Posted on 01/16/2006 8:32:58 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
Darwinists must be an endangered species. How else to explain their 80-year need for court protection to ensure their survival?
In 1925, an ACLU-driven defense team in the Scopes-Monkey Trial wanted a court to declare that laws forbidding the teaching of evolution were unconstitutional. In recent weeks, in a courtroom in Dover, Pa., the same organization applauded a judge’s ruling that the teaching of ideas contrary to evolution, in this case Intelligent Design, were unconstitutional.
The same ACLU that once advocated for free and open discussion in schools is working to see it stifled today.
Its website boasts, “Intelligent Design is a religious view, not a scientific theory, according to U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III in his historic decision in Kitzmiller v. Dover. The decision is a victory not only for the ACLU, who led the legal challenge, but for all who believe it is inappropriate, and unconstitutional, to advance a particular religious belief at the expense of our children's education.”
Science involves observing nature and producing hypotheses which explain the data -- and of discrediting theories which don’t fit new observations. Having judges decide what constitutes science is as nonsensical as scientists issuing judicial decisions.
And the irreligious left, perpetually misusing the First Amendment, can’t identify which religion is being established. Is it that of the Jehovah’s Witnesses or of Catholicism? Perhaps Mormonism or Orthodox Judaism? Among many others, these disparate faiths all claim as canon the book of Genesis, where the religious version of creation is found.
But ironically, while no particular religion is being promoted by the teaching of Intelligent Design, there’s a belief system, which has established “churches” in several states, that is being favored by ACLU-- and court-imposed censorship: atheism, whose worldview promotes moral relativism and secular humanism.
The left maintains that Intelligent Design is merely creationism -- a literal reading of the Bible’s account of creation -- camouflaged in scientific language. But even a casual perusal of ID demonstrates there is no dependence on Genesis for any of its arguments, nor does it teach any biblical doctrine. It merely demands an examination of the evidence -- or lack thereof -- that uncountable species arose from primordial soup, or that they evolved over time from one to another.
To support Darwin’s theory, the earth should be teeming with myriad transitional specimens, but they are noteworthy, despite incessant extrapolation, only by their absence.
Other modern observations are daunting for Darwinists: digital information -- universally a mark of design -- in the genetic code and irreducibly complex structures such as miniature molecular machines within the cell which Darwin could hardly begin to imagine. Using the eye as an example, he coined the phrase, “organs of extreme perfection and complication” and recognized his theory’s inability to explain them. New discoveries only exacerbate these shortcomings.
And despite frequent references to “organic chemicals” present on the formative earth, neither Darwin nor modern scientists can demonstrate how to get from these compounds to just a single-cell living organism, or even a virus -- let alone the complex life forms. The search for that initial “spark” of life, or an explanation of why it is no longer in evidence, has been forever elusive.
Ironically, the scientific community, which anxiously tries to find evidence of other intelligent life in the universe, blatantly turns its back on the one intelligence we have the most indication of: a creator; a master chemist for whom the DNA code -- a puzzle which even our terrestrial species is just starting to grasp -- is a simple blueprint.
Even though ID relies not at all on the Bible, it does leave open the conclusion that the designer is the biblical God and this implication of God is what the Darwinists seem to fear.
So there may yet be hope for these folks since the Psalmist says, “The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom.” Let’s hope they eventually wise up.
That's not only absurd, but downright arrogant.
I believe in God, and I believe that He created everything. I don't know HOW He did it, and I don't believe that man is capable of understanding what it took to create everything out of nothing.
If there is evolution (change after creation), then evolution is His creation, because He created everything, and the belief in both Biblical creation and evolution is not conflictive at all.
Did God create an amoeba that could evolve into monkey that would evolve into man?
I don't know whether He did or not, but if there existed an amoeba that eventually evolved into a monkey with the ability to evolve into man, then God created that amoeba.
Her to Libertarian in Exile:You are certainly no ones better on this thread.
Umm......You forgot someone. :)
I have. The original statement "And still(nevertheless) be useless" is true of your statement since letters do not self-replicate.
The LORD Speaks
1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the storm. He said:
2 "Who is this that darkens my counsel
with words without knowledge?
3 Brace yourself like a man;
I will question you,
and you shall answer me.
4 "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
5 Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?
6 On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone-
7 while the morning stars sang together
and all the angels [a] shouted for joy?
8 "Who shut up the sea behind doors
when it burst forth from the womb,
9 when I made the clouds its garment
and wrapped it in thick darkness,
10 when I fixed limits for it
and set its doors and bars in place,......
1 Then Job replied to the LORD :
2 "I know that you can do all things;
no plan of yours can be thwarted.
3 You asked, 'Who is this that obscures my counsel without knowledge?'
Surely I spoke of things I did not understand, things too wonderful for me to know.
Who's losing their temper? I'm merely issuing Biblical directive: shut your yap! What, no snappy scripture to demonstrate how you, one of the inferior sex, have God's permission to lecture any male on Christ's teachings? And you've been so good flipping through your dogeared text so far!
I Corinthians 11:3
"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God."
I'm in charge here, honeypot. Shut your yap. Jesus said so. Paul told me. It's in the Book.
the ones who irk me are those who have but modest skill (I'm being charitable) in parsing their phrases, and too little wit to know when they've been skewered with their own words.
Happens to me all the time, though I think I've set a record tonight.
"You call yourself a libertarian and endorse that kind of censorship on an open forum? And you misquote Scripture to fit your own ends in the suppression of women? It's pretty hypocritical of you to believe in no government interference and then try to control someone's life because you don't like what they say. That's practicing the very thing you condemn in others. You are certainly no ones better on this thread."
Hey, it's in the Bible. You shut your yap, too. Unless you're going to go against God. Pretty hypocritical of you to go against God.
No, just yours. The 2nd law says that no work can be obtained from 2 heat resevoirs at the same temperature. Then working equaitons are derived from that. Your definition was a corrupted attempt to describe someone elses description of an equaiton.
" gas clouds forming stars"
The energy contained in the gravitational field works to cause the collapse of the cloud into condensed objects. No 2nd law violation here.
"Stars exploding and forming solar systems."
These processes are all driven by gravitational energy. Stars explode under gravitaitonal collapse after their fuel runs out. The gas clouds then condense to form objects. Again, no 2nd law violation.
"evolution giving way to more complex lifeforms, the lowest form of mammal is far more complex than any single cell organism."
The energy for the processes come from the heat contained within the Earth and the Sun's radiation. No bioreaction violates the 2nd law. Each reaction in the complex scheme is driven by heat energy. Note the sum also does not violate the 2nd law.
"If everything went to disorder; as some would have us believe, then the universe would be a homogenius mix of simple atoms. "
The 2nd law doesn't have anything to do with disorder, or order. I gave you the 2nd law above.
The entropy, S, is dQ/T. S=dQ/T. Q is the heat from, or to the surroundings. It's not order/disorder from the surroundings, it's heat. In the bio cases, it's heat from the Earth and the Sun's radiaiton. Statistical thermodynamics has an equivalent equation: S=k*ln(omega). Omega is the number of microstates of the system. Not the disorder/order. So, S=dQ/T=k*ln(omega), or Q=k*T*ln(omega).
Here's a link. Try to understand the Cu penny example.
flipping through your dogeared text so far!
yeah, Muffy's been whimpering for some reason.
And I am NOT one of those however I know in Whom I believe and in that I rest
and in that I rest
Bout time, it's getting late.
Is it the seventh day of this discussion already?
Time flies...
Thanks for the defense, but I'm okay here. I don't think your endorsement makes much of a difference, 'cause I'm supporting the Flying Spaghetti Monster and that makes me a heretic in some eyes.
Luckily, He's got the whole world in His Noodly Appendages! I'm in there somewhere!
Courtesy ping to apackof2.
I didn't put up the quote. And I don't see what colliding galaxies possibly has to do with ID. My question to you was "How would it not be evidence of intelligent design?" *You* could answer that question instead of dodging it. Your implication was the intelligent design would not produce colliding galaxies. Why not? What has that got do to with whether the desgin was intelligent or not? Maybe He thought it looked pretty.
"yeah, Muffy's been whimpering for some reason."
ROFLMAO...vision of a little Shi-tzu going 'yipe-yipe-yipe-yipe-yipe!'
Good guys don't tell women to "shut their yaps" or mock Christianity by posting insulting little cartoons for a "joke"
In fact a "good guy" would come to the defense of a woman and tell the "shut your yap" guy to knock it off.
Obviously we have different defintions of a "good guy"
I was defending you as a person because I do know that you are indeed a pretty fine one at that.
I don't defend evolution as an ID'er, BUT I find these threads so dang entertaining and fun. I come to see others' perspectives and not to argue.
You're right, my endorsement does not make a difference to anyone. If it did, I wouldn't be here:).
except that God, Gott, Deus, etc... also apply to non-judeochristian entities, whereas YHVH and elohim do not.
titles and positions aren't names.
then again, that's the way I look at things, and it doesn't seem history agrees - Smith, Carpenter, Thatcher, Archer, Sheppard, Mason, etc...
ah, well.
in the end, we may find out.
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.