[PatrickHenry]

This article is ten days old, but it's by an historian, and it's a very good look at the history of the evolution-creationism-intelligent design controversy.

Bold, underlining, and links added by me.

[PatrickHenry]

Evolution Ping The List-O-Links

A conservative, pro-evolution science list, now with over 330 names. See the list's explanation, then FReepmail to be added or dropped. To assist beginners: But it's "just a theory", Evo-Troll's Toolkit, and How to argue against a scientific theory.

[M203M4]

If the debate has evolved, then why are there still retarded arguments that keep getting rehashed after repeated debunking?

"Why are there still monkeys?"

[eleni121]

Evolutionitis (aka Darwinian pathology): so many problems..so much EVO stubborness...so little willingness to self examine.

http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/evolprob.html

[msnimje]

I have decided I want to start the "Intelligent Evolution" school.

The hypothesis for my new scientific theory is the premise the Democrats refuse to evolve past the mentality of an adolescent and therefore only intelligent people move on to be Republicans.

[Havoc]

Seems to be nothing more than a puff piece on the wishful thinking of an evolutionist. ID isn't going anywhere. Evolution is in serious trouble and the author seems to be hoping ID would go away. Sleep peacefully libs and evokooks.
Smaug will get you in the end.. rofl.

[MrEdd]

I am unaware of any Anti-evolutionary debate per-se just debates by various proponents each espousing their own particular view... I.E. creationism, evolution, or intelligent design (forgive me if I left anyone's out). Virulent objections by any of the aforementioned parties of the first part does not entitle them to dismiss the parties of the second part as being merely Anti their position with no conviction or evidence supporting another view.

[FormerLib]

I wonder how much of this would go away if kids were allowed to study religion in school as an elective?

I send my kids to a Christian School were Evolution in taught in the Science class and they learn about the Creator in Religion.

It's just no big deal when Science and Religion both have a voice.

[Axlrose]

How about the Creationism vs Physics debate ? Creationism vs Astrology ? Geology ? Oceonography ?

Because before the first single cell organism existed the universe, galaxy, solar system, planet, and ocean needed to exist and creationism hasn't even come with a compelling explanation of these events, never mind anything else.

Or do creationists accept people who are expert in these branches of science have the most plausible explanations ?

[LiteKeeper]

YEC INTREP - [YAWN] - Here we go again. Nobody convinces anybody...some throw stones; others call names. And in the end we're right where we started.

[Charles H. (The_r0nin)]

You know, the basic problem in this debate is that most conservative ID'ers (which I would guess was most ID'ers) don't seem to realize that, in order to believe that the complexity of life makes it impossible to have evolved without an intelligent guider, they must accept the basic tenet of socialism/communism. I'm serious!

F.A. Hayek, in his book The Fatal Conceit, points out that the concept of unplanned order arose in economics long before in science (in fact, he points out that Adam Smith's less well known work on the evolution of cultures, A Theory of Moral Sentiments, may have had a dramatic influence on Charles Darwin during his investigative years). What is the basic assertion of socialism? That without one person or group (i.e. government) running the economy, chaos and radical exploitation will result. Only through careful planning can something as complex as an economy work.

And what is Hayek's (and all free marketeers') response? That the collective knowledge of each consumer, as limited as it may be, together equals a force much more powerful than any government structure could ever be. The market is established by countless individual choices, made by individuals with no knowledge of the big picture, acting on personal incentives. And yet this market system reacts better, more efficiently, and with greater satisfaction for all members than the very best planned system could ever dream of doing. In other words, the vast and successful market system has no "creator;" it exists as a product of the unplanned choices of the individuals that make it up and changes based on the countless successes and failures by those individuals. For decades, the proponents of socialism have attacked the free market as wild, chaotic, and negative because it is unplanned. Many of them would assert that a beneficial market system is impossible without a mind to guide it. They make many of the same arguments about irreducible complexity and instability that ID'ers and creationists do. And that's what is scary. Because, if we are to say that incredibly complex structures are impossible without a guiding mind, then we must reject the free market as being impossible. Hardly a conservative idea, yet the liberals (i.e. the socialists) will be quick to use this against us...