Posted on 12/03/2005 5:28:45 PM PST by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The beauty of Intelligent Suck is that we don't dictate who the agent(s) may be. You're free to follow your conscience - wink, wink. :)
Sure, we're at war with Christianity along with the folks at the Templeton Foundation (according to the article, a major supporter of projects seeking to reconcile science and religion) and Frank D. Macchia (according to the article, a professor of Christian theology at Vanguard University, which is affiliated with the Assemblies of God, the nation's largest Pentecostal denomination) and many other religious people who see no conflict whatsoever. Yep, Ken Miller (a devout Catholic) opposes ID because he's at war with Christianity.
Precisely and that's why IDers need to get a grip. What's next? Are you going to redefine the field of mathematics to show how you can take a half a dozen loaves of bread and a couple of fishes and turn that into 5,000?
There are several academics in my field (speech communication) who have been prominent supporters of ID, and they also happen to be left-wing, po-mo types who view science as it is currently practiced as also being an expression of Western imperialism and male domination, making natural allies of both the IDers and the "Science for the People" crowd.Is that because Noam Chomsky's theories of language include the "sudden appearance" of major features?
He was also a supporter of numerical calculations. I guess that means they're going to start demonizing arithmetic next. 2 + 2 just can't equal 4! Karl Marx believed that...it MUST be wrong!!
"Given that humans have worshipped literally thousands of deities that could rightly be called "gods", many of whom are referred to by name as "God", many of whom are quite clearly mutually exclusive, to which did you refer when making your statement and why?"
I am a Christian.
The Templeton Foundation, a major supporter of projects seeking to reconcile science and religion, says that after providing a few grants for conferences and courses to debate intelligent design, they asked proponents to submit proposals for actual research.What a devastating set of quotes! Reporters should ask the ID spokespeople about this at every opportunity. When foundations with lots of money to donate, who are on your side, can't even convince you to come up with actual research proposals for your "theory", why that is just pitiful."They never came in," said Charles L. Harper Jr., senior vice president at the Templeton Foundation, who said that while he was skeptical from the beginning, other foundation officials were initially intrigued and later grew disillusioned.
"From the point of view of rigor and intellectual seriousness, the intelligent design people don't come out very well in our world of scientific review," he said.
While intelligent design has hit obstacles among scientists, it has also failed to find a warm embrace at many evangelical Christian colleges. Even at conservative schools, scholars and theologians who were initially excited about intelligent design say they have come to find its arguments unconvincing. They, too, have been greatly swayed by the scientists at their own institutions and elsewhere who have examined intelligent design and found it insufficiently substantiated in comparison to evolution.
"It can function as one of those ambiguous signs in the world that point to an intelligent creator and help support the faith of the faithful, but it just doesn't have the compelling or explanatory power to have much of an impact on the academy," said Frank D. Macchia, a professor of Christian theology at Vanguard University, in Costa Mesa, Calif., which is affiliated with the Assemblies of God, the nation's largest Pentecostal denomination.
Every now & then, Dembski, the folks at ARN, or other ID advocates hint about all these young ID researchers in academia who are just biding their time until they get tenure, and then they'll burst forth with earth-shaking academic studies either proving ID or using ID to produce real, productive insights into actual biological systems. So maybe the Templeton Foundation just needs to wait a couple years. Then, watch out! They'll be inundated with real research proposals. Just you wait! Any Day Now... Real Soon Now... Wait for it...
And where did you get the idea that I am a "creationist"? You just assumed it, of course, because the distinction between creationism and ID is too subtle for you. Well, I am just giving you a taste of you own medicine. The distinction between evolutionist and useful-idiot commie is too subtle for me.
Whether or not a god was involved is irrelevant, because evolution is a field of science and as such cannot comment in any way about the existence or involvements of any deities.
Oh, so evolution says nothing in any way about "the existence or involvements" of any diety? It doesn't say that humans could have originated without a diety? If it says anything it says that -- and that is saying something extemely important about a diety, whether you are willing to admit it or not. In fact, that is precisely why Marx and Hitler latched on to it. But I can't believe that even you are stupid enough to not know that.
After all is said and done, the fact remains that the purely naturalist theory of evolution is the intellectual lynchpin of communism. It's dogmatic "science" may ultimately succeed in salvaging communism from the ash-heap of history -- and useful idiots like you will be largely to blame.
His name is now Lenin
"He was also a supporter of numerical calculations. I guess that means they're going to start demonizing arithmetic next. 2 + 2 just can't equal 4! Karl Marx believed that...it MUST be wrong!!"
Marx never said that numerical calculations would be particularly useful for furthering the Marxist agenda now, did he. Duh!
Atheism apparently excludes any being higher than man.
And surely you knew that.
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.