Posted on 10/17/2008 7:59:18 AM PDT by Soliton
Three antievolutionists have been appointed to a six-member committee to review the draft set of Texas state science standards, and defenders of the integrity of science education in the Lone Star state are livid. "The committee was chosen by 12 of the 15 members of the board of education, with each panel member receiving the support of two board members," as the Dallas Morning News (October 16, 2008) explains. Six members of the board "aligned with social conservative groups" chose Stephen C. Meyer, the director of the Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture, Ralph Seelke, a biology professor at the University of Wiconsin, Superior, and Charles Garner, a chemistry professor at Baylor University.
Meyer, Seelke, and Garner are all signatories of the Discovery Institute-sponsored "Dissent from Darwinism" statement. Meyer and Seelke are also coauthors of Explore Evolution: The Arguments For and Against Neo-Darwinism (Hill House, 2008), which, like Of Pandas and People, is a supplementary textbook that is intended to instill scientifically unwarranted doubts about evolution. A recent review by biologist John Timmer summarized, "But the book doesn't only promote stupidity, it demands it. In every way except its use of the actual term, this is a creationist book." Garner reportedly told the Houston Press (December 14, 2000) that he "criticizes evolutionary theory in class."
Meyer and Seelke also testified in the 2005 "kangaroo court" hearings held by three antievolutionist members of the Kansas state board of education, in which a parade of antievolutionist witnesses expressed their support for the so-called minority report version of the state science standards (written with the aid of a local "intelligent design" organization), complained of repression by a dogmatic evolutionary establishment, and claimed to have detected atheism lurking "between the lines" of the standards..
(Excerpt) Read more at ncseweb.org ...
Absolutely it exists.. (as a god).. There are a thousand Gods out there.. maybe more.. Even atheists have a God.. They make themselves God.. some make the government God..
Jesus came to make ALL religion(Gods) obsolete, and DID..
A fact missed or under rated by atheists..
Gods, demigods and psuedo-gods are dismissed as silly or worse by Jesus..
Jesus mocked Gods and the followers of Gods..
He talked about the Father of spirits.. in a spiritual family..
"Gods"... are some kind of Super Hero prone to celebrity worship.. Human gods are neurotic alter egos.. totally mental constructs.. Jesus Father reveals himself to some humans.. others are clueless.. bemoaning that there is no God.. or creating a mental construct of their own..
If Jesus Father has not revealed himself to you(someone) its not silly to not believe.. its actually totally understandable.. Jesus Father knows who to reveal himself to and who to leave clueless.. After all he is the reality of what some humans call "God".. being not only the Father of Jesus but the Father of every human ever born(as well)..
Beats me. LG started it by claiming that it disproves the God of the Bible. I've been trying to get him to explain how it won't and he won't answer but keeps dancing around the issue.
Sure. You keep making determinations about the spiritual world based on........ what?
That's faith.
Being *religious* is nothing to brag about. It's not impressing us.
No more so than people were stupid before Galileo, or Newton, or Maxwell, or Einstein came along. All it takes is one Newton to figure out the truth and it doesn't matter what anyone believed before he came along. Consensus doesn't make truth.
It seems to me the assumption of an uncaused first cause has the greatest possible explanatory power and coverage in accounting for the regularities of nature that we observe, the existence of the order of reality, of space and time, of the physical laws themselves. It answers the question, "Why are things the way they are and not some other way?" And also the question: "Why is there anything at all, why not nothing?
That is your opinion and nothing more, but if it makes sense of the world to you go ahead with it. It isn't rational but that is okay too.
Yes, and Buddhists would seem to agree with Dispator [i.e., that God and the Universe are coextensive, or One]. Since it appears you are looking for a divine promotion -- to be "a god" yourself, at least in the narrow sense that you are to be the measure of all things, the criterion whereby all things false and true are to be discerned -- maybe Dispator is your divine cup of tea.
Huh? I am making fun of those Gods and your God too. Why do you think that your God is any different from those other Gods? Belief in any God, especially the idea that we are Gods is ludicrous.
But it is not true that the Holy Scriptures "evolve." They are God's revelation of Himself to us, and this revelation does not change. Only the human understanding of it changes. But that doesn't mean that earlier generations "failed" to understand them properly. They understood them as best as they could at a time of limited knowledge as compared with today. Today, even science seems to support Genesis 1.... A little something called the Big Bang/inflationary universe theory. [Let there be Light!]
LOL I can watch you trying to disagree with me even as you agree with me : )
But it seems you don't expect that theory to hold up after all. Indeed, how can it, as far as you're concerned? It is entirely consistent with the idea of a willful, purposive, intelligent creator as the cause of the universe. And this you will not have; it must be falsified (though you cannot do it); for it leaves the door potentially open to the "divine foot getting in the door" -- and you absolutely deny God on principle.
Actually I don't deny the existence of God purely on principle. I simply refuse to believe anything that there is no evidence of. At least I try to, as a skeptic it is sometimes hard to keep up. There are sooo many things to be skeptical of.
Your presuppositions and methods are designed to falsify God. As far as you're concerned, such presuppositions and methods are infallible. You put your whole faith in that.
No, I simply don't assume Gods existence as a fact and try to build reality around that assumption. I try to see reality and truth as it is, not as I would like it to be.
Satan tempted Adam and Eve with the same lie.
Looks like we know who Dispator is, or at least who he's working for.
I would never have known. I think you have a sense of humor metmom : )
No kidding.....
Maybe the rest of your fellow evos could latch onto that.
Beats me. LG started it by claiming that it disproves the God of the Bible. I've been trying to get him to explain how it won't and he won't answer but keeps dancing around the issue.
I will try one more time. Information cannot be transmitted faster than the speed of light. Nothing is faster than the speed of light. Therefore God cannot be omnipotent and omniscient.
Consequently an omnipotent and omniscient God does not exist.
Except that you don’t understand the difference between being *religious* and having faith.
Heh I agree with Jesus : ) and I am an atheist.
“I will try one more time. Information cannot be transmitted faster than the speed of light. Nothing is faster than the speed of light. Therefore God cannot be omnipotent and omniscient.” [excerpt]It would be more correct to say "Nothing measurable by science is faster than the speed of light."
We do know that no information is being passed between the entangled particles faster than the speed of light : ) And yes our normal ideas of spacetime do not apply.
Technically, God does not "exist." God is Being, not existence. It is in this sense that He is "nonexistent."
Whew, that point was a lot easier to get across than I thought it would be : ) Now that we agree that God doesn't exist I fail to see the disagreement.
Not so.. More accuratly.. nothing YOU KNOW OF is faster than the speed of light..
There could be things you don't know of..
Linear speed may not be the only option(s).. as well as linear time.. Looking at things in four dimensions may not be very accurate.. Speed and time intimately related..
Likewise, I will try one more time.
How do you know that? Present your case.
Provide the evidence that it is so and that you're not just making a baseless statement cause that's the way you want it to be.
LOL You told me that it was beyond my ability to comprehend : ) I am sorry but being told that a serpents head will bruise Adams heel isn't a prophecy about Christ.
You are absolutely correct. It is all relative. The only nonvariant is the speed of light.
Well thats honest.. I salute you for that..
Almost all the Gods of humans are humorous..
Maybe all of them..
No human can or could understand a being that could create a Universe.. A being beyond and above all dimensions that we know of.. If there is a being like that.. WHo is the idiot? that would turn down a chance to be friends with him/her/it..
Consequently an omnipotent and omniscient God does not exist.
The one complicating factor that you keep choosing to ignore is the omnipresence of God.
Even IF, and that's a big IF, information cannot travel faster than the speed of light, you have been deliberately ignoring that God is omnipresent.
Information does not need to *travel* anywhere. Since God is omnipresent, everywhere He is, He knows.
So your argument falls on its face.
You have not at all demonstrated that God is not omniscient or omnipotent. In order to do that, you'd have to be omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent yourself and I'm pretty sure you're not.
The only nonvariant YOU KNOW OF is the speed of light..
You are real hard head.. Be careful you could break something with that head..
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.