 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6337
Location: Memphis
|
 Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 9:13 pm Post subject: KU to teach ID |
 |
|
In a mythology class.
News link
| Quote: | Creationism and intelligent design are slated to be the subjects of a Kansas University class next semester — but as mythology, not science.
“The KU faculty has had enough,” said Paul Mirecki, chairman of KU’s religious studies department. He said he planned to teach “Special Topics in Religion: Intelligent Design, Creationism and other Religious Mythologies” next semester. |
| Quote: | | “The educational system of Kansas is under attack,” Mirecki said. “All they are is oppressors. They’re not martyrs and victims ... I’m expecting insecure, threatened people to start being more and more vocal. They don’t want their beliefs to be analyzed rationally. That’s what this class is devised to do.” |
Thoughts?
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.
Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
lone-traveler
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 6365
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 10:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote:
But intelligent design proponents say the class is meant to demean them.
“To equate intelligent design to mythology is really an absurdity, and it’s just another example of labeling anybody who proposes (intelligent design) to be simply a religious nut,” Calvert said. “That’s the reason for this little charade.”
_________________
Joh 15:14 Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you.
Joh 15:12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6337
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 10:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
“The KU faculty has had enough,” said Paul Mirecki, chairman of KU’s religious studies department. He said he planned to teach “Special Topics in Religion: Intelligent Design, Creationism and other Religious Mythologies” next semester.
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.
Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SDMD
Show Poodle
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Posts: 253
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 10:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lone-traveler wrote: | Quote:
But intelligent design proponents say the class is meant to demean them.
“To equate intelligent design to mythology is really an absurdity, and it’s just another example of labeling anybody who proposes (intelligent design) to be simply a religious nut,” Calvert said. “That’s the reason for this little charade.” |
But it IS mythology. It is pure "it is so because my faith wants it to be this way regardless of facts." There is nothing in it BUT mythology and wishful thinking.
_________________
Geology: fossils of different ages
Paleontology: fossil sequence & species change over time.
Taxonomy: biological relationships
Evolution: explanation that ties it all together.
Creationism: squeezing eyes shut, wailing "DOES NOT!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lone-traveler
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 6365
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 11:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Science, and thus intelligent design theory, can only discover what is found in the observable realm. We cannot access the supernatural. Thus intelligent design proponents make it clear that all their theory can do is tell if a natural object bears the hallmarks of having been designed--it cannot tell you anything about the designer, much less that it was a supernatural deity. If some supernatural agent took action in the natural world, we might be able to detect that action, but not detect whether the actor was supernatural or otherwise. As Eugenie Scott herself concedes "Science cannot tell you who done it, but how it happened."
Science can indeed tell us if aspects of biology were designed, but it turns out to be silent on the question on the nature of the designer.
Understanding the Identity of the Designer:
The scientific theory of intelligent design cannot identify the designer, but only detects the past occurrence of intelligent design in the natural world. Intelligent design theory cannot name the designer because it works off the assumption that all intelligent agents would generally create certain types of informational patterns when they act. While we can detect that type of information in the natural world to infer intelligent design, finding that type of information does not give us any information about the nature or identity of the designer. All we can infer is that the object we are studying was designed.
http://www.ideacenter.org/contentmgr/showdetails.php/id/1341
I think the argument is that intelligent design proponants don't want to be considered as religious, not mythology, but as a science.
And it appears as though the KU wants to remove it from a science to a mythology.
am I understanding this right?
Lone
_________________
Joh 15:14 Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you.
Joh 15:12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6337
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes. KU is treating it as a religious doctrine because it is a religious doctrine.
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.
Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lone-traveler
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 6365
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"We cannot access the supernatural. Thus intelligent design proponents make it clear that all their theory can do is tell if a natural object bears the hallmarks of having been designed--it cannot tell you anything about the designer, much less that it was a supernatural deity. "
Where is religion in this claim?
is there no "intelligence" to be found in science?
is there no "design" to be found in science?
is it only when the word design..er is used is when it becomes questionable?
those aren't battle words FFT, i'm just askin...
_________________
Joh 15:14 Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you.
Joh 15:12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6337
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 11:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
When those pushing ID want it to be considered science, they must subject it to the same process of peer review that other disciplines use.
Until it makes falsifiable statements which are subjected to peer review, it is not science. Period.
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.
Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
unschoolmom
Kitten
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 141
Location: Nova Scotia
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 04, 2005 3:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lone-traveler wrote: | "We cannot access the supernatural. Thus intelligent design proponents make it clear that all their theory can do is tell if a natural object bears the hallmarks of having been designed--it cannot tell you anything about the designer, much less that it was a supernatural deity. "
Where is religion in this claim?
is there no "intelligence" to be found in science?
is there no "design" to be found in science?
is it only when the word design..er is used is when it becomes questionable?
those aren't battle words FFT, i'm just askin... |
Where is the science in that claim?
I believe there is a creator but that's a religious conviction on my part. I think it would be interesting as a science student to have creation myths be a part of my education but not under the label science.
The whole field of creation science, to me, drags down both science and religion and simply leads people away from the point of faith. The whole 'believing without proof' aspect. Frankly, it seems embarrassingly desperate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SDMD
Show Poodle
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Posts: 253
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 04, 2005 8:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lone-traveler wrote: | | "Science, and thus intelligent design theory," |
That is a false claim. Science is what is explored through the application of the Scientific Method. ID has not shown the ability to be evaluated through this process as it has yet to be able to set up a Scientific Hypothesis.
Therefore, to mention ID as a "theory" in the same sentence as the word "Science" is a sign of flagrant dishonesty and deliberate deception.
It is my experience that while creationists and IDers WANT their personal BELIEFS to be considered as science, they have utterly no comprehension of what that means. All they know is that Biology is considered as Science and that "we want that too." What is involved in science is beyond them, and they go solely on wishful thinking.
And it is ALSO my experience that those who try to advocate creationism/ID or lend legitimacy to these belies are themselves completely clueless about what Science is. They feel that if only they declare something to be science, then it is. They then make remarks showing their utter and VERY EXTERME ignorance of science, the Scientific Method orr even the GRADESCHOOL basics of the difference between a Scientific Hypothesis and a Scientific Theory.
Thus, they make claims based on ignorance, then get upset when it is explained that their ignorance is showing and their claim is invalid.
NOT OUR FAULT. It is the fault of those who have chosen to be utterly ignorant of what they speak. It is the fault of those who believe that wishful thinking, faith and false claims are sufficient to be taken serious and NOT be seen as outright liars. It is the fault of those who feel that if they peddle a wishful belief hard enough as "scientific," that somehow makes it scientific; the same ones who then gets upset when taken to task for that deceptive claim.
The ones who want to discuss science have themselves a duty to others to actually know what science is. Anything else is an insult to those they argue against.
CAN YOU TELL I AM FED UP?
I am fed up with the LIES of creationists, IDers and wannabees and hanger-ons.
I am fed up with the stark misrepresentations based on stupidity and ignorance.
I am fed up with the stark dishonesty of the refusal of these same people to actually look at even the most basic arguments against their lies and deceptions
I am fed up with the deliberate bearing false witness of these people and the insult this is to the rest of us, the idea that if they lie enough, they "win" the discussion.
I am fed up with the liars, that's it. SO STOP IT!
And people who post "evidence" SHOULD know enough about science to know when their source is lying. If they don't, then they *Holy Censor, Batman* well owe us to educate themselves enough to know it. And if they did know this, then it raises the disturbing prospect of them being one of the people mentioned above, one of those who deliberately are bearing false witness.
| Quote: | | can only discover what is found in the observable realm. We cannot access the supernatural. |
This from an IDer whose claim is that something supernatural designed biological structures? A flat-out liar. Lets look at the source.
Who are the "idea"? The Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center! Ah, so it is a self-serving group designed specifically to promote lies
(Sheesh, and we are only on the first paragraph.)
| Quote: | | Thus intelligent design proponents make it clear that all their theory can do is tell if a natural object bears the hallmarks of having been designed |
And that ALSO is a flat-out lie. ID have yet to be able to set up a scientific hypothesis that meets the Scientific requirements of a hypothesis. These people are liars.
Lone-traveler, I am done with your lying source. Go find some other sucker. these people are peddling personal belief as science, lying A LOT in the process. ....
| Quote: | I think the argument is that intelligent design proponants don't want to be considered as religious, not mythology, but as a science.
And it appears as though the KU wants to remove it from a science to a mythology.
am I understanding this right? |
And for good reason. ID has no standing when applying the Scientific Method. This is deceptive, even at a grade-school level knowledge of science. The only ones they can fool are the ones who are completely and utterly illiterate about even the most basic concepts of science.
Who ARE the idiots who buy into this claptrap and these extensive and pervasive lies?
_________________
Geology: fossils of different ages
Paleontology: fossil sequence & species change over time.
Taxonomy: biological relationships
Evolution: explanation that ties it all together.
Creationism: squeezing eyes shut, wailing "DOES NOT!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SDMD
Show Poodle
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Posts: 253
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 04, 2005 8:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| lone-traveler wrote: | "We cannot access the supernatural. Thus intelligent design proponents make it clear that all their theory can do is tell if a natural object bears the hallmarks of having been designed--it cannot tell you anything about the designer, much less that it was a supernatural deity. "
Where is religion in this claim? |
It is not science.
| Quote: |
is there no "intelligence" to be found in science?
is there no "design" to be found in science? |
Lone-traveler, please provide or set up a SCIENTIFIC HYPETHESIS on this premise: "intelligent design proponents make it clear that all their theory can do is tell if a natural object bears the hallmarks of having been designed--"
Now, please show us where a SCIENTIFIC hypothesis can be set up to actually test this design... No? THAT is the problem. They can't even get to the first step of the Scientific Method, let alone the last. That makes their claptrap beliefs NOT science and any claim that it IS science thus is a flat-out lie. DON'T YOU GET IT? DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD IS?
| Quote: | | is it only when the word design..er is used is when it becomes questionable? |
No, it is because they claim scientific exploration of what can't be explored in Science. They try to push beliefs and wishful thinking as "science" just because they want, giving NO THOUGGHT AT ALL to what Science actualyl is.
At least I hope YOU know what the Scientific Metod is, when you try to push this idea?
_________________
Geology: fossils of different ages
Paleontology: fossil sequence & species change over time.
Taxonomy: biological relationships
Evolution: explanation that ties it all together.
Creationism: squeezing eyes shut, wailing "DOES NOT!"
Last edited by SDMD on Sun Dec 04, 2005 8:25 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SDMD
Show Poodle
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Posts: 253
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 04, 2005 8:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| unschoolmom wrote: | | The whole field of creation science, to me, drags down both science and religion and simply leads people away from the point of faith. The whole 'believing without proof' aspect. Frankly, it seems embarrassingly desperate. |
Agreed. It is like those who are weak in their faith need physical proof of God. It is like the Israelites building the Golden Calf. THAT is what creationism and ID is, a Golden Calf.
_________________
Geology: fossils of different ages
Paleontology: fossil sequence & species change over time.
Taxonomy: biological relationships
Evolution: explanation that ties it all together.
Creationism: squeezing eyes shut, wailing "DOES NOT!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
t-shirtsnjeans
Big Goldfish
Joined: 17 Sep 2005
Posts: 69
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 04, 2005 11:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lone, we just need to let these idiots alone with themselves. They can go on believing that it is mythology and God will sort them out later, then let them decide on 'mythology' or fact. It works for me.
BTW, I'M FED UP with bbq ribs right now 
_________________
In the beginning God created,,.......any questions? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SDMD
Show Poodle
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Posts: 253
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 04, 2005 11:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| t-shirtsnjeans wrote: | | Lone, we just need to let these idiots alone with themselves. |
Ah, a personal attack against the rules of the forum. A flagrant ad hominem because you don't want to deal with the evidence against the lies of the creationism and ID.
And for that you need such personal attacks? That's simply lame.
_________________
Geology: fossils of different ages
Paleontology: fossil sequence & species change over time.
Taxonomy: biological relationships
Evolution: explanation that ties it all together.
Creationism: squeezing eyes shut, wailing "DOES NOT!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
t-shirtsnjeans
Big Goldfish
Joined: 17 Sep 2005
Posts: 69
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 04, 2005 11:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| SDMD wrote: | | t-shirtsnjeans wrote: | | Lone, we just need to let these idiots alone with themselves. |
Ah, a personal attack against the rules of the forum. A flagrant ad hominem because you don't want to deal with the evidence against the lies of the creationism and ID.
And for that you need such personal attacks? That's simply lame. |
Hmm, ok, I was just putting a word that summarizes what is said about Christians and ID. Let's see what we have here:
"That makes their claptrap beliefs NOT science and any claim that it IS science thus is a flat-out lie. DON'T YOU GET IT? DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD IS?" (this is the insinuation that we are liars (the 'flat-out lie'), also uneducated with 'Don't you get it? Do you even know what the scientific method is?' in all caps denoting YELLING which is against forum rules.)
next:
" giving NO THOUGGHT AT ALL to what Science actualyl is." This again is (aside from the misspelling) is another attack on intelligence.
then:
"That is a false claim." Again, we are lying.
"Therefore, to mention ID as a "theory" in the same sentence as the word "Science" is a sign of flagrant dishonesty and deliberate deception." Self explanitory to the insult of intelligence and 'dishonesty' and lies.
"It is my experience that while creationists and IDers WANT their personal BELIEFS to be considered as science, they have utterly no comprehension of what that means. All they know is that Biology is considered as Science and that "we want that too." What is involved in science is beyond them, and they go solely on wishful thinking."
Should I go on?
Insults are insults, it isn't clean when it's a .50c word, nor is it any less degrading. I'm not gonna go through each post, you have shown more than your share of insulting comments, and I just hit your last three posts!!
So, have a happy day.
_________________
In the beginning God created,,.......any questions? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
