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

To: Prime Choice
I'm no fan of Intelligent Design, but if anything is annihilating the pool of potential scientists and other creative professionals, it's the gosh darned forced mediocrity and catering to political correctness idiocy. That's far more hazardous to learning than the silliness that is ID.

That's a good point. PC and the typical approaches of "educators" (as opposed to teachers) are lowering standards drastically.

But I feel very strongly about the scientific method, and that is the very spot the CS/ID folks are hitting. On a thread just today I couldn't get one of these folks to see something as simple as tree-ring dating--and that involves just simple counting! Its not even close to theory or hypothesis, just simple counting. That is what has me worried.

6 posted on 09/22/2005 5:25:17 PM PDT by Coyoteman (Is this a good tagline?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: All

I am a scientist, and deal with other scientists daily. While some of Darwin's postulates are correct (like releasing white mice in a brown field will result in no brown mice: they will be naturally selected against: they will stand out and be eaten!), the idea of the human being just evolving from nothing is vapid. The evolving evidence from DNA (Genomics), proteins (Proteomics), and resulting metoblites that run and fuel the body (Metabolomics), is so complex that most of my associates believe in "Intelligent Design". A company that is a customer of mine has identified 25,000 diferent metabolites as of this date. This is a result of randomm action?I don't think so.


7 posted on 09/22/2005 6:06:53 PM PDT by bennowens
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: All

I am a scientist, and deal with other scientists daily. While some of Darwin's postulates are correct (like releasing white mice in a brown field will result in no brown mice: they will be naturally selected against: they will stand out and be eaten!), the idea of the human being just evolving from nothing is vapid. The evolving evidence from DNA (Genomics), proteins (Proteomics), and resulting metoblites that run and fuel the body (Metabolomics), is so complex that most of my associates believe in "Intelligent Design". A company that is a customer of mine has identified 25,000 diferent metabolites as of this date. This is a result of randomm action?I don't think so.


8 posted on 09/22/2005 6:07:36 PM PDT by bennowens
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

To: Coyoteman
But I feel very strongly about the scientific method, and that is the very spot the CS/ID folks are hitting. On a thread just today I couldn't get one of these folks to see something as simple as tree-ring dating--and that involves just simple counting! Its not even close to theory or hypothesis, just simple counting. That is what has me worried.

Consider, there is a high probability that the majority of those you are at odds with (in these FR discussions) have been exposed to the type of science education you think is necessary & valuable to further our society. Despite years of students being taught the scientific method, many students somehow escaped learning it, including many who hold your position about evolution. Ask your tree-ring dating denier if (s)he had been exposed to the scientific method in school.

10 posted on 09/22/2005 7:20:29 PM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

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