Dover CARES sweeps election (Intelligent Design loses big)

York Daily Record ^ | 11/9/2005 | Michelle Starr

[js1138]

Spin is spin, but less than a hundred votes separating out of 5-thousand cast makes it under 2%. That's like Toomey- Specter here last year.

Many elections are decided by less than two percent, including presidential elections.

But I would agree it was the perjury that turned this one. A similar phenomenon is emerging in Kansas. People with long histories of promoting creationism are claiming no religious motives.

I find this odd, since the major ID proponents do not dispute the fact of evolution.

[Nextrush]

The Supreme Court ruling of 1987 against "Creationism" in
schools forces the mental gymnastics of ID as an end run against that ruling. (You mean the "G" word without using the "G' word). Its sad to live in a country where courts
are banning the use of the word "God" like the Supreme
Court did in the 1987 Creationism ruling and most recently
the 9th Circus Court in California and others regarding
the Pledge of Allegience. These rulings come from the minds of people who want us to believe that the government is God, so we must ban the use of the "G" word and call it
"separation of church and state." (a phrase that does not
appear in our constitution, but in Communist ones)

[js1138]

Creation can be taught in religion classes, which are not illegal, in philosophy classes, in history classes, in history of science classes.

But theories that require supernatural intervention are not part of science.

[RightWingNilla]

Somewhere. Maybe Dembski has some

ID circle jerk:

Dembski: "I dont have any, maybe Behe has some."

Behe: "I dont have any, maybe Minnich has some."

Minnich: etc...

[Ulugh Beg]

<< Actually, it was a serious question. Seems to me, Theistic Evolution is basically Intelligently Designed Evolution. >>


I was holding out hope that you were just mistaken -- and that is why I suggested you read up on it. But since then I looked at another thread and noticed that you included a link to some ID articles yourself.

That tells me you were deliberately equivocating, as I suspected but couldn't say for sure. Now I can. You knew before claiming to be "serious" in your question that ID is not the same as "theistic evolution" -- yet you continue the charade.

As I teach my logic students -- there is no point in trying to reason with someone who has decided to be deliberately unreasonable.

[RightWingNilla]

720th = st

Thats Harlem right?

[newcats]

I'm just saying logically if we're going to talk science, then there's no reason that either concept should be eliminated from a curriculum.

Sure there is a reason....ID is NOT science.
And again, my point is..why pick just ID?

[jennyp]

Spin is spin, but less than a hundred votes separating out of 5-thousand cast makes it under 2%. That's like Toomey-Specter here last year.

Sure, but this is a place where the Republicans outpolled the Democrats by almost 2-1, in the races where the Dems even bothered to run someone!

[PatrickHenry]

The lesson is clear. In a heavily republican area, ID tipped the scales enough that the dems won -- all the races. ID is political death. The Republican party can't commit suicide over this goofball issue. We must dump ID as a political issue!

[jennyp]

The York papers' data on the election results is frustratingly spotty. I wish someone in York County could get the full data & do a comparison between the results in Dover for the school board vs. all the other races, & between this year's school board races vs. the previous ones. (I expect that this year's school board vote totals should be higher than the previous school board election.)

[highball]

I say the majority of the scientists out there think ID should get a fair shake, but are afraid to admit it to their peers due to the fact that the institutions they work for are usually run by atheists.

Wow. That's amazing. Like most bizarre tinfoil conspiracy theories, it's nice and neat and pat (the lack of evidence for it is somhow characterized as evidence itself).

The problem is that it's absurd on its face. Surely any scientist who would be able to provide the smallest evidence to substantiate ID would be rewarded with instant fame, if not a much better job offer.

I'm sorry, pal, but the "worldwide atheist scientist conspiracy" can't take credit for this one. ID falls flat all on its own.

[PatrickHenry]

Placemarker and plug for The List-O-Links.

[gopgen]

There were Ph.D's in Nazi Germany who preached eugenics, as well. Come to think of it, William Pierce had a Ph.D in physics.

[LizzieBorden]

Well...say some dude came in and said that leaves fall because they have a vengeance against humans and want to cause them...dandruff. Would you agree with that? What would be your reasoning against it?

An example. Mind you, a silly one, but...still. :)