Defending science education against intelligent design: a call to action

American Society for Clinical Investigation ^ | 01 May 2006 | Alan D. Attie, Elliot Sober, Ronald L. Numbers, etc.

[Dimensio]

Doesn't take a degree in science to understand the arguments for and against.

Perhaps you could explain the arguments against and demonstrate the claim that the Theory of Evolution is a "lie" to be accurate.

[ToryHeartland]

You have said much better what I was trying to say in my post 210.

[PatrickHenry]

That would be because a good chunk of the religious right was, until recently, Jim Crow Democrat.

They were certainly enthusiastic about William Jennings Bryant, one of the wildest democrats in history.

[Publius6961]

You think that it wrong for an academic area that is vital to the country to object when people try to make them teach something with no basis that can be observed?

It happens all the time!
I know that, even in the third grade, if you tried to teach me that homosesuality is normal, I would have rejected it.

On the other hand, I was exposed to creationism with no visible adverse effects. It did not prevent me from learning all the basics of useful applied science.
And, incidentally, learned excellent geography to boot!

[wyattearp]

If a secularist Republican beats a Christian Republican in a primary, Christian voters will support the secularist in the general election because of party loyalty, but a Christian who beats a secularist in a GOP primary always has to worry about the secularist's backers defecting to the Democrat in the general election.

That is absolutely wrong. If the Christian canditate loses, the majority of them wont vote in that race (if the GOP is lucky). They cannot be depended on to vote GOP unless their candidate wins the primary. Furthermore, if their candidate loses the primary they go ballistic on Republican Party staff, claiming that the GOP is anti-christian, atheists, marxists, satanists, etc.

I used to work for the Republican Party. Many of the hundreds of phone calls that I fielded from the religious right after they lost a primary were downright vile. They can NOT be depended on to vote for the candidate that beat them, and often vote against him/her, especially if that candidate is pro-choice.

[usastandsunited]

I think people need to understand the difference between Theology and Biology. I'm no expert in either one, but they both are science and both are very different. A theologist has no more authority on matters of biology than a biologist has on theology.
Personally, I would be much more interested in the question "Did we begin from something or nothing?" than how genes may mutate.

[js1138]

And Huey Long, another good Republican.

[Liberal Classic]

Would you believe

|------|

that much?


^{(RIP Don)}

[PatrickHenry]

I think people need to understand the difference between Theology and Biology.

Agreed

I'm no expert in either one, but they both are science and both are very different.

They're not both science. Science has different epistemological principles, and doesn't use faith or revelation as a source of information.

A theologist has no more authority on matters of biology than a biologist has on theology.

True.

Personally, I would be much more interested in the question "Did we begin from something or nothing?" than how genes may mutate.

They're both interesting. But the former is like wondering if the Vikings really sailed to North America before Columbus. Nice to know, but of little practical value. The latter is like studying the American Revolution and the writing of the Constitution. Much more useful information.

[LibertarianSchmoe]

Quite the compliment coming from you, TH! You've saved me plenty of keystrokes in the past, expressing my own sentiments in much better words.

[LibertarianSchmoe]

They were certainly enthusiastic about William Jennings Bryant, one of the wildest democrats in history.

I'll let my tagline speak for me.

[wyattearp]

That would be because a good chunk of the religious right was, until recently, Jim Crow Democrat.

Agreed. They came over to the GOP with Reagan. Most are only conservative on religious topics, and are liberal on most everything else. If their liberalism is attacked, they claim that it is an attack on their religion, and round and round we go.

[stands2reason]

Did plants die before the fall of Adam? How about bacteria or individual cells?

Please answer, so far no Christian will answer me.

[usastandsunited]

Did plants die before the fall of Adam? How about bacteria or individual cells? Please answer, so far no Christian will answer me.

I don't mind answering you. I don't know.

[stands2reason]

Reason is the Devil's whore? Wow, that means I really am a Satanist!


All this time, I never knew.

[Fester Chugabrew]

I am saying ID is not science.

That makes you a fine philosopher, but have you scientifically tested this assertion? Is it entitled to be upheld as the only one to enjoy legal status in a public, academic, or scientific context?

[stands2reason]

people are apparently more and more leaning towards belief in creation or ID.

Do you have proof that belief in creation is expanding?

[wallcrawlr]

^{Revelation 4:11}Intelligent Design
Constantly searching for objectivity in the evolution debate...
See my profile for info

[stands2reason]

but the ridicule and dogmatism from the Church of Darwinism should end.

I see hypocrisy....

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"I know of many well-qualified scientists who disagree with your statement."

My statement was that a degree in science will almost certainly leave one with the conviction that evolution is correct. Since about 95% or so of those with science degrees agree with evolution, your anonymous scientists would be woefully mistaken.