Posted on 11/13/2005 6:07:54 AM PST by NYer
CBN.com – SEATTLE, Washington - The Dover, Pennsylvania school board is on trial in the state capitol. Their crime? They wanted to tell high school students once a year that evolution is only a theory. They also wanted to mention an alternate theory: Intelligent Design, or ID.
That was too much for some parents. They sued, claiming ID is religious and therefore illegal in school. The judge will decide the case in the next few weeks.
So is ID really just religion in disguise? Do both biology and astronomy support ID? And who are these people promoting ID?
To answer those questions, we went to the Discovery Institute in Seattle, the major proponents of ID.
Dr. Stephen Meyer is the head of Discovery's Center for Science and Culture. He says to ban design theory as mere religion is wrong.
"And in fact,” Meyer said, “it's a science-based argument that may have implications that are favorable to a theistic worldview, but the argument is based on scientific evidence."
But perhaps these ID experts are not really reputable?
Mayer stated, "These are people with serious academic training. They are Ph.D.s from very, not just reputable -- but elite -- institutions. And they are people doing research on the key pressure points in biology and physics, and so their arguments are based on cutting-edge knowledge of developments in science."
So what is the evidence from researchers like biochemist Dr. Michael Behe, a Ph.D. graduate of the University of Pennsylvania and a senior fellow of the Discovery Institute?
He is an expert on a special kind of bacteria called flagella. Inside the bacteria are exquisitely engineered ‘inboard motors’ that spin at an amazing 100,000 revolutions per minute.
Darwin said that such complexity must have developed piece by piece. Behe said that is bunk. All the pieces must be in place at the same time or the motorized tails would never work.
Darwin's gradual theory has no good explanation for that -- ID does.
Behe makes the case for ID in a video called "Unlocking the Mystery of Life." The video’s narrator declares, “A thimbleful of liquid can contain four million single-celled bacteria, each packed with circuits, assembly instructions, and molecular machines..."
"There are little molecular trucks that carry supplies from one end of the cell to the other,” Behe explained. “There are machines that capture the energy from sunlight, and turn it into usable energy."
ID experts say the more you know about biology -- and some of the weird creatures like this island lizard -- the worse it gets for Darwinism.
Consider the workings of the genetic code. That code produces all kinds of molecular machines, plus all the other components of life. ID advocates say that to believe those components are just Darwinian accidents takes a blind faith in the creativity of dumb molecules.
So with growing evidence of ID, isn't Lehigh University proud of this cutting-edge scientist who teaches there—and wrote the 1996 bestseller "Darwin's Black Box?" Hardly.
In August, all the other (22) biology faculty members came out with a political statement on the department's Web site. They stated that "Intelligent design has no basis in science."
But they cited no evidence, and made no references to any scientific research.
Dr. John West, a political scientist at Seattle Pacific University, is senior fellow at Discovery Institute. He says these political responses to scientific issues are getting nasty.
West remarked that "hate speech, speech codes, outright persecution, and discrimination is taking place on our college campuses, in our school districts, against both students and teachers and faculty members."
In fact, universities are evolving into centers for censorship. Five years ago, Baylor University dismissed mathematician Dr. William Dembski from his position, primarily because he headed a center for ID there.
This September, the University of Idaho banned any dissent against evolution from science classes -- a slam on university biologist Dr. Scott Minnich, a noted supporter of ID.
"The school seems to be confusing where it's at,” West said. “Is it in Moscow, Idaho, or the old Moscow, Russia? ...in issuing this edict that…no view differing form evolution can be taught in any science class."
And at Iowa State University, more than 100 faculty members have signed a petition against ID -- an apparent political attempt to intimidate ISU astronomer Dr. Guillermo Gonzalez because he writes about ID.
Gonalez is, in fact, co-author with philosopher Dr. Jay Richards of "The Privileged Planet." Both scholars are also connected with the Discovery Institute.
The book and related video argue that astronomy also shows evidence of design. For instance, the earth has numerous aspects just right for our existence.
Gonzalez explained, "...We find that we need to be at the right location in the galaxy...that we're in the circumstellar habitable zone of our star (correct distance from the sun)...that we're in a planetary system with giant planets that can shield the inner planets from too many comet impacts...that we're orbiting the right kind of star -- it's not too cool and not too hot.”
These are just four of 20 some characteristics of earth that make our planet unique -- right for life, right for discovery by human science.
Richards said, "So you have life and the conditions for discovery happening at the same places. That, to us, suggests that there is something more than a cosmic lottery going on. That sounds like a conspiracy rather than a mere coincidence. So that to me is a tie-breaker in the question."
And there is more -- the finely-tuned underlying rules of the universe-- or physical constants. One of them is gravity. But what if gravity were not constant?
A film clip from Privileged Planet says: "Imagine a machine able to control the strength of each of the physical constants. If you changed even slightly from its current setting, the strength of any of these fundamental forces -- such as gravity -- the impact on life would be catastrophic."
In plain terms, a bit more gravity would mean any creature larger than the size of a pea would be crushed into nothing. And a little less gravity would mean that the Earth would come unglued and fly off into space.
But Darwinism has been maintaining that advanced life is easy to produce all over the universe.
"Almost everything we've learned in the area of astrobiology suggests that, 'Look, this is just not going to happen very often' -- now that might be sort of depressing for script writers for sci-fi movies, but that's where the evidence is taking us," Richards said.
Despite the attacks on ID, Meyer said the design interpretation of the evidence is exposing Darwinism as a theory in crisis:
"I think we're reaching the critical point where Darwinism is going be seen as simply inadequate,” Meyer asserted, “ -- and therefore the question of (intelligent) design is back on the table."
Just as this city of Seattle has all the earmarks of ID, so does nature, except that nature is infinitely more intricate.
You need to check out the link. It's silly for me to copy and paste for you.
I can't help but wonder why pro-evo posters and scientists work so hard at proving a theory (guesses) is not a theory (GUESSES) while calling it a theory.
Either BOTH should be taught, or neither.
It's only fair to the students to judge for themselves.
We say we should teach students HOW to think, rather than WHAT to think, but we are not doing that in the schools, and it's sad - really sad.
Not exactly. Christians USED to control everything taught in school. However they lost it by being intolerant and arrogant. Christians disrespected other groups so egregiously that when the time came, the dised groups got and are getting even. Michael Newdow is a classic example of this phenomenon. Don't take that to mean I condone his actions, I don't. But I do know that a lot of Jews growing up in public schools during the '50's and '60's got sick of Jesus being shoved up their nose and told that they were going to hell. Now the ACLU is shoving it all back at you. Christians are merely reaping what they had sown when they were on top. I think Jesus would be ashamed of you all. Christian and Jew.
BTW, "taking God out of the public square,..", the public schools are not the public square. The First Amendment does not apply to the classroom.
"BTW, "taking God out of the public square,..", the public schools are not the public square. The First Amendment does not apply to the classroom."
---
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
I read it and reread it. Where does the First Amendment exclude classrooms?
Silly me, I thought the Constitution and Bill of Rights applied to every square inch of the United States.
I can counter with another question: Where does the First Amendment explicitly mention classrooms? Or is this an exercise of finding such "emanations" as "separation of church and state" and "a woman has a right of privacy that includes abortions". But I won't base my opinion these.
There is no 1st. Amendment right in a public (or private) classroom by reason that a classroom, by definition, is a controlled environment and is a place to learn a subject and not to freely discuss political issues (unless it is a political science class). Furthermore, I find that the contemporary concept that minors have in their possession all of their constitutional rights to be an absurdity. A minors "rights" are vested with that minors parent or guardian until the minor is eighteen years old. Until then, the minor is a protected class and is entitled as such to be clothed, fed, sheltered, medicated appropriately, and educated in such a manner as to be a capable citizen in full possession of their rights when they reach the age of adulthood. The only circumstance that a child would need to be able to exercise certain rights under the Bill of Rights would be if the child had committed a crime.
Now I know that all conservative parents believe that their children have all the rights guaranteed by the constitution, but that concept is a recently modern one and the cause of most of the turmoil in the public schools today. The US Constitution was written for adults, not children. The classroom is not the "public square", but what is taught in this classroom is (or should be) the result of discussions and conclusions by adult participation in the political "public square".
If you think about it, that's really conservative!
You are spinning so much that you must be dizzy.
The ACLU doesn't even want a HINT of God in the classroom which is why they sued against even a mere 4-paragraph statement being read ONCE A YEAR saying that there is another theory.
The ACLU sued to remove "under God" from the pledge.
My Orthodox Jewish friend, and I, as a Christian both honor God.
The First Amendment only says that there should not be an ESTABLISHMENT of RELIGION. There is NOT an establishment of religion.
Around 90% of America celebrates Christmas. It is our heritage.
No. I just know the history.
Around 90% of America celebrates Christmas. It is our heritage.
I agree with you. It's a small percent of the remaining 10% percent that object. But they have the ACLU to make them appear to be a majority. I am no friend of the ACLU. NRA, yes! ACLU, no!
"I can counter with another question: Where does the First Amendment explicitly mention classrooms?"
---
The First Amendment doesn't mention your home either.
A "controlled environment" as far as necessary for proper order. (i.e. No shouting fire in a crowded movie theater.)
"A minors "rights" are vested with that minors parent or guardian until the minor is eighteen years old. Until then, the minor is a protected class and is entitled as such to be clothed, fed, sheltered, medicated appropriately, and educated in such a manner as to be a capable citizen in full possession of their rights when they reach the age of adulthood."
---
Yes minors are a protected class. I am the one doing the protecting; not the government. I provide the clothes, food, shelter, trips to the doctor, and education. I will be the one to determine if they may pray in the school caferteria or carry a Bible to class. Not the government.
If you think about it, that's American.
It's tough to be wrong isn't it.
Funny how everyone who embraces evolution refuses to acknowledge that they are following a religion of secularism. They are a state sponsored "belief" monopoly. They hate the arena of ideas mainly because they lose everytime they are confronted with the truth.
I posted dictionary definitions of some terms, you came back with a post I was not able to interpret. You have refused now two requests for clarification, and seem to be gloating about something.
Either clarify the post I inquired about or leave me alone.
You are obviously a moron. All we desire is the opportunity to be able to express our beliefs the way you now have the ability to. Since your system of explaining the origins of life is merely another set of beliefs then you should be given no more creedance to your beliefs than anyone else. You only have the opportunity because you have a state sponsored monopoly in which you step on all other competing beliefs through the power of the state. You are just what you were accusing me of being.
You are a tyrant, your fellow evolution believers are, for the most part, tyrrants; and you can stand nothing that in any way disagrees with you or your opinion. You are all fools in using the raw power of the state to stop what you don't agree with. For the reason of maintaining your state empowered religion you already force any and all to accept your beliefs before they can pass through the gauntlet of education.
Yet, you have nothing but theories to express. Nothing but another religion of secularism and humanism empowered by the guns and badges of the state. Thus you sitting there thinking that anyone who demands the public arena to be shared is somehow committing violence to you. You already are empowered through the states violence against any who attempt to stand and disagree with you. You already have the entire floor, the entire debate, and the monopoly of the minds of each and everyone that comes in the door.
There is no competition in your schools, mainly because you want everyone to believe in your state run religion. You keep that power at the point of a gun, all the while crying that challenging your power is tantamount to an act of censorship. You are a moron. That is about the nicest thing i can say about you. You have all the power and will fight to the last to stop anyone from being able to disagree with you in public.
You deny that what you have is a religion. But what you have is a religion of secularism and humanism. Your religion is the one that has gone through the world and murdered many more millions than could ever be accounted to any and all other religions. No one needs to mention the multiple millions that have been murdered by your secularist religion in USSR, China, Cambodia, Burma, Vietnam, Eastern Europe, and all the other places that it has taken root.
In fact your religion is to be greatly feared in that it doesn't seem to satisfy itself with just existing like any other religion would. Your religion has murdered and still murders, and that doesn't even touch on such things as abortion etc. Your secularist religion elevates man, the state, and humanism as the gods of the present age. The same gods that have left nothing but a massive trail of blood through the last century, and if you get your way through the next.
And all this because your religion can't stand a single element of disagreement with it. That is why you monopolize the public arena, and make laws that forbid anyone from disagreement with you in your modern church (the education establishment). But your religion is soon to be put down. Not by violent revolution, which would be justified considering it's blood-thirsty and unquenchable lust to kill; but, by others knocking holes in it through access to the public arena. That is why you fear that more than actual arms raised up against you. You fear the competition against you.
You know that once the house of cards you have built is spoken against you don't have a leg to stand on.
Well, and a Christian "Good Morning" to you, too!
Just who is the "who" that you referring to in your screed? Too me personally, or to those who think ID does not belong being taught out of its origins, the fundamentalist Christian church? If its me , personally, than I must consider your words to be a very un-Christian violent threat. If your comments are directed at those who believe that a religious dogma, masquerading as a scientific theory, should not be taught in public schools, as I do, then I had better keep my weapons dipped in pig fat.
You've got a big case of "Jihad", my friend. Most people in the USA don't want to go back to the Middle Ages and be ruled by a government run by priests, ministers, rabbi's or Muslim clerics. Neither did the Founding Fathers.
So, when's your new edition of the Malleus Malefactorum due out? You know, the one that lists all the ways of torturing confessions out of those Godless evolutionists?
That's what I said. Nowhere, in the quote above, is there any mention of a minors First Amendment "rights". However, you, as a citizen, have the right to exercise your First Amendment rights on the behalf of your children. Too many parents have been silent and allowed the schools be taken over by the left.
Do you even know what a scientific theory is? It sure doesn't look like it from that post.
"That's what I said. Nowhere, in the quote above, is there any mention of a minors First Amendment "rights". However, you, as a citizen, have the right to exercise your First Amendment rights on the behalf of your children. Too many parents have been silent and allowed the schools be taken over by the left."
---
Nice chatting with you. Truly.
I don't see age restrictions with regards to the Bill of Rights, but I have not eliminated your comments from my mind. Thank you for a vigorous, yet civil, debate.
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.