Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

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.

Posted on 05/03/2006 8:23:06 AM PDT by PatrickHenry

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 641-660661-680681-700 ... 961-973 next last
To: trashcanbred

>>I know but I won't be on for the next 3 days and I gotta get my FR fix in up front.<<

As long as your eyes are open and your enjoying yourself then I wish you the best.


661 posted on 05/04/2006 6:58:07 PM PDT by gondramB (He who angers you, in part, controls you. But he may not enjoy what the rest of you does about it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 659 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew
Your standard for "scientific scrutiny" is high for intelligent design, but low for evolutionism. As such you are inclined, for reasons I do not understand, to employ the law in favor of your personal preferences.

Oh Fester...when did I personally employ the law on anything? Why do you have that thought stuck in your head about me? If the school board proposed ID here I would do what everyone else around me would do... we would throw them out... Just like Dover, PA did in the end.

Now... if a theory came along that actually was accepted by the scientific community as a more viable theory than Evolution then I would welcome it with open arms. Same can be said of any scientific theory... plate tectonics... physics...

662 posted on 05/04/2006 6:58:50 PM PDT by trashcanbred (Anti-social and anti-socialist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 651 | View Replies]

To: trashcanbred
Now about teaching religious beliefs as scientific theory... that isn't how it is done is it?

If you had a scientific rather than philosophical basis for declaring as much I might agree. As it stands you have no such thing. And you have by no means answered what aspect of intelligent design is either supernatural, religious, or unscientific.

663 posted on 05/04/2006 7:01:05 PM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 652 | View Replies]

To: gondramB

Oh indeed I am but I think when I come back I will argue the ID side for day or two just to make it interesting. Thanks for the concern though.


664 posted on 05/04/2006 7:01:27 PM PDT by trashcanbred (Anti-social and anti-socialist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 661 | View Replies]

To: trashcanbred
. . .when did I personally employ the law on anything?

When you voted for lawmakers who think it is their duty to prescribe laws against mentioning intelligent design in connection with organized matter that performs specific functions.

665 posted on 05/04/2006 7:04:07 PM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 662 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew
And you have by no means answered what aspect of intelligent design is either supernatural, religious, or unscientific.

Fester... you are a riddle wrapped up in an enigma buddy. Ok I want to answer you.. I really do... but you have to help me out here, ok? It seems from one of your last posts that you believe the Intelligent Designer is God. You said there was "one" Designer because you were basing that from the Bible. Is what I just said correct?

666 posted on 05/04/2006 7:05:33 PM PDT by trashcanbred (Anti-social and anti-socialist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 663 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew

I would have a fear of a psychiatrist that did act like a machine...that would undermine my confidence in his ability to help me...people seeing a psychiatrist will tell him very intimate things, and trust that he understands why you are telling him the things you are, and trust that he can help you work through problems...I would trust another caring human being to help me, not sure that I would trust a machine, or a person acting like a machine, to help me...

Sorry about the lip flapper remark...I have been known to quite a 'lip flapper' myself...


667 posted on 05/04/2006 7:06:04 PM PDT by andysandmikesmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 658 | View Replies]

To: trashcanbred

Whoa! You got 666.


668 posted on 05/04/2006 7:06:17 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (Unresponsive to trolls, lunatics, fanatics, retards, scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 666 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew
When you voted for lawmakers who think it is their duty to prescribe laws against mentioning intelligent design in connection with organized matter that performs specific functions

Now you have access to my voting records? You scare me Fester.... I voted Republican both locally and nationally. Which party SHOULD I have voted for Fester? Hehehe Libertarian?

669 posted on 05/04/2006 7:07:52 PM PDT by trashcanbred (Anti-social and anti-socialist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 665 | View Replies]

To: trashcanbred

How about you just answer the simple question: What aspect of intelligent design is either supernatural, religious, or unscientific?


670 posted on 05/04/2006 7:10:21 PM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 666 | View Replies]

To: trashcanbred

It's called "trickle down philosophics." The power you have personally to enact laws resides within your capactiy to vote. Get it? Am I mistaken in assuming you would vote for a person who would by law oppose ID in a public, academic, scientific context? My County Comissioners must all be Bible thumpers or I will not vote for them.


671 posted on 05/04/2006 7:14:56 PM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 669 | View Replies]

To: andysandmikesmom
Sorry about the lip flapper remark . . .

It's quite alright. You were not far off the mark, if at all.

672 posted on 05/04/2006 7:17:34 PM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 667 | View Replies]

To: trashcanbred
Which party SHOULD I have voted for Fester?

The Kegger Party. What more shall I say?

673 posted on 05/04/2006 7:20:12 PM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 669 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew
How about you just answer the simple question: What aspect of intelligent design is either supernatural, religious, or unscientific?

Well Fester... everytime I tell you you claim it is a philosophical answer. I must have answered this question a million times and yet, you don't like the answer.

The vast majority of biologists disagree with your "organized matter" proof as do I. And if the "organized matter" argument doesn't hold scientific water... ID has no other footing as an accepted scientific theory does it? And... since you did claim that the Intelligent Designer is God in an earlier post, then there is obviously a pretty big religious connection there right?

Not to mention... any group that would push into the public school a theory that has not been valdated obviously is motivated by something other than "science". When Dover,PA did not accept ID in its schools who was the most vocal critic? Pat Robertson was it not?

674 posted on 05/04/2006 7:24:20 PM PDT by trashcanbred (Anti-social and anti-socialist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 670 | View Replies]

To: Liberal Classic

I do not think my understanding of science, objective reality, and truth merit exclusivity in the public domain. That is for you and your like-minded minions to pursue by law.


675 posted on 05/04/2006 7:25:31 PM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 646 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew
My County Comissioners must all be Bible thumpers or I will not vote for them.

If I don't vote for a bible thumper I am voting against ID?

676 posted on 05/04/2006 7:25:45 PM PDT by trashcanbred (Anti-social and anti-socialist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 671 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew
The Kegger Party. What more shall I say?

On this we agree.

677 posted on 05/04/2006 7:26:50 PM PDT by trashcanbred (Anti-social and anti-socialist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 673 | View Replies]

To: trashcanbred

Not necessarily. There are plenty of people who, either by hunch or by careful consideration, do not consider an intelligible universe to be the product of unguided causes, and come to this conclusion completely apart from any biblical texts.


678 posted on 05/04/2006 7:28:22 PM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 676 | View Replies]

To: trashcanbred

My mention of organized matter has nothing to do with "proof." By and large science has very little to do with "proof."

Go ahead and give an answer. We are not in the lab. Just answer according to your general understanding: What aspect of intelligent design is either supernatural, religious, or unscientific?


679 posted on 05/04/2006 7:32:21 PM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 674 | View Replies]

To: Fester Chugabrew

*sigh* Unsuprisingly, your answer and my question pass like ships in the night.


680 posted on 05/04/2006 7:35:26 PM PDT by Liberal Classic (No better friend, no worse enemy. Semper Fi.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 675 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 641-660661-680681-700 ... 961-973 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson