Posted on 02/22/2005 7:34:15 AM PST by PatrickHenry
When it's your job to serve as the president's in-house expert on science and technology, being constantly in the media spotlight isn't necessarily a mark of distinction. But for President Bush's stoically inclined science adviser John Marburger, immense controversy followed his blanket dismissal last year of allegations (now endorsed by 48 Nobel laureates) that the administration has systematically abused science. So it was more than a little refreshing last Wednesday to hear Marburger take a strong stance against science politicization and abuse on one issue where it really matters: evolution.
Speaking at the annual conference of the National Association of Science Writers, Marburger fielded an audience question about "Intelligent Design" (ID), the latest supposedly scientific alternative to Charles Darwin's theory of descent with modification. The White House's chief scientist stated point blank, "Intelligent Design is not a scientific theory." And that's not all -- as if to ram the point home, Marburger soon continued, "I don't regard Intelligent Design as a scientific topi."
[PH here:]
I'm not sure the whole article can be copied here, so please go to the link to read it all:
Chris Mooney, "Intelligent Denials", The American Prospect Online, Feb 22, 2005.
(Excerpt) Read more at prospect.org ...
Thank goodness that on evolution, at least, Marburger strays from the pack.
The American Prospect was founded in 1990 as an authoritative magazine of liberal ideas, committed to a just society, an enriched democracy, and effective liberal politics. Robert Kuttner, Robert Reich, and Paul Starr launched the magazine initially as a quarterly….…Our mission, simply put, is to rise to the momentous occasion that confronts all Americans who seek a just society built on our greatest traditions. Contemporary conservatism stands to thwart those traditions; it advances its agenda by way of stealth, fear-mongering, and a massive propaganda apparatus. It is our mission to expose that agenda and the lies that support it.
link
Yeah, but at the end of the article it had some rather strict language about copying it, so -- like a good little boy -- I did the prudent thing.
And yes, in my haste to get this posted (I even considered putting it in "Breaking News") my trembling fingers left out the "c" in topic. That's how it goes.
I wish cometimes that we were evolved from Grape Apes.
I read a great analogy of "intelligent design" br Dr. Wayne Dyer recently. He wrote, Imagine a huge junkyard with millions and millions of parts, wires, cables, tires electronic parts, metal scraps, plastic, foam rubber, cloth etc. All of the sudden a great wind arises and the parts all start whirling around and colliding. Just as suddenly the wind subsides. There in the junk yard is a fully assembled 747 ready to fly. It occured as a totally ramdom event, with no creative guidance. Well that's what the evolutionists would have us believe about our perfectly ordered universe, Evolution, yeah right!
I feel like I'm going to rain on the Darwinian parade with the following observation:
The American Prospect defends Kyoto on the same homepage it defends the Darwinian status quo.
Hmmm...
Omar.
It's Fred Hoyle's analogy. And it's absurd.
You can't meaningfully participate unless you buy a ticket. In this case, the ticket is some basic understanding of what's going on here, and the price you pay is the effort needed to bring yourself up to speed:
The Theory of Evolution. (Excellent introductory encyclopedia article.)
The scientific method. You must know what science is (hint: it's not a cult).
What's a Scientific Theory? Encyclopedia article. Yes, evolution is a theory. That's a good thing.
Evolution as Fact and Theory by Stephen Jay Gould. Very useful article.
A funny statement, to be sure, and one which creationists endlessly parrot. Unfortunately, the "747 in a junkyard" is invalid as a comparison, as neither a junkyard nor a 747 are biological entities. Biological entities make copies of themselves through reproduction.
Also, whatever the first biological life was, it certanily wasn't as complex as modern life.
The joke, therefore, falls flat.
It's no big secret that liberals have long been at peace with science & evolution's part in that, by contrast to conservatives. It just proves that liberals aren't 100% wrong, even if they're close....
Well, give us a brief tutorial.
"Probably because creationists don't understand the principles of the theory of evolution."
Nothing's more tiring on these Crevo threads than having to debunk the same tired, ignorant, wrong ideas and beliefs of evolution, like this whole "why are there still monkeys?" tired argument that creationists always try to make.
It's sad proof that, no matter how much you try, some people are just plain unwilling to learn the facts.
All the more reason to expose ID as a total fraud.
I like your nick...I've got some really good images of the MIKE test series saved. The yield was exceeded, however, by the CASTLE test series, and most spectacularly by the Russian TSAR BOMBA (58 Mt).
For aesthetics, the images of the REDWING tests are probably the best.
"The joke, therefore, falls flat."
I disagree. I laugh at creationists all the time!
When it comes to monkeys and humans, there is nothing in the TOE requiring that an ancestor species die off when a new species arises.
Yes, it’s no big secret that the liberals use Darwinism as a ‘world view’ as opposed to conservatives… like, the President (it is no secret where his 'world view' comes from and the liberals hate it…)
I laugh at evolutionists.
Your statement has no political merit, and if anything, the last election proved it. Just as most of this country is anti-abortion, so too most of this country is in the pro-creation camp. The secular left has made evolution one of their cause celebs, mainly because it is near impossible to "prove" it didn't happen, and they can use that as a vehicle to brand conservatives luddites or out of the mainstream and against science and the progress it represents.
This is all about the left trying to take G-d out of the public culture and discussion, to show there is really no "Godly" difference between humans and animals, and to ram their poisonous agenda thru the apathetic and docile public. We should not stand for it.
As was posted yesterday, the perfection of creation negates all the arguments of the evolutionists, and the ongoing process by which the universe functions indicates that the A-Mighty is still charge and will always be.
Makes it much easier to explain evolution, doesn't it?
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.