Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics': Supernatural Selection
The New York Times ^ | 14 April 2002 | JIM HOLT

Posted on 04/14/2002 12:31:25 AM PDT by sourcery

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 281-297 next last
To: jennyp
Don't bother me. I'm yelling back at the screen!

LOL!

221 posted on 04/15/2002 6:08:27 PM PDT by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: jennyp
Cloaked & lurking ...

222 posted on 04/15/2002 6:23:29 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

To: BMCDA
Mein Deutsch is nicht gut genüg! I'd like to read the English sometime.
223 posted on 04/15/2002 7:11:57 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: jennyp
There's a slight problem with the senescence model and that is that past reproductive years, mortality drops off as age increases.
224 posted on 04/15/2002 8:01:20 PM PDT by Nebullis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: jennyp
Dank für das komplette und lesbare website. Offensichtlich sollte jeder auf FreeRepublic es lesen.

Machen sie oberkorper frei! (I used that on german women when I was there.)

225 posted on 04/15/2002 8:08:55 PM PDT by Gladwin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gordon
Occum's Razor doesn't hold a candle to the Kobiachi Maru. (Just kidding....humor.)
226 posted on 04/15/2002 8:59:48 PM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Gordon
That'a Occam's Razor from Willam of Occam (or Ockham). He liked it so much, he bought the company.

Actually it shaves slowly but it shaves exceedling close.

227 posted on 04/15/2002 9:12:23 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
Most people seem not to have risen to the level of Aristotelean physics.
228 posted on 04/15/2002 9:14:51 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

To: jennyp;VadeRetro;Nebullis;PatrickHenry
It's quite comprehensive indeed but unfortunately it's completely in German and I don't know if the author has any plans to translate it to English.
I found this site some time ago while doing a search on evolution, Popper and Chalmers. I was quite surprised that there was a German website dealing with Creationism since I was convinced that this was only an issue in America (and to some lesser degree in Australia). Most Europeans don't even know that there is such a controversy over this topic in the US, so I was even more baffled when I found a French (or was it Belgian?) website dealing with Creationism (but somehow I lost the bookmark, merde!).
229 posted on 04/15/2002 9:32:20 PM PDT by BMCDA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Mein Deutsch is nicht gut genüg!

Ja aber babelfishdeutscher ist viel besser :-)

230 posted on 04/15/2002 9:36:12 PM PDT by jennyp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies]

To: Nebullis
There's a slight problem with the senescence model and that is that past reproductive years, mortality drops off as age increases.

Really? It holds across many species? How exactly do you define "mortality" in this case?

231 posted on 04/15/2002 9:37:52 PM PDT by jennyp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: BMCDA
It looks like a great site. A cursory glance revealed some good topics, canalization, developmental constraints...

Bedankt, hoor!

232 posted on 04/15/2002 9:45:24 PM PDT by Nebullis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: jennyp
How exactly do you define "mortality" in this case?

That's a good question. Mortality rates level off at older ages. The speed slows down. Mutations accumulate over a lifetime, but, apparently the expectation of mortality based on rates of deleterious effects, both from mutations and from active genes causing rapid senescence, slow down at some point far beyond reproductive age.

233 posted on 04/15/2002 9:50:49 PM PDT by Nebullis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies]

To: Nebullis
Niets te danken ;-D
234 posted on 04/15/2002 10:26:09 PM PDT by BMCDA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic
Most people seem not to have risen to the level of Aristotelean physics. Including many "scientists"?
235 posted on 04/15/2002 11:15:36 PM PDT by RobbyS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: BMCDA
merde!). Watch your language: this is a family thread! :-)
236 posted on 04/15/2002 11:19:04 PM PDT by RobbyS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: F16Fighter
If you care to check out this particular book, which also delves into the scientific, spiritual and historical dynamics of UFOs, Ghosts, Drugs (coincidently), critiques of Christian sects and their ties to the "occult", and other goodies, the book is called 'Occult Invasion'.

You actually have me interested and I may get it. The drugs/religion connection is well known though. That's how a lot of people "saw god."

For example, I read recently that researchers found that the Oracle of Delphi, which in a religious context gave out supernatural advice, worked on gas. There was a fault line running right under the temple that was releasing Ethylene gas, which caused the trances and delirium in the priestesses.

I suppose there's a rather mundane explanation such as this for most religious phenomena.

237 posted on 04/16/2002 1:12:23 AM PDT by Quila
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: Junior
I've been waiting for Fiat jokes.

"Fix It Again Tony"

238 posted on 04/16/2002 1:13:21 AM PDT by Quila
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Intelligent design is not creationism. Such is only a tie that's made by those who have an anti-intelligent design agenda.

You keep telling yourself that, but many of us have been watching the progression. It seems largely influenced by the fact that they can't force obvious religious doctrine into public schools (creationism), so the new tact is to wrap a scientific cloak around it to get it in.

In either case, the main point is to displace science (evolution) in the science classes with religion (creationism) by other than competition on an equal scientific level.

239 posted on 04/16/2002 1:17:03 AM PDT by Quila
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: F16Fighter
Interesting take on Hunt by Aufill, who certainly has his dander up about Hunt's inferences that Catholics surrender "devotions, novenas, feasts", and I suppose the incense, candles, and Marial and saint worship as well and does in fact tie in all the evidence.

I'm even more interested. I've always known that much of Christianity, and especially Catholicism, is taken from local pagan practices (in the Catholic's case, it was just plain good marketing). Hunt lays it out pretty well?

240 posted on 04/16/2002 1:20:07 AM PDT by Quila
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 281-297 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson