Posted on 01/03/2006 12:12:37 PM PST by PatrickHenry
Thanks for your post! But, er, a lot of people would also say that methodological naturalism, scientific materialism and the ilk are "spinning". Some would say that the theory of evolution is a "spin" - a continuum deduced from quantizations of another continuum (fossils in the geologic record) - or in the lingo, a "just so" story.
Indeed! Great catches, my dear sister in Christ!
The Supreme Court, IMHO, for decades was intent on secularizing the United States to conform it to the "progressive" ideological and even perhaps judicial model of the European countries. This is of course contrary to the Constitution - and is particularly evident in their prior - and woefully confusing - interpretations of the First Amendment.
The Lemon precedent uses a "secular" test. That is not a Constitution-based test - it is bad law and needs to be fixed.
The Constitution must never again be treated as an etch a sketch by the Supremes.
I cannot think of one that actually exists in our universe, so the burden is upon you -- my limited imagination says you are talking nonsense, so feel free to prove me wrong. I yearn to be awed by your intellect.
It is sadly amusing that when faced with hard arguments that you retreat into nonsense. If you had an argument, you could deftly slay my arguments with rigorous abandon. Oddly, that is not what has actually happened. Huh.
Richard Dawkins was the first Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at the University of Oxford and was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society. (among other things)
On your other issue, intelligence is not simple awareness or consciousness but also includes decision and process. The selection of a mate requires all three: awareness, decision and process.
My guess is that there's an article out there that fills the bill. Whoever finds it first should post it? What do you think?
It seems that those most eager to postulate a designer would have trouble operating a can opener.
Before you continue lecturing other people about science you should learn some. Come back when you can undetstand hy the moon is getting father away from the earth rather than gradually falling down.
If you speak from personal experience, I support you in this.
MoveTowardtheLight placemark
If you don't approve of my posts, feel free to skip right over them. I won't be offended.
Not sure you could recognize either.
"If not, they won't ever come down anywhere."
How can you prove that?
Great post, great tagline. I even liked that graphic.
It seems to me the retreat has been in the other direction, namely in refusing to prove how/whether the measure of predictive error complexity applies to organized matter that behaves according to predictable laws; how this esoteric math, into which you yourself retreat, demolishes the reasonable inference that where there are intelligble phenomena, intelligence may be involved in its construction and maintenance. Is that clear enough, or is that "nonsense," too?
Many of us here (myself included) opposed the President's choice of Miers for the Supreme Court, especially after we learned of her speech in the 90's where she seemed to endorse Roe. Will you oppose Alito if it appears he'll join Scalia & Co. in opposing the ACLU interpretation of the Establishment Clause? Will any of the others here oppose his confirmation and hold out for a more liberal judge?
And if I don't will you altogether disavow the fallibility of human reason, be only a slight believer, or set yourself up as its infallible king?
It would be even better if it were true.
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.