Man it's a hoot to watch these threads.
I just don't get it. If you evolutionists are so darn certain, why are you so scared of intelligent design.
Do you think people are stupid? Do you think that they aren't capable of weighing one against the other and deciding which has more merit?
You guys actually make people want to investigate intelligent design by the knee-jerk response you have to it.
Because you doth protest too much, IMO.
Scientists aren't fearful of ID. The protests are loud because ID proponents want science changed to include the supernatural. There is no room for fairy tale explanations in science, especially the type offered by ID where there are no falsifiable tests. These people want to muddy ALL of science just to have their personal philosophy injected into a place where it doesn't belong.
Afraid of ID? Hardly.
ID might possibly deserve serious consideration by scientists, who are qualified to fight out the battle over whether ID has any merit. This scientific contest would happen in the universities, at scientific conferences, and in referreed scientific journals. The public schools is not the right venue for this kind of battle. Were ID to survive serious scientific scrutiny, then it would deserve inclusion in high school curricula.
But the truth is that ID is speculative and poorly-supported. Mainstream scientists have dealt with ID in detail, and have pretty much torn it apart already.
The only thing I am afraid of is political manipulation of the science curriculum in the public schools. The fact that the ID people have resorted to this gives away their game: ID is much more a political movement than a genuine scientific movement.
Do you think people are stupid? Do you think that they aren't capable of weighing one against the other and deciding which has more merit?
You guys actually make people want to investigate intelligent design by the knee-jerk response you have to it.
Although from the plaintiffs' submission, this is a pretty good summary:
319. Intelligent design does not qualify as science for a variety of reasons:
(a) It violates the ground rules of science, as they have been practiced for hundreds of years since the scientific revolution, because it i) posits a supernatural actor as an explanation for natural phenomena and ii) it cannot be tested.[Dover] Plaintiffs' Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, pp. 140-141.(b) It has been universally rejected as science by the scientific community.
(c) It finds no support in the peer-reviewed scientific literature.
(d) It is not the subject of scientific testing and research.
(e) It makes no predictions and offers no explanations other than “the intelligent designer did it.”
(f) It is primarily a negative argument against evolution.
(g) The arguments made against evolution distort and misrepresent the real state of scientific knowledge.
You will understand when porn movies are taped in churches. You know, there is a time and a place.....
More fun to contribute to them, you might try it some day.
"I just don't get it. If you evolutionists are so darn certain, why are you so scared of intelligent design.
Who said anything about being afraid? Angry that pseudoscience is being pushed into the schools maybe, but not afraid. I also take part in a forum that debunks pseudoscience such as homeopathy; does that mean I'm afraid of quacks?
"Do you think people are stupid? Do you think that they aren't capable of weighing one against the other and deciding which has more merit?
Most people accept whatever they've been taught as children. If you think people will take the time to really weigh the pros and cons you need to look at all the people who believe in astrology, homeopathy, naturopathic medicine, crystals, pyramid power and so on.
"You guys actually make people want to investigate intelligent design by the knee-jerk response you have to it.
The reaction of science to ID is not knee-jerk in any sense of the term. Science knows more about ID than the majority of ID proponents. This is why people like Behe and Dembski find they need to constantly modify their hypotheses. Science points out the problems, and IDists try to make changes. This is good, but so far ID still hasn't made it to the science platform, they're still loading it on the truck at the factory
"Because you doth protest too much, IMO.
Had science protested enough, let alone too much, there would be no attempts to push it into the schools.
We're scared of ignorance on the march, proudly waving it's banner...