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

Skip to comments.

'Intelligent Design' Wins In Kansas
CBS News ^ | 10 November 2005

Posted on 11/09/2005 4:31:43 PM PST by Aussie Dasher

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240241-242 next last
To: LS

How do you test "ID"? And why do you think Darwinism is "crap"? It's accepted by virtually every biologist in the world, regardless of their religion.


201 posted on 11/10/2005 2:25:37 PM PST by springing interest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa
Apparently you are wrong about what is science or do you disagree with major universities?

"If you call a tail a leg, how many legs has a dog? Five? No, calling a tail a leg don't make it a leg."

Now don't get distracted, Mr. Troll - you got any "statistics" to post yet? No? What a surprise.

202 posted on 11/10/2005 2:30:39 PM PST by balrog666 (A myth by any other name is still inane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa
Why argue with someone who refuses to agree to the definition of terms?

I use the terms of science. I suggest you do so as well before you get confused any further.

If you wrongly claim that stats is not a science then its pointless for us to go beyond that, isn't it?

You can wrongly claim that a tail is a leg all you want, but it doesn't matter what you call it if you won't SHOW THE TAIL FIRST.

Put up or shut up, little-minded troll.

203 posted on 11/10/2005 2:35:14 PM PST by balrog666 (A myth by any other name is still inane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: balrog666; Doctor Stochastic
you got any "statistics" to post yet? No? What a surprise.

Here are my numbers

1. I believe that evolution took place.

2. I'm not afraid to use God given tools to explore our world.

3. I believe that stats are a valuable tool with which we can make sense of systems that otherwise appear random or are indiscernible.

4. I believe that the ID guys are raising some interesting questions regarding the likelihood of the outcomes we see.

5. I see two approaches to the questions they raise. One is to use logical fallacies to dismiss them out of hand (pretty much your approach). The other is to approach their apparent dilemmas using our God given gift of math to show where they are wrong.

6. I believe that the course you and others take that deny that stats has any part in the discussion or deny the questions themselves unhelpful in advancing the understanding of the science of evolution.

204 posted on 11/10/2005 2:41:26 PM PST by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa
My question is that seeing that ID is mostly based on applying statistics why you are against applying stats to evolution

It seems to me that Intelligent Design attempts to apply statistics to various facets of evolution, claim that statistically evolution is impossible, and then claim victory. But what evidence do they provide to show that their theories are, in turn, the correct ones? Do they have any theories to begin with indicating who or what the intelligent designer is? Or is it merely their contention that there can be only two possible theories, and if evolution is wrong then intelligent design is right by default? What kind of science is that?

205 posted on 11/10/2005 3:02:45 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Are these folks elected officials?

Yes.

If so, they might consider burnishing their resumes.

Four of them are up for reelection next year. We'll see what happens.

206 posted on 11/10/2005 3:04:01 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Ah, an open mind willing to let the facts go where they may. It seems that is a rarity here.

I have merely requested why there is an objection to hearing out these proposals based on stats and to answer them.

It appears to me that the evolution side looks weak when they just want to run and hide from the stats. I can understand that many in the field are not doctorates in math and would rather not.

However, it would seem plausible the exercises would strengthen both the study of statistics as well as reinforce the theory of evolution. In fact, these stat questions might even lead to raising the science of evolution to a higher plane.

So many benefits from engaging in the critics is possible, it makes it seem that some of the evolutionists are afraid of the outcome. Frankly, like you I'm not afraid of where facts lead.

Truth is truth and unchangeable.
207 posted on 11/10/2005 3:38:49 PM PST by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: springing interest

I read plenty of biologists who think Darwin is crap. Virtually all of the ID biologists say it's garbage. But suit yourself.


208 posted on 11/10/2005 3:48:29 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa
So many benefits from engaging in the critics is possible, it makes it seem that some of the evolutionists are afraid of the outcome. Frankly, like you I'm not afraid of where facts lead.

And what facts lead you to support intelligent design?

209 posted on 11/10/2005 4:40:40 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: All; Aussie Dasher

“Further, he (the Pope) seems to be cautioning those who have been claiming Church endorsement of the full-bodied, design-defeating version of Darwin's theory of evolution, which, after all, is often little more than philosophical materialism applied to science,” added Chapman.

Chapman noted that in his very first homily as Pope, Benedict XVI had rebuked the idea that human beings are mere products of evolution, and that, like his predecessor, John Paul II, the new Pope has a long record of opposition to scientific materialism.

excerpt from: http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=3015&program=News&callingPage=discoMainPage


210 posted on 11/10/2005 4:41:54 PM PST by Sun (Hillary Clinton is pro-ILLEGAL immigration. Don't let her fool you. She has a D- /F immigr. rating.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa
You too think that stats has no place in evolution?

No, I think you have no numbers. Put your numbers on the table; state your assumptions; show your work.

211 posted on 11/10/2005 5:57:53 PM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa

Non-responsive. You have no numbers to offer. [Mode='VI']


212 posted on 11/10/2005 6:00:18 PM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch ist der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

Did I say I support that theory? I merely asked why many of you folks are afraid of stats.


213 posted on 11/10/2005 6:48:11 PM PST by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic

Do you think stats are a valid science that can contribute to the advance of evolutionary theory? Or do you think that its futile to even try to use it as a tool?


214 posted on 11/10/2005 6:49:44 PM PST by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa
Here are my numbers

Damn, boy, they don't add up to much of anything. In particular, nobody cares what you "believe" - only what you can establish through evidence and reason.

As for the ID/IOT clowns, yes, we dismiss them because their arguments are logically fallacious - just as we should.

As for statistics, you have yet to post any or even establish that you understand what statistics are and how they can be used.

Frankly, your reading for comprehension needs a lot of work, you reason poorly based on the arguments you posts, and you like to put words in people's mouths that have neither said nor implied. All the marks a garden-variety, pleading-for-attention, no-nothing troll.

Don't go away mad, just go away and quit wasting everyone's time.

215 posted on 11/10/2005 7:01:49 PM PST by balrog666 (A myth by any other name is still inane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: balrog666

Thanks for your response. I have learned much about how you and others apply reason and logic. I am very much impressed by the level of dialog.


216 posted on 11/10/2005 7:39:02 PM PST by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: LS

Any of those biologists have a name?


217 posted on 11/10/2005 11:59:23 PM PST by springing interest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa
Did I say I support that theory?

Are you denying you do? Why? Don't the statistics work for you?

I merely asked why many of you folks are afraid of stats.

I'm not afraid of them at all. Haven't been since I was a little kid.

218 posted on 11/11/2005 3:46:41 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

To: Centerfield
As you should - for malfeasance of duty.
219 posted on 11/11/2005 3:53:24 AM PST by KeepUSfree (WOSD = fascism pure and simple.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: springing interest

They do. Since you are so interested, you find them.


220 posted on 11/11/2005 5:40:42 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240241-242 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