Intelligent Design case decided - Dover, Pennsylvania, School Board loses [Fox News Alert]

Fox News | 12/20/05

[MineralMan]

Here's one of my favorite slime molds, Lycogala Epidendrum.

[Dimensio]

He was an anti Christian and believed that only science - Dr frankenstein redux- could find the answers to man's questions...elitist that he was.

Please provide a quote from Darwin wherein he made such a claim. And while you're at it, please provide a reference to just one of the "500 theses" on Piltdown Man that you claimed exist.

[Dimensio]

Thanks...I didn't bother to check the authenticity of the note, making the (obviously naïve) assumption that a FReeper wouldn't attempt to hoax fellow FReepers.

When dealing with antievolutionist claims regarding Darwin it's typically safe to assume that they are lying and start from there.

[narby]

I merely wish to point out that a federal judge has ruled that atheistic science is the only credible science.

The judge is merely pointing out the obvious that science cannot detect the supernatural, thus is "atheistic". By definition, science deals with the natural world, therefore anything it can detect and measure is a part of the natural world, I.E. "atheistic".

That situation could change when the first scientist detects, or describes a method to determine the nature of God. That scientist will become the most famous in history too, so don't tell me that all scientists are anti-God and wouldn't attempt such work.

[saganite]

You just can't commit can you? Probably one of those moderates who believe we should just sit on the fence til hell freezes over. I've stated my postion clearly but you seem to have none, except you think ID is a valid theory and should be taught somewhere. Well, where? That's the thrust of this thread. Come on. Go on record. What do you think?

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Darwin never read any Marx...what a hoot! Darwin if nothing else was an avid reader and was well aware of marx and anything that smacked of anti Christian beliefs."

No, he never read Marx. Marx was a second tier socialist thinker in the 19th century. Darwin may have heard his name but there is ZERO evidence he ever read any of him. Why would he? Darwin was a free market, antislavery Whig.

"He may not have read Kapital but he was familiar with it and his note to marx exhibits empathy and support no matter the "florid" style."

Nonsense. It was a thank you. Darwin specifically says he knows very little about economics. How is this *support*?

"But more on the self centered misanthrope bozo Darwin and his anti Christian beliefs. In another letter to Edward Aveling - and you know who that jerk is--- he goes on"

Yes, this was the book that was to be dedicated to Darwin, and Darwin said no. Where is there ANY evidence that Darwin was a misanthrope, other than in your imagination? He had lots of friends, and enjoyed communicating with them.

The letter you posted shows that Darwin didn't want to get involved in a religious debate. Why should he have?


You are stretching for something, but you are not reaching it.

[NJ_gent]

"Who proposed such a thing?"

You did, in #481: "Only some theories should be mentioned?" Either all theories should be mentioned, or only those theories consistent with the class in question should be presented. You can't have it both ways.

[Fester Chugabrew]

. . . but the school board was attempting to put intelligent design over evolution.

The Discovery Institute rejects any mandate to teach intelligent design as the only viable explanation for the history of organized matter. I would object to removing evolutionist teaching entirely from a scientific setting, although the greater part of it belongs in a philosophy class.

[andysandmikesmom]

Dimensio...thanks for that link, which explains the supposed letter the Darwin sent to Marx...it just keeps getting better and better..

Thanks to all three of you, for completely and thoroughly unmasking the falsehoods, about the supposed connection between Darwin and Marx..

The next time someone tries to make the claim that Darwin and Marx were somehow mutual admirers of each other, now, at least I have the true 'facts', to know that such claims are garbage, based on nothing more than wishful thinking...

[benjibrowder]

DNA actually proofreads itself in some cases. So this would prevent change.

[eleni121]

Lies and more lies. Why would I believe a copy paste website that pushes EVO theory?

Darwin and Marx influenced many within science — and were committed to an historical materialist and dialectical philosophy-secularism. Darwin was nothing more than a sad sack budding commie---with proclivities to racism and Nazism.

Get a life.

[MindBender26]

>No. He decided what is and what is not science.

Most excellent

[MindBender26]

Intelligent Design is neither nor the sum of its parts.

[RightWingAtheist]

All I can say is...

[Fester Chugabrew]

You talk out of both sides of your mouth. First you say science is by nature atheistic, then you suggest a scenario at some point down the road when a scientist might detect, or describe a method to determine the nature of God.

[Coyoteman]

If it cannot be reproduced it is just a theory isn't it? Or have the rules of scientific investigation been dumbed down in order to accomodate the belief system of evolution.?

No, and no.

This is what a theory is. Reproducing something in the laboratory has nothing to do with it.

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"

[Quark2005]

Thanks for showing the "Periodic Table" - that made my day.

[benjibrowder]

Yes, I know that infinity isn't an actual number. The number line supposedly does not end. The number line cannot end because there are unlimited numbers. I could sit at my computer and type 9 in my computer forever until I died, or the computer just couldn't handle it anymore (battery died, age of computer, processor, etc). I wouldn't ever do it, of course.

[Thatcherite]

If anyone can explain how evolution is falsifiable, I would like to know.

Find an endogenous retrovirus identically positioned in the human and gorilla genome, and not present in the chimp genome in order to do tremendous damage to the theory of evolution. Find a few more similar anomalies in other genomes to bang the nails in evolution's coffin. Some creationists predicted that molecular evidence like that would falsify evolution as we mapped genomes. They were wrong. Instead, the retroviral evidence has stunningly vindicated evolution, matching as it does the predictions of the phylogenetic tree.

Alternatively find a rabbit fossil in pre-cambrian strata. Untold millions of fossil finds made since Darwin's day match the predictions of the theory of evolution.

Find an identical species of flightless bird native to two remote oceanic islands to falsify the theory of evolution. (Hint: we've already looked, and we couldn't find any, flightless bird species on oceanic islands are always unique to that island, for an evolutionary reason that you'll work out if you think about it)

There are loads and loads more ways that evolution could potentially be falsified, but where the real evidence when studied ends up vindicating evolution. Google is your friend. :)

[MindBender26]

>Darwin was nothing more than a sad sack budding commie.

What does The Origin of The Species have to do with dictatorial, non-theocratic socialism?