It’s the rib thing that was weird.
And evolution has nothing to say about the origin of life and certainly the astrophysics of the Big Bang. It addresses the origin of species.
I think I kind of get what you’re trying to say about cellphones, but simply because they might have been considered supernatural devices three hundred years ago does not equate them with ID. They were at least something that could have been looked at, handled and studied at the time. ID is merely an argument. Much different.
If we could study ID, find evidence to support it, or do anything else except argue about it, then it would be in the scientific arena. This should not be that hard to agree with.
Nobody is banning ID. It’s out there and it sells a lot of books, and one movie that isn’t doing that great.
But you just don’t get to win the argument that it’s science and should be taught equally with other scientific disciplines until it’s something more than a conclusion.
I can make a bunch of conclusions about nature, but that doesn’t make them science. Teach ID all you want. But you may not teach it as science until you play by the scientifc rules that existed long before Darwin.
In an interview with the Trinity Broadcasting Network, Ben Stein said the following amazing thing in an interview with Paul Crouch, Jr.
Stein: When we just saw that man, I think it was Mr. Myers [i.e. biologist P.Z. Myers], talking about how great scientists were, I was thinking to myself the last time any of my relatives saw scientists telling them what to do they were telling them to go to the showers to get gassed … that was horrifying beyond words, and that’s where science — in my opinion, this is just an opinion — that’s where science leads you.
Crouch: That’s right.
Stein: …Love of God and compassion and empathy leads you to a very glorious place, and science leads you to killing people.
Crouch: Good word, good word.
You can see the whole shameful thing here. It's a pity Crouch didn't invite the Rev. Jeremiah Wright into the studio for a three-way conversation. It would have elevated the tone.
“It’s the rib thing that was weird”.
IS not was, it STILL is weird, to me anyway.
Something about Christianity, God knows what He’s doing!
Some people are meant to understand things crystal clear I beleive. I’m simply not one of them when it comes to creation, not even close.
PERHAPS this will be clear to us, sooner, later, who knows? Perhaps in the next life, perhaps never.
I guess a way to explain it is the Detroit Lions playbook is a foreign mess to a QB that’s part of the steeler organization. But once he’s traded to the lions, he’s exposed to practices, talks to the offensive coordinator, it makes MORE sense anyway.
OK OK...admittedly the Detroit Lions might not be the best example....:)
But that’s the way the Bible works. It CAN be a 100% mystery, but the likelihood that at least SOME of it makes sense is reached once your perspective is that of a Christian, or at least Judeo-Christian. (Even muslim in some respects from what I’m told.)
The thing is, before I was a Christian or even believed on my own there is a God, a big bang and so forth was waaaaaaay out there to me!
Funny the way God made Adam, funnier still the way He made Eve, but there’s symbology in that...makes them close, her part of him, him part of her...why he didn’t choose a nipple? Beats thehelloutta me!
I’m all for rules and conformity and so on...but science itself isn’t static, including how we test, define, THEORIZE it, etc.
I’m also for thinking outside the box.
The turth is, evolution is simply inadequate, and of course my other experiences lead me NATURALLY to the ID theory.
If people in charge of promoting ID are in it for politics, religion and not science, shame on them!
BUT, just the same, let them prove it!
Or let others DISprove it.
If it’s every single time and forever “not science”, how are they to prove it within science? Should they go over to the math class and prove it scientifically?
BTW, origin of life, progression of life, evolution...whatever, it’s full of way too many gaps. It’s all theory, and many pieces of puzzles are beyond our understanding, scientific or otherwise. Not even all scientists even agree, and many assert IT’s nothing more than “faith”!
When people are always warning about all the kook religions, wiccans, etc. creeping in...I say the more the merrier!
Society itself will weed this out anyway!
Always trying to BAN everything though, except of course atheism, agnosticism, etc. will only keep it around, perhaps even creating MORE kooks that snip their nuts off and kill themselves to catch spaceships in comet tails to get to heaven!
Same for scientific theories!
I wasn’t equating cellphones with ID, rather pointing out how we define science itself changes over time, how we understand science EVOLVES. So who’s to say God didn’t use evolution as a tool and sooner or later theologins and scientists will come to the same conclusions when there’s a merge?
What you and I call science today will be laughable 500 years from now...but what may, MAY be the biggest joke of all is that people were actually saying things like ID is scientific (OR evolution), but what might be the biggest laugher of all is: THAT’s not science!
Something that should be MOST obvious is that if there is a God, HE certainly gave you free will. It stands to reason, that Jesus wants people that through their free will come to Him, He doesn’t want forced conformity.
Therefore the idea of a Theorcracy in this country can’t work, because the majority of people, Christian or otherwise, I beleive, are not the extremists. THEREFORE, we won’t let a Theocracy happen.
I’d be right alongside you if ANYONE was demanding ID without evolution, or that people be forced to define anything, believe anything...that’s DEMANDED of them.
but vice versa is true...I’m NOT going to conform to the state. Nor illegal laws that hijack us for the sake of religion OR secularism.
But you just don’t get to win the argument that it’s science and should be taught equally with other scientific disciplines until it’s something more than a conclusion.
>>>>I think what you fail to see is that YOU don’t get to win the argument in defining what is or isn’t science, after all, evolution is ALSO theory, unprovable, just because it needs 40,000 MORE years to “prove”...ONLY means that’s your best guess!
SHUCKS, YOU DON’T EVEN “GET TO” DEFINE THE ARGUMENT!
See, in America, we ALL do, or NONE of us do!
Scientists aren’t God or the Wizard of Oz. They’re people. Imperfect with much to learn!
Nobody is banning ID?
You keep saying that, but always attach the stipulation that it can’t be taught in science class in public schools.
As evidence shows us, more peole are turning to private schools, and more are turning to home schooling. Which unsurprisingly is why California liberals are in a state of panic now banning...YUP...home schooling!
SURELY you realize ID is accepted in therefore a growing number of science curriculums...which leads me to the next issue:
Sooner or later the SCOTUS WILL have to FINALLY answer to this absolutely off the rails separation of church and state issue once and for all. OR at least some clarificiations in the present situation...there are simply way too many and a growing number of cases clogging up the courts concerning relgious freedoms and intolerance thereof in this country.
Sooner or later the majority that tolerate God are going to be pushed just so far and I think that point has been reached, and more will wonder why it is the tolerant of God that are having to be forced to pay for private schools and not the other way around!
Shouldn’t it be the Michael Newdow’s of the world and his ilk, hijacking his own daughter to arrogantly demand of the WHOLE country to once again somehow disacknowledge God...the same Christian God the founding fathers ackowledged many times?
I think the more people “demand” it be their way, the more Christians (and others for that matter) are going to push back!
BTW, I’m curious...I saw a show once called “the science of love”. Discovery channel or one of those.
It went on and on about male and female sexuality, all the scientific physical changes that go on...it wasn’t “the science of lust” mind you, but the science of love.
Now I wonder...why weren’t the phones literally ringing off the hook? Because I’ve yet to see a paper, a shred of evidence ANYTHING that PROVES love is a SCIENTIFIC phenomenon!
Now I smell a load of hypocrisy on the subject of what is or isn’t science from these people demanding to define “acceptable” science for everyone!
AGAIN!