyote stood alone with water surrounding him. Two ducks swam by, and Coyote asked if they had seen anyone else. The ducks said no but thought that something might exist under the water.Coyote asked if they would travel underwater for him and report on what they saw. The ducks did as they were asked, finding nothing. He asked again, and the ducks returned with a root. On the third try, they found mud and Coyote was happy. He told the ducks that they could build with it, and he began to shape and mold the mud into an island. He blew on it, and it expanded. He blew again, and it grew into the earth. The ducks said they did not like the earth's emptiness, so Coyote created grass and trees out of the roots that came from the water.
Coyote and the ducks loved the earth, but it was flat. They wanted rivers, valleys, mountains, and lakes. So it was done. Soon Coyote and the ducks made a perfect earth, but they grew lonely, with only the three of them to sit and enjoy the land. So Coyote molded dirt to form men and then more mud to create many types of male ducks. Soon, they realized that without women, the males could not have children. So with more dirt he made women and female ducks to populate the earth.
One day Old Man Coyote traveled upon the land and was surprised to find another Coyote. When asked where he came from, the younger brother, named Shirape, said he was unsure of his origin and only knew he existed. As the two traveled along, Shirape wanted Old Man Coyote to make other animals, for only ducks, humans, and the two Coyotes had been created. The elder Coyote agreed, and as he spoke the new animals' names, they were created. He said "Elk" and an elk appeared. He said "Bear" and a bear appeared. This is how it was until all animals were created.
' Since Crevoids (or Anti-Evos, which seems to be a new Moonbat species) can't substantiate their philosophy-based (or anti-science-based) ravings, those of us who undersand science get a little frustrated.
We ask for facts and we get "how many dinks can dance on the head of a pin?"
Of course we get a little peeved. Our world is based on facts and argunentation. The anti-science word is based on assertions and rhetoric. We can use science to substantiate our points. Those who will drag down Conservatism use sophomoric philosophy to substantiate their childish assertions.
We have every reason in the world to be upset.
For one thing they use a period of time almost a thousand years shorter. And then the vast majority of "Biblical Creationists" argue from an entirely different base than you and your friends in the "young Earth" society.
You must understand that NO religious person accepts your interpretation of what the Bible does or does not say ~ you are not, as it happens, a trustworthy witness.
Your additional argument on behalf of mysterious, unseeable, invisible demigods also casts doubt on your claims to "knowledge".
Like to point out further that the overwhelming majority of religious people who believe God created the universe also accept the idea that "evolution" may well have been created by God.
My beliefs on these matters are a bit different, but that's neither here nor there. It's just that I cannot stomach the degree of ignorance about religion expressed by so many of the Evos who glom onto these threads. With the internet available, there's simply no excuse for you to continue your ignorance. It'd improve your arguments if you could understand who you are talking to.
I have a vast collection of Coyote stories. Some of them are undoubtedly true. Some of them are clearly false.
You miss my point here, Stultis. The fundamental claim of the Nazi ideologists was that man could decide, respecting his fellow men, who was "fit" and who was not. And therefore, what living beings were privileged to continue in a living state, and which were not. Whatever "excuse" the Fascist makes to support his claim -- the recovery of a "lost" Eden, the construction of a perfect utopia in spacetime reality, whatever -- is almost entirely beside the point. That's the PR angle designed to smokescreen the reality that is actually taking place, to give it an ersatz "justification." At this level of description of the problem, you are looking at pure B.S....
The only way to justify such a scheme of things is on the basis of power: We might say "species" power. For Hitler's theory of racial superiority rested on the consensus of a "favored species," determining the fate of the lesser-favored species effectively at its whim. The notion of "survival of the fittest" excuse was paramount, even if shall we say not evident from first principles.
If I might make a suggestion: You depend too much on the surface appearance of things. Maybe you need to be looking a little deeper? FWIW.
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.