Posted on 12/02/2005 4:53:39 PM PST by Michael_Michaelangelo
In December 2004 New Mexico Public Television scheduled, advertised and then, under pressure, canceled a documentary explaining the scientific case for a theory of biological origins known as intelligent design.
In the same month, a renowned British philosopher, Antony Flew, made worldwide news when he repudiated a lifelong commitment to atheism, citing among other factors, evidence of intelligent design in the DNA molecule.
Also in December, the ACLU filed suit to prevent a Dover, Penn. school district from informing its students about the theory of intelligent design.
In February, The Wall Street Journal reported that an evolutionary biologist with two doctorates had been punished for publishing a peer-reviewed scientific article making a case for this same theory.
More recently, the Pope, the President of the United States and the Dalai Lama have each weigh in on the subject.
But what is this theory of intelligent design? And why does it arouse such passion and inspire such apparently determined efforts to suppress it?
[Snip]
Contrary to media reports, intelligent design is not a religious-based idea, but instead an evidence-based scientific theory about life's origins-one that challenges strictly materialistic views of evolution. According to Darwinian biologists such as Oxford's Richard Dawkins, livings systems "give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose." But, for modern Darwinists, that appearance of design is entirely illusory.
(Excerpt) Read more at canada.com ...
Ping
Stephen C. Meyer earned his Ph.D. in the History and Philosophy of Science from Cambridge University for a dissertation on the history of origin of life biology and the methodology of the historical sciences. Previously he worked as a geophysicist with the Atlantic Richfield Company after earning his undergraduate degrees in Physics and Geology.
Not a scientific case, but a political case for ID.
In the same month, a renowned British philosopher, Antony Flew, made worldwide news when he repudiated a lifelong commitment to atheism, citing among other factors, evidence of intelligent design in the DNA molecule.
Yes, Flew became a Deist. So what?
I am ever amused (and annoyed) at the ID debates--and the Darwinian religious/philosophical objections. The whole issue proves to me that this is a PHILOSOPHICAL debate--about the basis of science.
If you start with an a priori assumption that science can ONLY point to nature then of course any kind of intelligent design hypothesis or evidence is out of line. But of course that is an ASSUMPTION....based on a philosophical outlook as a given element. What is interesting is western science itself has a theistic basis--in that a good orderly Designer will have an orderly universe capable of being understood... many other ancient philosophies did not start with the assumption of an orderly law-abiding universe (hence the slow start of science). Once the Western world accepted order, then science became possible--and that order came about due to religion. Now with its successes, many scientists seem to want to drop any possibility of God or anything outside of nature--or their own understanding, and in the process, they throw away the basis of science.
"Intelligent Design" is neither.
YEC SPOTREP
More recently, the Pope, the President of the United States and the Dalai Lama have each weigh in on the subject.
According to Darwinian biologists such as Oxford's Richard Dawkins, livings systems "give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose."
I know you guys have declared war on science, but must the English language be collateral damage?
I still need to hear from Dan Brown, Madonna, Bill Gates, and The Donald.
ID Ping
He used to be an atheist. I mean not just a run-of-the-mill-angry-drunk atheist. But the king atheist. You know, It-was-me-who-cooked-up-the'all-real-Scotsman'-stuff atheist.
And he's not an atheist anymore because atheism really doesn't make a whole lot of sense. That's what.
Heh. Consider the alternative:
"Religion convinced the world that there's an invisible man in the sky who watches everything you do. And there's 10 things he doesn't want you to do or else you'll go to a burning place with a lake of fire until the end of eternity. But he loves you!"
-George Carlin
Anyway eternity doesn't have an end.
I've always thought that the whole diety thing was a nice idea, but given the warp and woof of human history (and mankind's stunning ability to self-decieve when presented with the inexorable or the terrifying) I just could never bring myself to believe it.
Let's see, an 80 year old man with one foot in the grave and long past his intellectual peak, decides to believe in a Deist, non-meddling, concept of a god. I repeat, so what? It's not like he suddenly decided to believe in a religion. And it's not like he had any "followers" who might be influenced by his pronouncements.
As Rush says, there are no great books of moderation. And there are no "leaders" of atheism.
You really need to stop considering atheism as a religion or cult of personality.
If you are sincere atheist then Christianity shouldn't bother you. In fact, you should be encouraging as many as possible to be Christians. You'd want your neighbors to be taught to love you, help you when your sick etc. All you'd have to do is put up with a little bit of occasional witnessing. Do you repent? Sure, but I'll pass on services this Sunday.
I can see that point. But for me, the existence of love makes me think God is a certainty.
I know too many True ChristiansÒ to ever trust one with anything I hold dear.
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.