= 
Posted on 04/20/2008 8:49:48 AM PDT by Soliton
“Intelligent Design” is of no scientific value in determining the origins of life in the universe. A designer would have to be supernatural (i.e. not subject to the laws of physics) or natural and subject to those laws. If the designer is natural in origin, then it would have to have been designed by another designer –again supernatural or natural. Ultimately come to an original designer that either evolved from a lower state of matter, or was created by a supernatural being. You will note that this is back to where we started. Science does not deal with supernatural phenomena by definition. Scientifically, the only answer is evolution. ID, however, is really about the cosmology of the Book of Genesis anyway, but if that is admitted, it can’t be taught in school. And there’s the rub.
The term “Intelligent Design” was adopted by the Discovery Institute, the originator of the ID movement, and a non-profit company that was incorporated specifically to get the story of Genesis taught in public schools (as specifically stated in the incorporation documents). To that end a Creationist textbook was published called Of Pandas and People.
In 1987, The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that teaching creationism in public schools violated the separation of church and state in Edwards vs. Aquilard.
In a similar later case, Kitzmiller vs. The Dover Area School District involving the school’s acquisition of Of Pandas and People, it was proven in court that the publishers and the people who financed the purchase lied in depositions when they stated that Intelligent Design wasn’t just another term for Creationism. They did this by showing that dozens of passages in the pre-1987 Edwards vs. Aquilard copies of the book used “Creation”, while later versions substituted “Intelligent Design” in its place.
The entire Intelligent Design movement is a dishonest, legalistic Trojan horse specifically intended to teach creationism in public school even though it is against the law.
Complete transcripts of Kitzmiller vs. Dover can be found here:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dover/kitzmiller_v_dover.html
You’re proposing that Ann Coulter assume the responsibility for determining if geologists can date the age of the Earth at more the 6,000 years? You’re either an idiot or a troll.
I follow the data and logic where it leads. Regardless.
Quantum theory is well established. If not completely understood. Not familiar with string theory.
Are you familiar with Thomas Kuhn's book "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions"?
I think he was trying, successfully, to be funny and not give a serious answer.
I’ll cut him some slack.
I’ll wait to see if anything that looks like an answer that involves some sober reflection and consideration of the consequences is forthcoming.
Again.
Evolution doesn’t attempt to explain the origin of life.
=
DRF didn't say evolution does that. He said science does.
No. Not at all.
If it avoids the ultimate origin of life question then it implies it doesn't know where "life information" (e.g. DNA) came from. And it's on much firmer scientific ground. But gives IDers ammo.
Stein, according to reports, had Dawkins tied into knots on this very question.
As soon as you say "we don't know" in jumps God to fill the gap. For theists this is not a problem, but for atheists, it's a big problem.
No because of Quantum Physcics which state on the sub atomic level anything can happen even something coming from nothing
When ask a stupid question you deserve a stupid answer.
What major scientific advances has ID been responsible for?
Offer another alternative.
Not only doesn't but can't. It's a mystery.
No one protests the teaching of their own religion. The purpose of the SCOTUS ruling was to prevent OTHER PEOPLE'S religions from being taught. Unfortunately for you, your religion is other people's religion to people of different faiths, and no more valid without scientific evidence.
Complaining that the theory of evolution doesn’t explain the origin of life is like complaining that your holy book of choice doesn’t explain nuclear fission.
If anybody wants to see the USSC's bogus separation of church and state disappear before their eyes, a politically correct perversion of our constitutional religious freedoms that was wrongly legislated from the bench when the Court decided Cantwell v. Connecticut in 1940, then please read the following post. Note that while the post concerns a 10 Commandments issue it is also applicable to this thread.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1992174/posts?page=22#22The bottom line, as mentioned in the referenced post, is that the people need to reconnect with the Founder's division of federal and state powers, particularly where the wrongly ignored 10th A. power of the states to address religious issues is concerned, power now limited by the honest interpretation of the 14th Amendment. The people then need to get in the faces of renegade justices, the Oval Office and the Senate and do a major spring cleaning where government respect for our religious freedoms is concerned. President Lincoln put it this way.
"We the People are the rightful master of both congress and the courts - not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution." --Abraham Lincoln (Political debates between Lincoln and Douglas), 1858.
Amen brother. No one attacks the substance of my post. No understanding of science. Its like they want to play baskeyball but get upset when the referee insists that they have to dribble the ball. PERSCUTION!
Thanks for making my point that ID is just religion in disguise!
ditto
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.