Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Politicized Scholars Put Evolution on the Defensive
New York Times ^ | August 21, 2005 | JODI WILGOREN

Posted on 08/20/2005 5:45:53 PM PDT by Nicholas Conradin

By SEATTLE - When President Bush plunged into the debate over the teaching of evolution this month, saying, "both sides ought to be properly taught," he seemed to be reading from the playbook of the Discovery Institute, the conservative think tank here that is at the helm of this newly volatile frontier in the nation's culture wars.

After toiling in obscurity for nearly a decade, the institute's Center for Science and Culture has emerged in recent months as the ideological and strategic backbone behind the eruption of skirmishes over science in school districts and state capitals across the country. Pushing a "teach the controversy" approach to evolution, the institute has in many ways transformed the debate into an issue of academic freedom rather than a confrontation between biology and religion.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: anothercrevothread; crevolist; enoughalready; evolution; intelligentdesign; leechthecontroversy; makeitstop; notagain; scienceeducation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 341-360361-380381-400 ... 481-487 next last
To: js1138

Evolutionists attempt to taint anybody who even questions them as lying, bible thumping, snake handling, trailer trash. -excerpt of my comment-


"Part of that impression is self-imposed. the continued use of Second Law arguments. Out of context or fabricated quotes attributed to famous scientists, the unwillingness of creationist to police their own when sill and discredited arguments are posted -- all this looks like what you said." your response


Justify it however you so choose, but do you really think that it appeals to parents sending their children into public schools who already believe evolution is a lie.

my response


I'm not sure exactly what this sentence means. Are you referring to my attitude?

your question


Again, I probably disagree with what most creationists believe...

Why should creationists do what evolutionists do not do themselves. I see no such "police" (your word) in their manner of debate. I can read Darwin's "origins" and I can make of it what I choose, I no not need anyone to tell me what it meant when he wrote it and what it means now.

Your words justified the methods used by evolutionists to control who says what and what the meaning of things said are. Just like a whole lot of Christians like to do with the Bible.






361 posted on 08/21/2005 9:42:46 PM PDT by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 360 | View Replies]

To: narby
You piqued my interest, so I visited the site you linked to. Curiously, I found no citations for the charges contained therein, so, out of curiosity, I did a quick google search of the first charge on the list...that of Dr. Richard Bliss, to wit:

"Dr" Richard Bliss, who develops curriculum materials for the Institute for Creation Research, has a doctorate in education from the University of Sarisota in Florida, an unaccredited diploma mill that is located in a hotel."(emphasis mine)

Here's their website, which seems to be accredited to me. Of course, things could have been different in the seventies when Bliss was awared his PhD. I personally don't know, but I'm a little skeptical when someone levies a charge of fraud without backing it with any evidence other than their word.

That said, you may not agree with their method of the distance-learning model, but it hardly constitutes fraud.

I'm willing to change my opinion if you can provide evidence, but so far it looks like an unsubstantiated charge.

362 posted on 08/21/2005 10:46:54 PM PDT by csense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 358 | View Replies]

To: csense

I'm sorry, not PhD...EdD


363 posted on 08/21/2005 10:53:29 PM PDT by csense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 362 | View Replies]

To: csense
I'm sorry, not PhD...EdD

uh huh. So we might possibly not be speaking about the cutting edge of biological research science here?

364 posted on 08/21/2005 11:31:26 PM PDT by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 363 | View Replies]

To: narby
Just so we get this straight. You guys believe:

Absolute Nothingness somehow begat our special universe, a one-in-a-mega-magilla-jillion chance, on the very first try.

And we (Universal IDers) believe:

Absolute Somethingness (a force external to our universe) begat our special universe - no mind-boggling ultra-lotto necessary - on the first try by choice because it (the Creator) wanted it this way.

And another question for yooz guys:

Isn't it entirely within the projected scope of even our science in the not-too-distant future to create universes? And if you agree that this is so, then doesn't that say that you agree that universes can, at least theoretically so far, be created from the outside? (Spare me the "tortoises all the way down" for the moment. We'll leave that conundrum for later.)

Wouldn't you then agree that it is perfectly plausible that this universe is a creation? (As many of the world's greatest physicists have also stated, regardless of the level of proof so far?)
365 posted on 08/21/2005 11:45:53 PM PDT by LeftCoastNeoCon (Spell-check free and proud of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 305 | View Replies]

To: donh
Look donh,

Why don't you take your little knucklehead self and Mordo here go off to another thread.

Its obvious there is no desire for a dialog, civility, decency, or even anything approaching intelligence from dknucklehead.

Donh your an insult to the evo-crusade. Kudos to you!! that is hard to do!

Now Mordo can get down there with you in your COMFORT ZONE.., that area you operate from that all can see..

Yeh & its about a subtle as the proverbial 2x4 up side the mules head. Yeh, Yeh.

Yeh, Mordo will talk the language that you know. Yeh, he still remembers it from when, oh uh 10 years old or so? yeh thats the ticket.

Get all yourself and your little evo buddies together, yeh all of um & we all all have a nice happy little thread.

Yeh.., thats the ticket
MORDO IS LAUGHING AT YOU!! LMAO!! LOL!! HA HA HA HA!!!!
366 posted on 08/21/2005 11:54:42 PM PDT by mordo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 364 | View Replies]

To: donh

Would you say that these headlines are basically what the arguement boils down to?

Nothing Creates Universe, Wins Lotto, Universe is Special

Or:

Something Creates Universe, Uses Choice to Make Universe Special


367 posted on 08/21/2005 11:55:42 PM PDT by LeftCoastNeoCon (Spell-check free and proud of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 364 | View Replies]

To: donh
uh huh. So we might possibly not be speaking about the cutting edge of biological research science here?

What we're talking about, is the charge of fraud. I assumed that much was clear from my post. Obviously you have nothing of interest to add regarding that particular point, however, considering some of the minds that places like Harvard is churning out these days, I personally don't place much value in such elitist platforms that you seem to be advocating from here, especially when advocates like you leave yourself wide to having a non-professional like myself slap you down such as I am.

Now, if you have something of interest to add to my querry, then fine. If you don't, then you might want to ping your evo-zombie friends, because I'm not really interested.

368 posted on 08/21/2005 11:55:59 PM PDT by csense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 364 | View Replies]

To: csense
What we're talking about, is the charge of fraud.

There is a thin line between tort fraud and representing an institute as scientific enough to speak with authority at, say, school board meetings, due to the credentials of its participants, which turn out to be all but non-existent upon examination. It takes more than a snotty, supercelious attitude to turn lead credentials into gold, hard as you may try.

369 posted on 08/22/2005 12:14:49 AM PDT by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 368 | View Replies]

To: mordo
Yeh, Mordo will talk the language that you know. Yeh, he still remembers it from when, oh uh 10 years old or so? yeh thats the ticket.

I doubt you actually do remember. My 10 year old nephew is substantially more lucid than this.

Get all yourself and your little evo buddies together, yeh all of um & we all all have a nice happy little thread.

Yeh.., thats the ticket MORDO IS LAUGHING AT YOU!! LMAO!! LOL!! HA HA HA HA!!!!

Another thrust from the clown school of argumentation.

370 posted on 08/22/2005 12:19:15 AM PDT by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 366 | View Replies]

Comment #371 Removed by Moderator

To: LeftCoastNeoCon

Would you say that these headlines are basically what the arguement boils down to? 

Nothing Creates Universe, Wins Lotto, Universe is Special 

Or: 

Something Creates Universe, Uses Choice to Make Universe Special 




No. That is what you and countless creationists would very much like it to boil down to, so you can engage in this loony science-by-sheer-logic rhetoric, that was so popular in the 13th century, and which you've recently grown so fond of.

Serious science is not interested in this argument, because it's outside science's sphere of competence. Science is interested in mundane material explanations of material phenomena, and has no useful, or particularly competent, opinions about additional metaphysical explanations beyond that.

372 posted on 08/22/2005 12:29:27 AM PDT by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 367 | View Replies]

To: mordo
What a PUNK!!

BLA HA HA HA!! ROFLMAO!!! CAN'T BREATHE!! LOL!!

Thanks for your input.

373 posted on 08/22/2005 12:31:06 AM PDT by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 371 | View Replies]

To: LeftCoastNeoCon
Wouldn't you then agree that it is perfectly plausible that this universe is a creation? (As many of the world's greatest physicists have also stated, regardless of the level of proof so far?)

Practically all scientists probably would agree with this. Practically none of them would regard it as a scientific statement.

374 posted on 08/22/2005 12:35:15 AM PDT by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 365 | View Replies]

To: donh
Look,
I just serve up back to you what you put out there. Only I take the white glove off of it. Like people cant see it for what it is anyway.

You guys seem to count on the Creo's (whoever they are) to be nice. Well guess what? Mordo will play YOUR GAME

More Donh wisdom on the teaching of evolution.

You're kind of a one-idea show, aren't you?

Gusto doesn't really make up for failure to turn your brights on, and watch where you're going.

Braying like a jackdaw really doesn't do a thing for your arguments.

Or Thor. Or Odin. Or Raynard the Dawn Fox.

The same can be said for UFOlogy, and crystal healing, and pyramid energy theory. All could conceivably be true and all, like ID, lack the positive, specific forensic evidence to make scientific investigation possible.

Huh. So much for geology, astronomy, and murder trials.

You got me there. It can't butter the toast, or put out the cat, either, but we struggle along as best we can.

375 posted on 08/22/2005 12:49:15 AM PDT by mordo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 373 | View Replies]

To: donh

And thus yer 'serious science' shows that in a world that operates by philosophy, that could not continue to operate without philosophy, it believes it is perfectly authorized to steal philosophy's show. Of course that does not extinguish philosophy, it only drives philosophy underground.


376 posted on 08/22/2005 12:57:50 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (No wonder the Southern Baptist Church threw Greer out: Only one god per church! [Ann Coulter])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 372 | View Replies]

To: mordo

I'd prefer to put out the toast, and butter the cat.


377 posted on 08/22/2005 12:58:11 AM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (No wonder the Southern Baptist Church threw Greer out: Only one god per church! [Ann Coulter])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 375 | View Replies]

To: mordo
Do you have an actual argument, or are we going to have an endless demonstration of creationist courtesy and consideration?
378 posted on 08/22/2005 1:01:22 AM PDT by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 375 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
Those are his words not mine.

If anything else.. these threads drive this heathen MORDO towards the bible.

Mordo Out,

Good nite.. even to my knucklehead adversaries, yeh.. thats you evo-crusaders
379 posted on 08/22/2005 1:05:54 AM PDT by mordo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 377 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
And thus yer 'serious science' shows that in a world that operates by philosophy, that could not continue to operate without philosophy, it believes it is perfectly authorized to steal philosophy's show. Of course that does not extinguish philosophy, it only drives philosophy underground.

Kind of fans of philosophy, are we? I think it's chief competence is to annoy undergrads, myself.

380 posted on 08/22/2005 1:09:50 AM PDT by donh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 376 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 341-360361-380381-400 ... 481-487 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson