[Nebullis]

Text of AAAS Resolution

[Nebullis]

Bump.

(Ginger Pinholster... what a name!)

[VadeRetro]

... [S]cience-based information and conceptual belief systems should not be presented together.

Nice way of putting it!

[CalConservative]

I know a number of scientists who are ID proponents and their scientific credentials are impeccable, as is their work. This complete resistance to ID by the Darwinists stifles, rather than promotes, scientific inquiry.

The design paradigm is both powerful and compelling to the point that leading evolutionists have felt it necessary to assert that the "appearance" of design does not necessarily imply design. Yet it is hard to ignore the incredible design element of many living organisms, even down to the gene level.

I think it is important to note that scientists who are in the ID camp are not the fringe element or religious crackpots that Darwinists make them out to be. As a matter of fact, many of the attacks I have seen on ID I have seen by Darwinists tend to be personal attacks that attempt to disparage the person's credibility rather than their position, in an attempt to marginalize the person and thus their work. Some of these attacks tend to be quite vicious at times to the point where being an ID proponent can be a career limiting move. Just ask William Dembski or Stephen Meyer.

[Cicero]

For those freepers who don't want to bother visiting the link, AAAS stands for the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

[RaceBannon]

We cant have any children thinking for themselves!!

[f.Christian]

Running joke is 'evo-science'...
biggest cult of oxy-moonie-morons---art bells!

Latest evo gem---ARTISTRY!


Like FR 'patrickhenry'...

"search for the creator via evolution"---

"total--only evolution" too---"No Competition"!


The papal encyclical rightwingprofessor-whack thinks/interprets---"professes evolution"...

could abortion be next???


Nebullis..."preschool evolution---INTENSIVELY"---


donh...

"if the sun can create crystals-snowflakes...human life "could have---most likely"(not certainly) follow"---

(Why, if the sun can create crystals and snowflakes, can't it create life?)

(How much different is my paraphase of your rhetorical question---statement!)


also by donh...

"Nor have I even suggested that 'most' nazi germans were christians, though I think it's likely so."

"christian values and sentiments were the majority religeous view in Germany between 1938 and 1946"

BIG WHOPPER!

Hitler and nazi germany were mostly Judeo-Christians---creationists!

(With this statement we can safely say bankrobbers/murderers are auditors/morticians!)


dominick harr..."just like a ball bouncing down the stairs----evolution created everything"---

jennyp..."anarchist evolutionary(natural) capitalism---Christianity(manmade) is communism"---

and patrickhenry doesn't know..."if prior to darwin---if science existed"...

SkyRat...Divine hammer-retribution from above via evolution!

exdemmom...evolution is the "lug wrench" that fixes science--biology/life!

Running sores of evo schlock!

Evolution is Truth/science/history ABORTION--freaks!

[f.Christian]

To: f.Christian

Now I follow, thank you. Actually, I don't disagree with this at all since I see the left as abandoning the uncertianty of democracy and majority rule for the assurance technocracy and expert rule.

152 posted on 9/10/02 12:17 PM Pacific by Liberal Classic

and...

To: f.Christian

Dakmar...

I took a few minutes to decipher that post, and I must say I agree with a lot of what you said.

fC...

These were the Classical liberals...founding fathers-PRINCIPLES---stable/SANE scientific reality/society---industrial progress...moral/social character-values(private/personal) GROWTH(limited NON-intrusive PC Govt/religion---schools)!

Dakmar...

Where you and I diverge is on the Evolution/Communism thing. You seem to view Darwin and evolution as the beginning of the end for enlighted, moral civilization, while I think Marx, class struggle, and the "dictatorship of the proletariat" are the true dangers.

God bless you, I think we both have a common enemy in the BRAVE-NWO.

452 posted on 9/7/02 8:54 PM Pacific by Dakmar

[arielb]

hey Atheists Anonymous for the Advancement of Stupidity: Republicans won bigtime Nov 5, 2002. Get over it.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Hey!! Our new HIV test hit PMSNBC news!

[Fester Chugabrew]

AAAS . . .

You sure that isn't ASSS? e.g. American Society for Socialist Shenanigans or some such.

[RonF]

Scientifically:

Intelligent Design is an interesting guess, but unless a hypothesis can be developed from it that can be then tested, it doesn't qualify as a theory.

Theologically:

I personally don't think God would/will allow "proof" of his existence. It seems to me that the whole concept behind faith is that you accept it in the absence of proof. If the existence of God was provable, then God would be part of man's body of knowledge, and I think one of the points of faith is that God's plan cannot be encompassed by man's reason.

[aruanan]

AAAS Board Resolution Urges Opposition to "Intelligent Design" Theory in U.S. Science Classes

These are the descendents of those who tried to protect the phlogiston theory of combustion.

[LiteKeeper]

Young Earth Creationist bump for reading in the morning

[CalConservative]

Sorry - lost power last night. I know it was just the storm, but I like to think it is our way of celebrating Gray Davis' re-election as governor of California.

[Tribune7]

I suspect the AAAS would like to update the Declaration of Independence to better reflect their view of what should be the foundation of American liberty to:

We hold these outlooks to be best, that all men are evolved, that they are endowed by accident with certain conditional allowances to be determined by us.

America is based on the assumption of God's existence. Throw that out we become just as much of a Hell on earth as was the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany.

[RightWhale]

If I were teaching a science class, I would cover ID this way: "Assuming the Universe was deliberately created by a Supreme Being, let's take a look at what we seem to be part of."

That would dispose of the topic and the rest of the semester would consist of attempts to teach science.

[gore3000]

And who may be this AAAS? They think they are so famous that everyone will know who they are? Are they that arrogant? Or are they really trying to hide their real name? Perhaps their full name is the American Atheist Association?

[gore3000]

In contrast, the theory of biological evolution is well-supported, and not a "disputed view" within the scientific community" - article -

Sorta shows what too much education does to people. They turn into liberals, they turn into atheists and they ignore the most basic principle of biology - a cat is born from a cat, a human from a human, a horse from a horse. While this miracle is seen millions of times every single day, no one has ever seen a single species produce any progeny of a different species. NOT ONCE.

[gore3000]

"The contemporary theory of biological evolution is one of the most robust products of scientific inquiry," the AAAS Board of Directors wrote

The only robustness of evolution is that it keeps calling everything evolution even if they contradict each other. If features are similar then they prove evolution, if they are different then they prove evolution too. If the bones show gradual change then it is evolution, if they do not, then it is evolution also. In short, it is not a scientific theory, it is an ideology and that is why evolutionists will never dare to say in plain English just what the theory of evolution is. They need room to 'maneuver' in discussions. The AAAS in this long drivel which says nothing except 'evolution is science because we say so' does not even bother to state the theory let alone back it up with any scientific evidence.

[gore3000]

The AAAS Board resolved to oppose claims that intelligent design theory is scientifically based, in response to a number of recent ID-related threats to public science education. -article-

This awful threat of course is teaching students to think instead of indoctrinating them. They want to use the public schools to indoctrinate children in atheism and oppose the religious teaching they get at home and in Church. Their whole agenda is shown in the first sentence "to keep it separate, in the same way that creationism and other religious teachings are currently handled." Of course creationism is just the evolutionist euphemism for religious. Philosophically and scientifically there is no way to disprove the existence of God, however by fiat, by law, by definition, they are trying to ban any explanation which may support a religious view. They are also trying to do what real scientists would not do - destroy discussion, destroy dissent, destroy alternate theories. They can call themselves whatever they like, but they are no scientists, they are atheist ideologues trying to take over the minds of our children.