Intelligent designers down on Dover

The York Dispatch ^ | 9/20/2005 | CHRISTINA KAUFFMAN

[js1138]

But why are more recent revelations rejected? Does Gabriel outrank Moroni? Is there infighting amongst the host? Is Moroni a plural form like Elohim? Enquiring minds want to know.

[SeaLion]

Dictated by the ArchAngel Gabriel directly into the Prophet's Ear

"Dictated" is pretty old-tech. Don't you mean "ear-mail"?

[JohnnyM]

I understand that evolution is a theory based on evidence. We think it happened this way and here is why. What I do know is science has never observed creation and never observed a single cell organism evolving into a man or some other complex creatue and it has never observed macro evolution. Therefore any conclusions they make about the origin of man and the creation of the universe are at best educated guesses and believed on faith.

JM

[SeaLion]

My true followers will be rewarded

WE ARE NOT WORTHY!

[wallcrawlr]

Youre freedom rant doesnt make sense if you limit it for others.

You are free to believe as you will, and even to proslytise in most places. But the science classroom is not one of those places

You stand up for freedom....than deny it in the classroom.

You are placing limits on freedom, when you have no right to.

[longshadow]

You mean, people like Howard Ahmanson?

Wow! Hadn't heard about him before.

To paraphrase the Prefect of Police in "Casablanca": "I'm shocked, shocked to discover that people like Howard Ahmanson are major contributors to the Discovery Institute!"

That's the second good laugh I've had already today!

[Vive ut Vivas]

I understand that evolution is a theory based on evidence. We think it happened this way and here is why.

Yes, exactly, so what's the problem?

What I do know is science has never observed creation and never observed a single cell organism evolving into a man or some other complex creatue and it has never observed macro evolution.

Science will never observe a single cell organism evolving into a man or some other complex creature directly. Instead, we observe the *evidence* that such has happened. "Macro Evolution" is a bogus term because there is no divider between "micro evolution" and "macro evolution". I made a post with pictures about this once, I'll have to dig it up.

Therefore any conclusions they make about the origin of man and the creation of the universe are at best educated guesses and believed on faith.

No, they are not "at best educated guesses" or "believed on faith". I linked you to the List-O-Links which has mountains of evidences. A theory based on evidence is not believed on faith. I don't believe the theories of gravity or electrodynamics on faith. I don't have anything emotionally invested in their being true.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

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

But Discovery Institute is the leading organization touting intelligent design research and supporting the scientists and scholars who want to investigate it.

They just can't decide when.

[SolarisRocks]

If the Bible was as clear as 2+2=4 then we would not have 1001 different versions of what a Christian is.

Just because something isn't 100% clear doesn't mean it is incorrect.

[JohnnyM]

we can observe gravity in action. We have yet to observe a macro-evolutionary event or creation. It is faith that you believe these things occur the way you say they did. Just as I believe by faith that God created them from nothing. Science does not make untested assumptions, except, it seems, for cell to man evolution.

JM

[longshadow]

I certainly can't prove that you're wrong. Therefore ...

I refuse to abandon Pastafarianism unless the Godess permits me to touch her with MY Noodly Appendage.....

[SolarisRocks]

Do you want these same teachers to have the freedom to discuss sex ed and homosexual behaviors also?

[JohnnyM]

I dont think you can get much clearer than "God said let there be light and there was light."

But I will admit this is on faith by His Word.

JM

[Antonello]

If something/someone is trustworthy then it would seem reasonable to trust what they say. As one would continue to look into the claims, that authority would either be validated or invalidated.

To be clear, I'm not referring to the church. I make the authority claim based on the authority Jesus claimed to possess. What He has spoken of regarding man and Himself is reasonable.

BTW, how did arrive at most of what you know? Did you happen to trust the statements of other men initially and then investigate the claims, subsequently affirming or negating what you believed?

I could be wrong but it seems much of what we do know and believe comes by 'standing on the shoulders of giants' (i.e.-trusting what other men say about a certain thing without fully going to the end of it ourselves).

I do enjoy reading these posts. I find them challenging and thought provoking.

You have presented a very well worded and intelligent response, thank you for it. I would have to agree that in order to critically understand any premise it is essential to at least initially give consideration to the claim being made based upon the perceived trustworthiness of the source.

This brings up a fundamental difference between theology and science, and underscores why neither is suited to assume the place of the other. Trust in scientific claims is earned through continuous and never-ending testing of falsifiable claims; i.e. it is not only possible but a requirement that any such claim be independently verified. Theological claims ultimately rely on a character judgment of the origin of the claim - usually only verified by the claimant itself; e.g. the chief argument to trust in the Bible is because the Bible itself says to trust it. Thus the assertion that science is based on facts and religion is based on faith.

So I guess my point is that to me the level of trustworthiness something enjoys is directly proportional to the ability to independently verify its claim.

I also enjoy reading these threads. If that were not the case, I would not be here. Thanks again for your thoughtful post.

[PatrickHenry]

I refuse to abandon Pastafarianism unless the Goddess permits me to touch her with MY Noodly Appendage.....

I filed my application for the position of Consort long before your obscene post. And as for your appendage, I doubt that Her Divinity would even notice it.

[SolarisRocks]

That is What/Why not How.

Science = How
Religion = Why

[Vive ut Vivas]

Of course I wouldn't notice it. I'm not omniscient, remember?

:-(

[Oztrich Boy]

Now I am no prophet but I do realize as a Believer in a literal and inspired Word of God I'll be persecuted.

"I'm being oppressed! Come and see the violence inherent in the system!"

[Vive ut Vivas]

And perhaps I can have many Consorts. I'm flexible, I'm a swinger.