Skip to comments.
Professor of new creationism course criticized for e-mail
The Morning Sun {Pittsburg Kansas} ^
| November 25 2005
| AP author unknown
Posted on 11/25/2005 6:19:05 AM PST by labette
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160, 161-162 next last
To: narby
A God that can't even communicate a single common belief among His followers is impotent.You're really trying to get Him to 'communicate' to you; eh?
;^)
(Now you've got a REALLY big crowd of Believers praying for you!)
121
posted on
11/26/2005 3:36:02 PM PST
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
To: Elsie
I suspect Mr Rational really DID mean to write "present" and not "prevent".
I suppose we could ask him. But to reheat an argument simply for the sake of argument isn't likely to be productive.
122
posted on
11/26/2005 3:40:20 PM PST
by
labette
(Opinions and Christian criticisms welcomed.)
To: Elsie
"But; withOUT the BB, we never get to the point of E."
Nor do you get to any other point in science. Does that mean that the BB theory is tied into every other theory in science?
123
posted on
11/26/2005 3:58:34 PM PST
by
CarolinaGuitarman
("There is a grandeur in this view of life...")
To: Elsie
Just as the Toe CHANGES when new data contradicts the old guesses. Evolution has changed? Let's see, Darwin said species changed over time, multiple species had common ancestors, survival of the fittest was one of the input elements. What's changed?
Whereas ID can be God made the universe in 6 days via separate creations. Or, God made evolution happen and directed it. Or, extra terrestrials planted primitive cells that evolved on their own.
Which is THE Intelligent Design Elsie?
As I said, ID can be anything, therefore it is nothing.
124
posted on
11/26/2005 4:29:08 PM PST
by
narby
(Hillary! The Wicked Witch of the Left)
To: Elsie
You're really trying to get Him to 'communicate' to you; eh? I'd be satisfied if all Christians believed the same thing. The fact that they don't tells me there is no real God at the center of their faith.
125
posted on
11/26/2005 4:32:39 PM PST
by
narby
(Hillary! The Wicked Witch of the Left)
To: CarolinaGuitarman
Well...
without a beinging........
126
posted on
11/26/2005 6:28:24 PM PST
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
To: narby
I'd be satisfied if all Christians believed the same thing.Well, don't get dissatisfied when you find out that all Evolutionists do not believe the same then!
127
posted on
11/26/2005 6:31:00 PM PST
by
Elsie
(Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
To: Virginia-American
First, this is about intelligent design, not creationism.
2nd, The professors have made clear that who they hate are Christians.
3rd, while Islamic beliefs may be reasonably accurately called "creationist," the term uis understood to refer specifically to Christian beliefs.
128
posted on
11/26/2005 8:20:50 PM PST
by
dangus
To: labette
129
posted on
11/26/2005 9:40:37 PM PST
by
LiteKeeper
(Beware the secularization of America)
To: LiteKeeper
130
posted on
11/26/2005 9:41:09 PM PST
by
dennisw
(You shouldn't let other people get your kicks for you - Bob Dylan)
To: LiteKeeper
YEC INTREPHuh ?
WSTOMH { while scratching top of my head }
131
posted on
11/27/2005 4:52:42 AM PST
by
labette
(Opinions and Christian criticisms welcomed.)
To: LiteKeeper
Young earth creationist ? Intelligence report ??
132
posted on
11/27/2005 4:59:12 AM PST
by
labette
(Opinions and Christian criticisms welcomed.)
To: RadioAstronomer
A theory in science never becomes a law no matter how much evidence is accumulated. Thusly, gravitational theory will always remain a theory. A theory in science is the end point.
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary/theory
excerpt:[ 4b : an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principles, or circumstances -- often used in the phrase
in theory 5 : a
plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena 6 a : a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b : an unproved assumption : CONJECTURE]
We have identified the elements on the periodic table (with more to follow, I'm sure) and have gone further to speculate (theorize?) as to what they are made of. When you consider that the entire universe is made of just over 100 basic units it certainly seems
plausible that there is some intelligence to the design of the elements. Since no one can explain the origin of the elements or their components, if someone proposes (theorizes?) that the elements may have been designed, does that not constitute a theory?
133
posted on
11/27/2005 6:21:03 AM PST
by
Pipeline
(Choose your teachers carefully.)
To: Pipeline
Since no one can explain the origin of the elements or their components, if someone proposes (theorizes?) that the elements may have been designed, does that not constitute a theory? As used in science, a theory is not a guess, idle speculation, or "an unproved assumption." In science a lot of steps and work go into a theory, and it is the endpoint of the process, not the beginning.
Your example, above, would be speculation. To be a true scientific, hypothesis and capable of being tested, there would have to be some data, or some connection to the natural world. If it cannot be addressed or tested by science, your speculation could not lead to a scientific hypothesis or theory.
Here are some definitions, more as they are used in science (from a google search):
Theory: a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"
Hypothesis: a tentative theory about the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena; "a scientific hypothesis that survives experimental testing becomes a scientific theory"; "he proposed a fresh theory of alkalis that later was accepted in chemical practices"
Guess: an opinion or estimate based on incomplete evidence, or on little or no information
Law: a generalization that describes recurring facts or events in nature; "the laws of thermodynamics"
Assumption: premise: a statement that is assumed to be true and from which a conclusion can be drawn; "on the assumption that he has been injured we can infer that he will not to play"
Speculation: a hypothesis that has been formed by speculating or conjecturing (usually with little hard evidence)
Observation: any information collected with the senses
Data: factual information, especially information organized for analysis or used to reason or make decisions
Fact: when an observation is confirmed repeatedly and by many independent and competent observers, it can become a fact
Belief: any cognitive content (perception) held as true; religious faith
Faith the belief in something for which there is no evidence or logical proof
Dogma: a religious doctrine that is proclaimed as true without proof
Impression: a vague idea in which some confidence is placed; "his impression of her was favorable"; "what are your feelings about the crisis?"; "it strengthened my belief in his sincerity"; "I had a feeling that she was lying"
134
posted on
11/27/2005 7:49:14 AM PST
by
Coyoteman
(I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
To: Coyoteman
Or then again maybe some of the scientists on these threads prefer to follow evidence, rather than belief? Sorry I missed this.
And of course democrats are pure at heart and want to only help the poor and downtrodden.
135
posted on
11/27/2005 9:15:52 AM PST
by
tallhappy
(Juntos Podemos!)
To: tallhappy
Or then again maybe some of the scientists on these threads prefer to follow evidence, rather than belief?Sorry I missed this.
And of course democrats are pure at heart and want to only help the poor and downtrodden.
You are comparing "scientists" to "democrats"??? Now I am insulted!
136
posted on
11/27/2005 9:24:10 AM PST
by
Coyoteman
(I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
To: Coyoteman
Learn what is analogy and learn what is scientist.
Then you'll feel better.
137
posted on
11/27/2005 9:34:34 AM PST
by
tallhappy
(Juntos Podemos!)
To: tallhappy
Learn what is analogy and learn what is scientist. Son, I "is" a scientist. But you, if I may hazard a guess, didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
138
posted on
11/27/2005 10:23:08 AM PST
by
Coyoteman
(I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
To: Coyoteman
No idea what you are talking about, but, as far as scientists here. You may be one. The people I'm talking about -- the vast majority here -- are certainly not.
139
posted on
11/27/2005 10:49:24 AM PST
by
tallhappy
(Juntos Podemos!)
To: Coyoteman
You changed the word. I stated "evos" in quotes. I never said anything about scientists. An "evo" may actually have a job as a scientist of some sort. Most don't. "Evos" are people who see this issue as one where by they use science to participate in religious argument and the like. The interest is not the science or evidence for its own sake but for bashing Christians or other beliefs.
That is what I meant by learn what a scientist is as opposed to an "evo".
140
posted on
11/27/2005 10:54:54 AM PST
by
tallhappy
(Juntos Podemos!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160, 161-162 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson