You posted a few thoughts that interested me to hear more.
explain our universe via clear, reproducible observations. This one gets me every time, I wont yell SHOW ME THE MONKEY, but how is macro-evolution reproducible? Every time I ask it, I get toasted, but would love to see a coherent outline, so I keep asking. :o)
As for the teaching of Intelligent Design in secondary school science classrooms, I am opposed. I am starting to lean that way also but not for the same reason. I realize that the bias against any ID topic is strong and the narrow gate to publishing in peer reviewable journals is tightly controlled. I think that ID needs to do it's homework for another few years (evolution payed its dues before it was accepted to be taught even though my opinion is that it shouldn't be taught either (macro only).
ID should get stronger within its ranks, but the possibility of getting serious consideration and publication in the peer reviewed works will continue to go the way of some of our threads. Science say it's theology and theology saying its science.
ID isn't science, it is philosophy. My feelings are the same in regards to macro-evolution. I see we stand diametrically opposed, and that is fine with me. If I only talked to ID'ers I wouldn't learn anything new.
Thank you for your time, response(s), thoughts and comments. I will defend your right to believe anything you want, anytime, anywhere. It is refreshing to see reciprocation.
K4
how is macro-evolution reproducible?
While I believe in evolution, I cannot claim to be as well-versed in the science as PH or others, so the short answer is "I don't know". But I will offer two observations.
1) Evolutionary Theory proposes a hypothesis which can be pursued scientifically. In other words, while it may not yet have been observed, it is something that could be observed, along with a discipline to get to that point. The Theory of Evolution, as it exists today, may yet be disproved, but it is science that will do so, not Theology.
2) Has anyone ever observed an Ice Age? What about the giant crater in Arizona? What caused it? How do we know that aliens didn't go out into the desert with bulldozers and create it? Did anyone see it formed? These comments aren't meant as an attack upon you, just an (admittedly ridiculous) example of how lack of proof doesn't equate to proof of falsehood. Evolution continues to be studied for this very reason, and questions such as yours should continue to be asked. But if someone purports to disprove a theory based on lack of evidence, then the argument is lost before it begins.
I'd like to add one thing, a little off-topic. I honestly believe that the biggest problem facing our country today is the complete breakdown of communication between people who share opposing views. I lament the fact that too often political disagreements become screaming matches. It has always existed to some extent, but it seems that in the last few years, it has risen to a level such that people can't even talk any more. I was having an interesting debate with a new poster the other day regarding the concept of Hate Crimes. While it was obvious that he didn't share traditionally conservative viewpoints in this area, he wasn't disruptive or rude and even politely asked to be allowed to continue the discussion in peace. However, there were a few posters so threatened by his mere existence that they pinged a mod and got him banned. If one is so threatened by someone who argues against him, is it perhaps because of the weakness of his own argument? Food for thought...
Well, have to go do some chores. Hopefully we can continue this. Have a great day.