Ending the Evolutionary War

Mackinac Center for Public Policy ^ | Jan. 6, 2005 | Andrew J. Coulson

[js1138]

You are one of the "3 or 4" that I had in mind. I point this out just in case someone might think that the number is swelling.

It seems to have equaled the swelling number of credentialed biologists who doubt evolution.

[PatrickHenry]

... the swelling number of credentialed biologists who doubt evolution.

Ah yes, the 3 or 4 evolutionists who keep "flocking" to creationism year after year. The same 3 or 4 flockers, who keep leaving evolution in droves, and who for some reason never publish their ghostly findings in peer-reviewed professional journals. It's a real crisis for evolution.

[longshadow]

100

I never cease to marvel at your ability to post on the odd-numbered primes like that.....

;-)

[Junior]

Amen, brother. Junior is still a Catholic and still believes in the Almighty. However, Junior thinks your typical creationist is childishly afraid of what daddy might do if said creationist ever grew up and started using his brain.

[js1138]

Should we meet the flockers?

[PatrickHenry]

I never cease to marvel at your ability to post on the odd-numbered primes like that.....

I'm attracted to irrational numbers.

[AndyTheBear]

BTW Big Bang makes testable predictions which have been verified.

The Bible also makes testable predictions which have been verified.

Neither can be tested directly enough in a repeatable controlled experiment to be considered science.

I'm inclined to believe both to be reasonably accurate, but claiming either is scientifically verified is at best dishonest.

[Thatcherite]

The Bible also makes testable predictions which have been verified.

Can you cite these please. I'm intrigued.

[AndyTheBear]

Can you cite these please. I'm intrigued.

Good grief! Have you ever heard of Archeology? Prophecy? History? I don't even know where to begin.

For example, I assume you've heard of the Biblical character of Jesus (mentioned predominantly in all versions of the Christian Bible). Would you find it surprising to know that archaeologists and historians have found plenty of "secular" documentation of the man's life consistent with the accounts in the Bible?

So then, the Bible predicts there was a famous religious leader who traveled around to certain cities. Thus "predicting" secular records of his ministry existed. Archaeologists looked for such, and found them! Amazing! Shazam! But does this make the life of Jesus science?!? Not in my humble opinion.

[xm177e2]

If the majority in the community wish that evolution be taught and creationism not be taught, so be it. The converse is also true.

Wrong. This is a "Republic," not a mob-ocracy. If we let the government dictate religion to our children, bad things will come of it. ID is firmly tied to religion, there is no separating it out.

[AndyTheBear]

ID is firmly tied to religion, there is no separating it out.

Interesting, and yet ID is held as a self evident in the preamble of the U.S. Constitution.

[PatrickHenry]

and yet ID is held as a self evident in the preamble of the U.S. Constitution.

Can you post the text?

[AndyTheBear]

Its a famous enough part that I think my memory of it will suffice for our purposes (feel free to correct the wording should you be inclined to look it up):

"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights among them life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

[PatrickHenry]

Very nice. Two problems, however:

1. That's not the preamble to the Constitution.

2. I'm somehow missing the reference to ID.

Otherwise, you're doing fine.

[AndyTheBear]

On point 1) You are correct, it was the declaration of independence:

In Congress, July 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

On point 2, you are entitled to miss the blantantly obvious. It is, after all, your God given right to deny the existance of God. Heck you could even beleive the sky is red and that pigs can fly. You could even go so far as to say that beleiving the sky is blue is too religious, and that the government should be carefule not comment on the color of the sky.

On the planet Earth, in the United States however, the existance of a Creator is "self evident".

[so_real]

Wrong. This is a "Republic," not a mob-ocracy. If we let the government dictate religion to our children, bad things will come of it. ID is firmly tied to religion, there is no separating it out.

I agree with you that this is a republic and not a dem/mob-ocracy. My point is not to allow the "government" at a federal (or even a state) level dictate that a particular community teach, or not teach, creation/ID/evolution. For the good of the nation, we all agreed that every child should have a baseline of education. In my humble opinion, that baseline consists of little more than reading, writing, arithmatic, American history, and civics. Beyond that, what right do hardcore evolutionists have to force their theories to be taught as fact to all children? What right do hardcore creationists have to prevent any theoretical discourse from taking place? Why have the rest of us lost the right to have our children hear both sides out?

[JCEccles]

Forty states? The monopolists can see their monopoly crumbling. No wonder the panic.

Indeed. Phillip Johnson, Boalt Hall (Berkeley) Law Professor Emeritus, an ardent champion of ID, conceived of this strategy in the early 1990s, calling it "the wedge." He and a handful of other brilliant men and women including Dr. William Dembski, have endured unceasing hostility, resistance, and scorn over the years from the Darwinists as they have patiently and methodically driven "the wedge" through the heart of the materialist beast.

The Darwinists are losing because ID meets them and beats them on their own terms at the point at which Darwinism is weakest and most vulnerable--the issue of origins.

[JCEccles]

ID is firmly tied to religion, there is no separating it out.

Of course you can separate it out. ID can and should be evaluated according to strict mathematical and statistical models and rules without invoking religion.

ID shares common stock with such scientific theories and initiatives as panspermia and SETI, both of which are darlings of many an atheist scientist.

[Dataman]

He and a handful of other brilliant men and women including Dr. William Dembski, have endured unceasing hostility, resistance, and scorn over the years from the Darwinists as they have patiently and methodically driven "the wedge" through the heart of the materialist beast.

And this is characteristic of the evolutionists; to not respond with logic, reason, or science, but hostility and scorn. (They would respond with logic, reason and science if they had access to it.)

[Dimensio]

The Darwinists are losing because ID meets them and beats them on their own terms at the point at which Darwinism is weakest and most vulnerable--the issue of origins.

What, are you referring to the fact that evolution does not and has never addressed the ultimate origins of life?