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 think you have finally hit on something useful.
Your non belief is also irrelevant.
"Hey, if you call it the Egon Spengler "Molds, Spores and Fungus" ping list, count me in! ;-)"
Hah! Now it's four, just in this thread. We'd have to put a disclaimer on the ping list, though: "This is an extremely low-volume ping list. Don't join it if you actually expect to be pinged."
I personally have no problem with the Georgia stickers. I remember a similar effort from my high school days.
Immediately after the Cuban revolution my state mandated a course in Americanism vs Communism. I was going to a military prep school at the time. We weren't exactly sympathetic to Castro, particularly since he was arresting and killing relatives of some students.
But the mandated course had the opposite of the intended effect. I think students automatically tend to reject government mandated content. The source and purpose of the Georgia stickers will simply split the students into factions.
So if the stickers go, that's fine with me; if they return, I am not concerned. Most students will treat them as a joke.
"Your non belief is also irrelevant."
So it is, at least when it comes to scientific theories. They are, you see, independent of beliefs. An atheist, a Hindu, and a Christian, will come to the same conclusions in science, based on the evidence presented.
Of course, those who have no science education may believe whatever they wish. It's irrelevant to the truth of the matter.
I would not have a school board, none of the members of which have any advanced science training, dictate the curriculum of science classes. That, my friend, was the case in the Dover situation. Not a single school board member had any serious education in any of the sciences past the secondary level.
Science curriculum decisions are one of those areas where religious beliefs are irrelevant. Sorry, but there it is.
I think we can safely classify "Harvard" as one of those words, like science, that changes meaning with context. Ninety-nine percent of the time when a FReeper uses the word Harvard, it's a pejorative. But when a creationist has a Harvard relative, it's suddenly the cream of the crop. Maybe he/she even took Gould's course.
Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart... Hmmm. Reminds me.
Jimmy Swaggart telephoned Jim Bakker.Short Jokes.Swaggart: I have a theological question: Can a prostitute be saved?
Bakker: Yes.
Swaggart: Would you save me one for Saturday night?
perjurious placemarker
You often seem confused.
A guy who prays to no one, for things that he doesn't believe can happen, in front of others who also don't believe, after basing his whole identity on his non belief,,,is a very confused person.
What other kinds of knowledge are there? I thought your assertion that there is no way there to know if a God exists was based on the assumption that we do not have the ability to scientifically test for the existence of a deity. (?)
Cordially,
The predictions it makes largely, if not exclusively, extend to what will be found in a static record, and that record can be interpreted any number of ways. As far as predicting the future course of evolution, or the dynamic process of evolution as it happens today, Darwin's theory is useless. Natural selection is an arbitrary description that is applied only after the fact. How does Darwinian evolution "predict" mutations? Does it specify precisely where, when, and how the mutations will be beneficial?
We weren't debunking your article, which is fairly typical of science journalism. We were amused by your interpretation of it.
Yes, hence my desperate attempt to become a heavyweight like you by mimicking you with my use of "chief." The only thing I forgot (for which I hope you will forgive me, your method is complex and subtle) was to add LOL! after every few sentences to indicate my disdain for the silly notions of another poster that I am cleverly mocking. LOL!
...we find that ID is not science and cannot be adjudged a valid, accepted scientific theory as it has failed to publish in peer-reviewed journals...
The judge bought this lie hook, line, and sinker, and repeats it in his decision. Discovery org has a list of articles in scientific publications.
Cordially,
Excuse me, but the Religion of the Darwinian Scholars Union was not defeated in this case.
Except for one thing, you ain't too clever. LOL
It really is superbly reasoned and written. I had feared the judge might view this as a distasteful duty to be dispatched in some manner minimizing the scope of his decision and sweeping as much as possible under the rug. Instead, we have a historic ruling.
"What other kinds of knowledge are there?"
Logic, mathematics.
"I thought your assertion that there is no way there to know if a God exists was based on the assumption that we do not have the ability to scientifically test for the existence of a deity."
We don't. Math and logic won't help us either. Personal revelation can't be trusted, and certainly is not evidence at all for someone who was not the subject of the revelation. And science is also impotent at this time. Unless you know of a way to know if God exists?
Good line. And true.
Aww gee, it's just soo hard to live up to the amazing and brilliant example you've set, old man. LOL!
"A guy who prays to no one, for things that he doesn't believe can happen, in front of others who also don't believe, after basing his whole identity on his non belief,,,is a very confused person."
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.