Posted on 10/14/2006 11:16:50 AM PDT by lizol
Methinks thou assumes a LOT!
How would an UNusual personal attack be received?
Amen!
|
Name at birth: Yung Myung Moon (Mun)
Sun Myung Moon is the founder and leader of the Holy Spirit Association for the Unification of World Christianity, also called the Unification Church, a world-wide organization that believes him to be the "Messiah" sent by God to complete the earthly mission of Jesus. As a teenager in Korea, Moon had a vision of Jesus (1935), who told him he'd been chosen to continue God's fight against evil. Moon founded his church in 1954, but didn't get international attention until moving to the United States in the early '70s. He ran afoul of the U.S. congress in 1976 and was investigated for his business dealings and his connections to the CIA in Korea. The investigation, denounced by Senator Orrin Hatch and other conservative politicians, culminated with Moon spending 13 months in prison (1981-2) for conspiracy and filing false tax returns. Reverend Moon has been attacked as a cult leader, but his church (now called the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification) continues to have hundreds of thousands of members (often referred to as "Moonies") and holdings in educational and media institutions, including the political journal The Washington Times.
In a single ceremony in 1995 Moon claimed to have given 360,000 couples the marriage blessing of God, with he and his wife in the role of the "True Parents" of humanity... Moon, a South Korean citizen, was given permanent residency status in the U.S. in 1973.
FOUR GOOD LINKS
Yeah. We all (wearily) understand that this is completely true by YOUR definition of "Intelligent Design," which is that any recognition, whatever, of order or regularity in the universe is ipso facto, ID.
The problems are that 1) No one else, not a single person I've ever heard of or come across, and certainly no on in the "ID movement," uses your definition of ID, and 2) it doesn't distinguish anything, since ALL scientific theories, INCLUDING evolution, predicate order and regularity in nature.
You may continue your tiresome exercise in tautology at your own discretion, but this will comprise the totality of my response for the present thread.
ESTABLISHMENT!!
(But then... how would we KNOW? Bein' they're so sneeky and all...)
I tend to think of "drunken rant" accusations differently. Apparently the Moderator does, too. Not that I am personally offended by such an accusation, especially since it was wholly unfounded. But I would hardly call it "some semblance of rationality in the conservative party." In fact, the tone was generally reduced to DU level at that point.
Probably only rises to the level of a Marcus Julius Agrippa. But conservatives seem to support his organization and positions. The Moon vs Scientology wars will be amusing to observe.
Well, that's what they're doing...they're rejecting a dogmatic faith in Darwin.
There's nothing wrong with discussing speciation by natural selection as a theory...because that's precisely what it is, regardless of how well validated it is.
If we're going to teach science, let's be rigorous about it.
I prefer to use the words "may be reasonably construed or inferred as ID," and not enter into positive language. Why? Because science deals with relative truth and not absolute truth. And you're right, the idea is so comprehensive it is a wonder some kind of movement is needed to re-state what has been patently obvious since the beginning of time.
Are you a red herring? Why are you pursuing a question that has nothing whatsoever to do with the qualifications the theory of evolution has for being taught as science or in public schools?
Wikipedia has a good, plain language description:
A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. It originates from and/or is supported by experimental evidence (see scientific method). In this sense, a theory is a systematic and formalized expression of all previous observations that is predictive, logical and testable.A theory is not the final word. It is, at best, the current state of knowledge, subject to change. Newton's gravity was found wanting, augmented (but not totally replaced) by the Theory of General Relativity, which required quantum theory to make a complete picture. Scientists are still trying to reconcile the apparent conflicts between relativity and quantum theory, yet we know that both work in the real world (unless you're one of the "Quantum physics is bunk" nuts).
then why get one's panties in a twist when reminded that evolution (in the wide sense) is a theory as opposed to a proven fact?
Nobody does. The problem is that when creationists call it a "theory" they mean it in the vernacular, while we mean "theory" in the scientific sense. They have two very different meanings.
It does if held to the standards required by evolutionists for their "theory."
What are the conditions to falsify ID? What predictions does it make?
Furthermore, intelligent design enjoys thousands of examples for direct observation at any given moment where intellect is at work.
Again, some applicable examples, please.
Cherchez l'argent!
Don't you think the actual content of science class should have something to do with what science has learned thus far?
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.
