Posted on 12/20/2005 12:12:16 PM PST by truthfinder9
SEATTLE — "The Dover decision is an attempt by an activist federal judge to stop the spread of a scientific idea and even to prevent criticism of Darwinian evolution through government-imposed censorship rather than open debate, and it won't work," said Dr. John West, Associate Director of the Center for Science and Culture at Discovery Institute, the nation's leading think tank researching the scientific theory known as intelligent design. “He has conflated Discovery Institute’s position with that of the Dover school board, and he totally misrepresents intelligent design and the motivations of the scientists who research it.”
“A legal ruling can't change the fact that there is digital code in DNA, it can’t remove the molecular machines from the cell, nor change the fine tuning of the laws of physics,” added West. “The empirical evidence for design, the facts of biology and nature, can't be changed by legal decree."
In his decision, Judge John Jones ruled that the Dover, Pennsylvania school district violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by requiring a statement to be read to students notifying them about intelligent design. Reaching well beyond the immediate legal questions before him, Judge Jones offered wide-ranging and sometimes angry comments denouncing intelligent design and praising Darwinian evolution.
"Judge Jones found that the Dover board violated the Establishment Clause because it acted from religious motives. That should have been the end to the case," said West. "Instead, Judge Jones got on his soapbox to offer his own views of science, religion, and evolution. He makes it clear that he wants his place in history as the judge who issued a definitive decision about intelligent design. This is an activist judge who has delusions of grandeur."
"Anyone who thinks a court ruling is going to kill off interest in intelligent design is living in another world," continued West. "Americans don't like to be told there is some idea that they aren't permitted to learn about.. It used to be said that banning a book in Boston guaranteed it would be a bestseller. Banning intelligent design in Dover will likely only fan interest in the theory."
"In the larger debate over intelligent design, this decision will be of minor significance," added Discovery Institute attorney Casey Luskin. "As we've repeatedly stressed, the ultimate validity of intelligent design will be determined not by the courts but by the scientific evidence pointing to design.”
Luskin pointed out that the ruling only applies to the federal district in which it was handed down. It has no legal effect anywhere else. The decision is also unlikely to be appealed, since the recently elected Dover school board members campaigned on their opposition to the policy. "The plans of the lawyers on both sides of this case to turn this into a landmark ruling have been preempted by the voters," he said.
"Discovery Institute continues to oppose efforts to mandate teaching about the theory of intelligent design in public schools," emphasized West. "But the Institute strongly supports the freedom of teachers to discuss intelligent design in an objective manner on a voluntary basis. We also think students should learn about both the scientific strengths and weaknesses of Darwin's theory of evolution."
Drawing on recent discoveries in physics, biochemistry and related disciplines, the scientific theory of intelligent design proposes that some features of the natural world are best explained as the product of an intelligent cause rather than an undirected process such as natural selection. Proponents include scientists at numerous universities and science organizations around the world.
One word: standing
See, I would have used all that info to prove the opposite point. The flu virus mutates. Are mutation and evolution synonyms? No.
Mutation, to me, means minor changes within a species. Evolution means one species changing to another, like apes to man, fish to horses, etc.
Case in point: The train tunnels under the Hudson River have escape routes. The problem will be if they are ever needed because they are built for an average man 150 years ago, about 5-7 and 140 pounds (roughly). But we are bigger on average today. This is not evolution, it's husbandry (better feed and care.)
Like begets like. Like does not beget unlike.
"and it sounds as if the people would have made the same decision the judge did in this case"
The people voted in that board and then voted them out when they performed poorly.
Having drank the Kool-Aid, you will get your degree.
What kool-aid? And for which side?
Please continue my education. The law of evolution would be.....?
During the trial, the board argued that it was trying improve science education by exposing students to alternatives to Charles Darwin's theory of evolution and natural selection.
The policy required students to hear a statement about intelligent design before ninth-grade lessons on evolution. The statement said Darwin's theory is "not a fact" and has inexplicable "gaps." It referred students to an intelligent-design textbook, "Of Pandas and People."
But the judge said: "We find that the secular purposes claimed by the board amount to a pretext for the board's real purpose, which was to promote religion in the public school classroom."
excerpt: http://apnews.myway.com//article/20051221/D8EKABI80.html
So I' trying to figure out WHICH religion would be promoted by the Intelligent Design theory.
What's the inistance on law?
We can't predict when and where hurricanes will be formed.
There's no Law of Hurricanes. But we have a theory of hurricane formation (And it's not "Rain God angry")
And that's how it's supposed to work!
susie
A good intelligent design book is I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist, recommended by David Limbaugh.
THank you, I'm not really familiar with what is taught (we didn't teach it, of course--however if it had been an option to discuss I would have made sure I got up to speed on it).
susie
"The court decision [available online] addresses your point in great detail - there are not many scientists thinking ID is a science, and those few who might are dubious scientists."
It will take time for more scientists to come around, because of decades of hearing only one side, but here are 700 free thinkers:
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1103AP_Czech_Intelligent_Design.html
Monday, October 24, 2005
'Intelligent design' supporters gather
By ONDREJ HEJMA
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER
PRAGUE, Czech Republic -- Hundreds of supporters of "intelligent design" theory gathered in Prague in the first such conference in eastern Europe, but Czech scholars boycotted the event insisting it had no scientific credence.
About 700 scientists from Africa, Europe and the United States attended Saturday's "Darwin and Design" conference to press their contention that evolution cannot fully explain the origins of life or the emergence of highly complex species.
excerpt
There are scientists and there are kooks. They normally differ.
We have no way of independently verifying who or how many attended, but the conference schedule is on line, and it featured a measly five speakers - four of them old antievolution hacks of long standing - over one day. The conference registration was a little over $20 -- too much to pay for rubbish, you might say, but it included coffee and lunch. The web page looks like it was put together by a computer science student on a wet Saturday morning. There was a booth where they sold the standard antievolution tracts translated into Czech, and that's it. If this is an international conference, my group meeting is an international conference.
This is the web page for the FEBS/IUBMB conference in nearby Budapest in July. Compare and contrast.
BTW, seminary teacher William Dembski, erstwhile luminary of the ID movement, banned me from his uncommon dissent blog for merely mentioning the size of this conference. I guess they're embarrassed it was so tiny.
It is conceivable that some advanced civilization encoded the seeds of life into DNA, that included instructions to generate a plethora of utilitarian regimes to deal with a broad scope of environmental conditions, and to select for sets of effective regimes to enhance survival of the package. And then broadcast these seeds throughout the universe.
Even in our primitive state of knowledge with computer software codes, we develop genetic algorithms that cope with varying conditions in virtual space, and select and incorporate the most effective code fragments to deal with particular problems.
The payoff in exploring this interesting idea is motivation to decode DNA, with researchers looking for encoded messages that lead to greater understanding without having to wait for evolution to express the design.
Our "junk" DNA could be an encyclopedia of knowledge!
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.