This is a Ferrari engine. ID is the theory which says that when you see something like that, you figure it was designed and engineered. Evolution is the theory which says that things like that just sort of happen.
Posted on 09/27/2005 9:10:31 AM PDT by Crackingham
Dover Area School District's federal trial began yesterday in Harrisburg with talk ranging from divine intervention and the Boston Red Sox to aliens and bacterial flagellum. After about 10 months of waiting, the court case against the district and its board opened in Middle District Judge John E. Jones III's courtroom with statements from lawyers and several hours of expert testimony from biologist and Brown University professor Kenneth Miller.
On one side of the aisle, several plaintiffs packed themselves in wooden benches behind a row of attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union, Pepper Hamilton LLC and Americans United for Separation of Church and State. On the other side of the aisle, nine school board members, only three of whom were on the board when it voted 6-3 to include a statement on intelligent design in biology classes, piled in behind lawyers from the Thomas More Law Center. Assistant superintendent Michael Baksa and superintendent Richard Nilsen shared a bench with Michael Behe, a Lehigh University professor expected to take the stand in defense of intelligent design.
SNIP
Miller, whose resume is several pages long and includes a stint as a professor at Harvard University, was the first witness called for the parents. Miller co-wrote the Prentice Hall textbook "Biology" with professor Joe Levine. The book is used by 35 percent of the high school students in the United States, Miller said. His were some of the thousands of biology books in which school officials in Cobb County, Ga., ordered stickers to be placed, warning that evolution is only a theory, "not a fact." Miller also testified in a lawsuit filed by Cobb County parents, and a judge later ordered that the stickers be removed.
Yesterday, the scientist's testimony was at times dominated by scientific terminology, though he jokingly told ACLU attorney Witold Walczak he would do his best to explain things in the layman's terms he uses with his mother.
Miller said intelligent design supporters think an intelligent designer must have been involved in the creation of life because science can't yet prove how everything evolved. He said the intelligent design idea that birds were created with beaks, feathers and wings and fish were born with fins is a creationist argument.
Intelligent design supporters often cite "irreducible complexity" in their research, he said. "Irreducible complexity" means that a living thing can't be reduced by any part or it won't work at all. So those living things could not have evolved in the way Darwin suggested; they had to be created with all of their existing parts, Miller said.
Intelligent design proponents often cite the bacterial flagellum, a bacterium with a tail that propels it, Miller said. Behe and his colleagues claim bacterial flagellum had to be created with all of its parts because it couldn't function if any of them were taken away, Miller testified. But scientists have proved that the bacterial flagellum can be reduced to a smaller being, a little organism that operates in a manner similar to a syringe, Miller said.
One of the biggest problems with the scientific viability of intelligent design is there is no way to experiment with the presence of a supernatural being because science only deals with the natural world and theories that are testable, Miller said.
Some people might suspect divine intervention last year when the Boston Red Sox came back to win the World Series after losing three games in a row to the New York Yankees in the playoffs. It may have been, but that's not science, he said. And intelligent design proponents haven't named the "intelligent being" behind their supposition, Miller said. They have suggested, among other things, that it could be aliens, he said. He said there is no evidence to prove intelligent design, so its proponents just try to poke holes in the theory of evolution.
"If Intelligent Design IS Creationism, it'd be called Creationism."
Well, it IS, but it's NOT. Intelligent Design is trying to make an end run around the limitations on religious instruction in schools. It's still Creationism, but that trick never works, so they gave it a new name.
Indeed, the book in question in this case started out using the term Creationism in its pages. When that trick didn't work again, as it always fails to work, they edited the book, substituting Intelligent Design for Creationism.
This is why this case is sure to go the Plaintiff's way. It's a poor subterfuge and won't succeed.
Dover update ping.
I thought creationism was the belief that man and dinosaurs lived together and that the world is only a few thousand years old.
Now it is wrong for people to believe that God had any hand in the existence of the world? Or at least to consider the posibility in an educational setting? How about in "philosophy"?
Sets up the potential situation that atheism (absolute belief that there is no god) can be the defacto state religion. Agnostics are the ones who say "don't know".
Or is the position that it is okay to say that "god may exist but He didn't have any role in everything else"?
2005-09-27 Biology expert testifies. Professor: Intelligent design is creationism.
2005-09-27 Trial Over 'Intelligent Design' Resumes
2005-09-26 Creationism, Christianity, and Common Sense
2005-09-26 Creationism, Intelligent Design, and Evolution
2005-09-26 Dispute over evolution goes on trial in U.S. court
2005-09-26 Does Genesis hold up under critic’s scrutiny? (Creation/Evolution)
2005-09-26 New Analyses Bolster Central Tenets of Evolution Theory
2005-09-26 The Problem With Evolution
2005-09-26 With world watching, trial starts
2005-09-25 In Evolution Debate, Creationists Are Breaking New Ground
2005-09-24 The trouble with Darwin (Bush's I.D. comments changed Australia's Educational Landscape)
2005-09-23 Ultimate thread on Dover, Pennsylvania's Evolution v. Intelligent Design trial
2005-09-22 Court Case Threatens to 'Drag Science into the Supernatural'
2005-09-22 Evan Jamieson, hydrometallurgy (Creation/Evolution)
2005-09-22 Insight into our sight: A new view on the evolution of the eye lens (Desperate conjuncture)
2005-09-22 Intelligent Design: An Ambiguous Assault on Evolution
2005-09-22 Intelligent designers down on Dover
2005-09-22 Intelligible Design
2005-09-21 Intelligent design? Not on this campus [Pennsylvania]
2005-09-21 Researchers create functioning artificial proteins using nature's rules
Crevo Warrior Freepdays for the month of September:
2005-09-17 Arnhart
2001-09-06 atlaw
2004-09-22 coffee260
2004-09-15 Diana in Wisconsin
2001-09-17 Dimensio
2003-09-25 gobucks
2001-09-14 Heartlander
2004-09-21 JamesP81
2004-09-13 johnnyb_61820
2004-09-09 LouAvul
2004-09-16 ml1954
2003-09-14 neverdem
2003-09-09 RightWingAtheist
1998-09-17 tallhappy
2003-09-25 truthfinder9
1999-09-23 Tumbleweed_Connection
In Memoriam. Fallen Crevo Warriors:
ALS
Aric2000
bluepistolero
ConservababeJen
DittoJed2
f.Christian
goodseedhomeschool
gore3000
jedigirl
JesseShurun
medved
metacognative
Modernman
peg the prophet
RickyJ
SeaLion
Tomax
tpaine
Bring back SeaLion and Mondernman!
The evolutionist believes that death is natural and a mechanism for species change and believes therefore that death will always the norm.
For the Creationist, the God who warned Adam and Eve not to commit this act, afterwords provided a way of salvation (the bruising of the serpents head - done on the cross by the Lord Jesus Christ) and life eternal, just as God had planned.
The Evolutionist believes that there is no life after death and therefore can rape and pillage as his inclination desires. The believer, on the other hand, through the scripture, knows the result of this and is compelled to live virtuously since death will be done away with.
Which do you choose?
IOW...the denial is merely job security.
This is a Ferrari engine. ID is the theory which says that when you see something like that, you figure it was designed and engineered. Evolution is the theory which says that things like that just sort of happen.
That's just a vile slur. Does your religion teach that you can lie as your inclination desires?
When Ferrari engines reproduce naturally, with no human intervention, then your example will make some sense. Since they do not, it doesn't.
"The Evolutionist believes that there is no life after death and therefore can rape and pillage as his inclination desires. "
"I thought creationism was the belief that man and dinosaurs lived together and that the world is only a few thousand years old.
Now it is wrong for people to believe that God had any hand in the existence of the world? Or at least to consider the posibility in an educational setting? How about in "philosophy"?
"
The believer, on the other hand, through the scripture, knows the result of bearing false witness...
There is only one truth..
All else is counterfeit
Sexual reproduction is more complicated than anything happening in the Ferrari engine. In fact the simplest one celled animal is more complicated than the Ferrari engine.
If a Ferrari engine couldn't just happen, how in hell are those kinds of things supposed to?
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.