Great piece of lab equipment for cooking primordial soups
Posted on 08/18/2005 5:17:34 PM PDT by curiosity
Bingo.. Theres much common ground between "Evos", Atheists, even Agnostics and liberals..
Sorry. I was scanning the thread, and just picked a convenient spot to insert my two cents. I should have backed up a few to see what the previous comments where.
There is remarably little dissention. All the major ID "theorists" are at the Discovery Institute. Here is what they say about intelligent design, straight from the horse's mouth:
Questions about Intelligent Design
1. What is the theory of intelligent design?
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.
2. Is intelligent design theory incompatible with evolution?
It depends on what one means by the word "evolution." If one simply means "change over time," or even that living things are related by common ancestry, then there is no inherent conflict between evolutionary theory and intelligent design theory. However, the dominant theory of evolution today is neo-Darwinism, which contends that evolution is driven by natural selection acting on random mutations, an unpredictable and purposeless process that "has no discernable direction or goal, including survival of a species." (NABT Statement on Teaching Evolution). It is this specific claim made by neo-Darwinism that intelligent design theory directly challenges.
http://www.discovery.org/csc/topQuestions.php
Why should the alleged origin of anything preclude studying it?
Well, I'm still not sure I understand, but if you are suggesting that Christianity and Islam differ but by the name of the Diety, I think you are quite wrong.
Study up on Mohammed. Study up on Jesus. I think you will find them to be polar opposites in just about every respect.
Lack of predictability for things like taxonomy.
If something like a flagellum is declared "irreducably complex" because we have accepted the ID notion, no one would fund studying it any more than there are grants for perpetual motion machines.
I couldn't help being amused at the transparent way that Sagan's "Cosmos" made Christianity look foolish and then ended with a friendly glance at Hinduism.
None of us had any illusions otherwise. But shshsh! The Discovery institute will be upset if you let the Big Secret out.
Hi, my name is MaxMax and I must be a crackpot.
Even the Great Fish of Hinduism is there ~ that's a manifestation of the Messiah as a fish that saves Ma-Nu (Noah) from Mt. Ararat and thereby saves both humanity and all the schools of wisdom and knowledge.
There are other references in that book that clearly point to this lesson, otherwise why would God have inspired men to keep this book in the canonical texts?
Sorry, but I'm just not quite sure what you are saying.
If you are saying that because there are certain things in the Bible which are similar (identical even) to things contained in the writings of other religions, that somehow those other religions are validated or legitimized, then I disagree.
The Koran coops a lot of the Judeo scriptural references. But the Koran is simply another synthetic intended to lure souls away from Jesus. The best way to catch a fish, is to put real food (worm) on the hook. You can put a lot of "Truth" in the scriptures of any religion, and it can still be a false religion.
Oops
Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of intelligent design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools- Philip Johnson.
Interesting.
BTW, I would be really, really careful about taking anything the Hysteric Leftists at New Republic say too seriously. When they offer the Right advice, it is a really good idea for the Right to look for the hook. This is just another example of the Left writing what they WISH would happen.
Where does a criticism of the current state of evolution theory end, and intelligent design theory commence? Let the games begin. It does not bother me. I find it stimulating. You may find ID kooksville. I find that contention overstated, without considerable qualification. I simply don't find those who indulge a leap of faith kooks. We all do it, whether we be secular or otherwise.
Well, some, yes. But some of the most vocal opponents of intelligent design are faithful Christian scientists. They fight intelligent design because it is bad science.
Then there are others, like Edward Oakes, who see intelligent design as bad theology, and fight it for that reason:
http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0101/reviews/oakes.html
No, like it or not, intelligent design is about the hand of GOD.
No, intelligent desgin is about asserting false evidence for the hand of an awkward, lumbering, tinkering false god. It is not about Yaweigh, the God I worship.
Not only that, notice how quick the "open minded" Left is to pronounce their own dogma holy writ. I though science was SUPPOSE to be about asking questions and investigating hypotheses. Instead it turns out to be about pronouncing anathema on any heretics who wander off the Left wing Ideological plantation. To the Hysteric Left, what they CALL "Science" is really just their form of religion. It differers in rituals and terminology from other religions some but it is similar in how Hysteric Left embraces it with the same blind faith they accuse their foes of having. Claim it is "Science" is just the Left's wave of claiming their version of papal infallibility
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.