Posted on 12/31/2005 12:41:23 PM PST by streetpreacher
Same goes for Christians and ID theory. Darwinists point to the fact that Christians use it to their advantage, and then claim that therefore ID itself is Christianity, and that any introduction of it into public schools is an unconstitutional "establishment" of Christianity.
You are wrong. Drawing attention to falae analogies by giving further examples to illustrate the original absurdity has been long practised.
You're right; ID is used as a tool to get Christianity into government schools, and there are those who object.
He was identifying Aritotle's time the way historians have four thousands of years identified historic time, either BC or AD, Before Christ or Anno Domini, after Christ. I don't think Buchanan intended anything more than that.
Oh yeah? Well it was Christianity that built the car. My computer is Christian, too. In fact, anywhere matter has been crafted into a human implement, it is by definition a "fundamentalist Christian" entity.
It crafted a few nuts too.
Ante pasta placemark
It is a shame that you were so insulted. A dispassionate discussion is the desirable way to change minds, or at least to inform.
Would that it were so, that Buchanan's description was merely a result of his ignorance. I guess you are not familiar with Lee Smolin's 'Darwinian' cosmology.
The desire for the Darwinian paradigm to be a 'universal solvent' to destroy all religious dogma or speculation is so strong that a reasonably respectable physicist has proposed to overcome the problem of anthropic cosmology (the fact that even tiny changes in the values of certain physical constants would make anything like life impossible) by proposing the following scheme:
Black holes create a new universe in which the physical constants have slightly changed (randomly by an unspecified mechanism). 'Fit universes' produce lots of black holes, and thus lots of similar universes. There is a further argument as to why universes which support life also produce lots of black holes, but it is not imporant here.
Notice that another universe is by definition unobservable, and what happens in a black hole is likewise unobservable (by definition, also--a black hole must be massive enough that no signal can escape it). The proposal is thus completely unscientific, however naturalistic it may be. Quite as untestable as a Divine fiat (which seems to win over infinitely many universes and an unspecifiable 'mechanism' of variation if Occam's Razor is applied).
This phenomenon (of extending the Darwinian paradigm--also represented by 'evolutionary psychology' with its usually untestable just-so stories) is the reason why the word 'Darwinist' has a useful meaning as distinct from 'evolutionary biologist'.
It is a shame that you were so insulted. A dispassionate discussion is the desirable way to change minds, or at least to inform.
Not insulted, as I expect no less from many creationists.
But I agree that a good discussion is desirable and informative. I prefer to keep things on that level, which is why I responded with a little humor [perhaps very little].
Alas not so. (cf. my comments on Smolin's 'Darwinian' cosmology in post #130)
These threads might go better if 'Darwinist' was restricted to and taken as meaning those who expand the Darwinian paradigm to matters other than biological diversity.
It would not bother me much if you were. What I mean in saying "I don't have any friends" is that I am fully capable of offending everybody on any side of an issue. WRT the issue at hand, Christians who think it is necessary to establish their faith in public schools and atheists who think it is their duty to do the same can take a hike.
Both enjoy, or at least should enjoy, the protections of our Constitution. Therefore both should enjoy a hearing in the public forum. Of all nations of people, we're the ones who should "get it." Judge Jones apparently doesn't, and if there is an overzealous Christian version of this guy, he won't get it either.
Too bad you can't point out a false analogy. Attempting to outlaw the teaching of trigonometry on the grounds of its allegedly heretical nature would definitely increase interest in it. It might not increase proficiency in the sciences based on it, but that's not the point.
No more than evolution is a tool to get atheism into schools, as you illustrated at #114.
What !!!! Peaceably defining words BEFORE flame-wars? Not on these threads!
...oh, and Happy New Year.
Happy New Year inquest.
And once we have (inevitably) triumphed over this caricature, then what? Personally, my guess is that we then declare victory over "Darwinism" in any form.
No, thanks. Me, I can kind of see that one coming a mile away ;)
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.