|
|
| Author |
Message |
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6337
Location: Memphis
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:52 pm Post subject: Success in Dover |
 |
|
News link.
| Quote: | | In his decision, Jones systematically dismantled the arguments of the proponents of intelligent design. Jones said that the history of intelligent design shows that it is essentially creationism with explicit references to God and the Bible removed. As such, it is primarily a religious theory, not a scientific one, and cannot be taught in US public schools, which are prevented from promoting religion. |
Thankfully, reason won out.
_________________
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 |
|
 |
LuckyStrike
Sea Monkey
Joined: 04 Nov 2004
Posts: 10
Location: Valdosta, GA, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 11:42 pm Post subject: Re: FFT |
|
|
| FFT wrote: | News link.
| Quote: | | In his decision, Jones systematically dismantled the arguments of the proponents of intelligent design. Jones said that the history of intelligent design shows that it is essentially creationism with explicit references to God and the Bible removed. As such, it is primarily a religious theory, not a scientific one, and cannot be taught in US public schools, which are prevented from promoting religion. |
Thankfully, reason won out. |
How opponents of Intelligent Design react to this case is enlightening. On one hand, opponents of Intelligent Design criticize Intelligent Design for being "poorly defined" or "relativistic," yet, on the other hand, opponents of Intelligent Design claim that Intelligent Design is "Biblical Creationism without mentioning Biblical Creationism."
You cannot have your cake and eat it too.
_________________
1 Peter 3:15 [NIV]
Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6337
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Of course I can.
Intelligent Design is not scientific, it is religious.
It does not appear to have any scientific merit whatsoever, save as an example for those who would wish to insert religion into our science classrooms in the future.
_________________
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: Wed Dec 21, 2005 6:52 am Post subject: Re: FFT |
|
|
| LuckyStrike wrote: | How opponents of Intelligent Design react to this case is enlightening. On one hand, opponents of Intelligent Design criticize Intelligent Design for being "poorly defined" or "relativistic," yet, on the other hand, opponents of Intelligent Design claim that Intelligent Design is "Biblical Creationism without mentioning Biblical Creationism."
You cannot have your cake and eat it too. |
There is no 'on the other hand'. Those two thoughts go quite well with each other ID is poorly defined AND Creationism without creationism. It's because it's a thin attempt to guide thought towards creationism that it's so poorly defined. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6337
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:35 am Post subject: Re: FFT |
|
|
| LuckyStrike wrote: | | You cannot have your cake and eat it too. |
By the way, I was under the impression that you simply didn't have enough time for other threads.
Was that a lie, then?
_________________
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 |
|
|
nakhash
House Cat
Joined: 07 Dec 2005
Posts: 171
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 6:26 am Post subject: Re: FFT |
|
|
| LuckyStrike wrote: | | How opponents of Intelligent Design react to this case is enlightening. |
More enlightening is the way in which supporters of ID have reacted. The biggest reaction is disbelief, specifically, "The judge just doesn't understand that we don't explicitly appeal to God to explain ID."
The simple fact of the matter is, what science is and what science isn't was presented to the judge. The history of the ID movement was presented to the judge. The "scientific" methods of ID were presented to the Judge, along with the published evidence that ID presents. The methods used in paleontology, ecology, geology, molecular biology, genetics, developmental biology, etc. were presented, along with published evidence and the conclusions that have been drawn from this evidence. Additionally, the predictive power of each was presented, showing the benefit to society each school of thought offers.
The judge determined that ID fell outside the bounds of science as defined by scientific method. The judge then also determined that redefining science according to the definitions of ID and the Discovery Institute is not beneficial to society, nor is it constitutional.
I think this is not only incredibly open and shut, but it is also absolutely flawless.
Evolution: 1
Creationism: 0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TeeJoe
Growing Guppy
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Posts: 42
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:05 am Post subject: Re: FFT |
|
|
| LuckyStrike wrote: | | You cannot have your cake and eat it too. |
I know, I'm easily puzzled, but I've never understood that saying. I mean It's cake right. What else do you do with it?
Ok, sorry back to the discussion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6337
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
It was originally "you can’t eat your cake and have it too." As in once you've eaten it, you can't "have" it. Just like "I couldn't care less," it got screwed up somewhere along the line and small minds don't seem to think about what they're saying before they say them.
_________________
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 |
|
|
TeeJoe
Growing Guppy
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Posts: 42
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 7:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| FFT wrote: | | It was originally "you can’t eat your cake and have it too." As in once you've eaten it, you can't "have" it. Just just like "I couldn't care less," it got screwed up somewhere along the line and small minds tend not to think about the things they say before they say them. |
Doh!
Just because I thought about it don't you dare think I don't belong in the small mind category.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gnosis
Tadpole
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
Posts: 15
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I always read it as "you can't have your cake and eat it too" as this... You can either have your cake but not be allowed to eat it, or you can have the right to eat cake but no cake. You will always be miserable.
Or better, you can't have everything your way. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 7005
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | The simple fact of the matter is, what science is and what science isn't was presented to the judge |
I'm just glad the courts, not scientists get to determine what science is or is not nowdays.
_________________
JP's Mind - my blog
Psa 118:8 It is better to trust and take refuge in the Lord than to put confidence in man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6337
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 2:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"The simple fact of the matter is, what science is and what science isn't was presented to the judge"
_________________
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 |
|
|
gnosis
Tadpole
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
Posts: 15
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| No, science is clearly defined by scientists. It was presented to the judge and the judge agreed that ID is not science as defined by scientists. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SDMD
Show Poodle
Joined: 12 Oct 2005
Posts: 253
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 27, 2005 4:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | | Quote: | | The simple fact of the matter is, what science is and what science isn't was presented to the judge |
I'm just glad the courts, not scientists get to determine what science is or is not nowdays. |
Well, scientists and the judge AGREED.
_________________
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: Tue Dec 27, 2005 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gnosis wrote: | | No, science is clearly defined by scientists. It was presented to the judge and the judge agreed that ID is not science as defined by scientists. |
Indeed. And Behe, the ID proponent who did testify was found to be (1) dishonest in his claims, and (2) using a "definition" of science that allowed ASTROLOGY as a "science."
_________________
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 |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
