Defending science education against intelligent design: a call to action

American Society for Clinical Investigation ^ | 01 May 2006 | Alan D. Attie, Elliot Sober, Ronald L. Numbers, etc.

[hawkaw]

Thanks for this article. As always, I appreciate the PING

[JmyBryan]

And the funny part is that they leave their children in public schools when they could start their own Bible schools and teach the kids creationism to their hearts content.

Of course if these kids start reading books on biology, they're going to start asking satanic questions ...

[gondramB]

>>Notice the evolutionists avoid answering the question of whether Jesus was lying when He said that God created Adam and Eve.<<

That questions assumes there is a God and that there was an Adam and Eve. Lacking proof of those things there is no way a scientist can answer that question.

[Quark2005]

Notice the evolutionists avoid answering the question of whether Jesus was lying when He said that God created Adam and Eve.

Maybe you're not asking the right evolutionists.

[blowfish]

Notice the evolutionists avoid answering the question of whether Jesus was lying when He said that God created Adam and Eve.

Possibly because a hearsay account of what one person may or may not have believed has nothing to do with a scientific theory based on physical evidence....

[hawkaw]

You would have perfectly fit right in a few hundred years ago when the folks were talking about the earth being flat as a circle and persecuting people for practicing proper science.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Of course you conveniently ignored the *created them* part."

And you ignored everything else I said (you know, the part where I asked who says that humans were ever anything but male or female...); nothing new there. The created part is not really that important, as theistic evolutionists simply believe that God created life and directed it's evolution through natural means. That's consistent with the evidence; a literal reading of Genesis is not even close to being consistent.

"So is Jesus lying when He said that God created Adam and Eve?"

Since I wasn't there to ask him what he really said, I don't know. Theistic evolutionists don't see that part as being literal. Why do you, when it is genetically impossible for two people living 6,000 years ago to be the ancestors of every living human today without this severe bottleneck having resulted in genetic deformities and showed up in our genome today? We would be FAR closer genetically with one another than we actually are.

[gondramB]

>>Of course I do. I wonder why they avoid that question?<<

Because the question makes assumptions that are not in evidence so there is no way to give a definitive answer.

[Liberal Classic]

metmom wrote:
Notice the evolutionists avoid answering the question of whether Jesus was lying when He said that God created Adam and Eve.

To which you replied:
Of course I do. I wonder why they avoid that question?

Because it's a rhetorical trap.

The question is phrased such that if we disagree with it, we're calling the Lord a liar.

People of good will can disagree on theology. When faced with emotionally laden arguments such as that one, however, we get the sense some folks are not arguing in good faith and decide it's better to just move on.

[aNYCguy]

I forget that evolution keeps "adjusting its beliefs. The Big Bang has fizzled out.

Where is life from lifelessness?

1. The Big Bang has nothing to do with evolutionary theory.
2. The Big Bang hasn't "fizzled out." It's still the standard model.
3. What does a scientist creating "life from lifelessness" have to do with the validity of mainstream biology?

I'd say you have some misunderstandings about biology and cosmology. Your attempts to singlehandedly revolutionize biology without understanding the basics appears... silly.

[gondramB]

>>Evolution is the BIGGEST lie EVER perpetrated on the human race! By the devil himself!<<

I thought the biggest lie was that the Devil doesn't exist...

[furball4paws]

I think she's talking about the virgin birth.

[trashcanbred]

I'm sorry THAT I am not as perfect as you are, my humble apologies for the mis spell.

Oh that is CLASSIC! Oh "Dr I. C. Hypocrisy"... you are so funny!!! Maybe we were in the same "Liberal" class together. Oh I cannot stop laughing... thanks you both made my day with that one.. :-)

[mlc9852]

Seems all the arguments on these threads are "emotionally laden".

[Virginia-American]

Shouldn't the Scientologists be in the Inter Faith Network?

[gondramB]

>>I'm sorry (I seem to be apologizing alot) I forget that evolution keeps "adjusting its beliefs. The Big Bang has fizzled out. What's the latest?<<

what kind of Doctor are you, if you don't mind me asking?

Evolution is a separate issue from the big bang.
The big bang is the current theory.

Science represents our best understanding based on evidence - so of course views change as new evidence is found. The forced ID folks want to skip the evidence part - its a very harmful approach.

[Liberal Classic]

I've said my piece. Please derive your at-work entertainment at someone else's expense.

[Publius6961]

Science which even thinks about "defending itself" from intelligent design can't be much of a science to begin with.

Fortunately, I know only the bottom 5% of so-called scientists have so little to do as to consider this a "pressing issue"...

[Publius6961]

Are there that many gay "scientists"?

[trashcanbred]

Micro or macro....read Romans chapter 1, Genesis chapter 1, for my responce.

Oh no!! Responce? Oh no Dr... look you were the one to start picking on my one typo as the product of "Liberal teaching" and now you do this? Oh no... just when I stopped laughing you did it again.

Plus my friend, Genesis Chapter 1 doesn't address microevolution at all does it? There are plenty examples of microevolution.

It has been fun,... you're just to smart for me.

Awww now cmon don't be like that... you started the debate by telling me how wrong I was about Evolution.