Message 106 of 283 (649150) 01-20-2012 9:16 PM

Reply to: Message 96 by marc9000 01-20-2012 8:50 PM

is why these bills keep turning up. Some people just can't accept that religion doesn't belong science, no matter what the constitution says, no matter what legal experts judge to be unconstitutional and no matter how bloody stupid they looked the last time they tried it in Dover.

They cannot accept that they were wrong, after all God is on their side so they must be right. Praise Jeebus! It doesn't matter that they mow down honest people, honest scientists, the law, the constitution as long as they get to tell kids in science class that the ToE is atheistic and they'll go to Hell for accepting it and that all scientists are atheistic liars out to disprove the existence of God. They will lie time and again to disguise their purpose, they will say that it has nothing to do with religion when all along we know and they know it's [i]all about religion[i/] and getting their particular version taught to a captive audience.

It's time the zealots stopped judging science and scientists by their own gutter standards. The only agenda science has is to find out stuff, there is no ulterior motive. The religious nuts in Dover got handed their heads to play with after lying under oath (and it's all too evident in the transcript where they were caught out time and time again telling blatant lies).

Even if ID managed to disentangle itself from religion it's still got major problems, courtesy of Behe and his lies in his book "The Edge of Evolution". He lies about science!! And he's been caught out (see the discussion over at Panda's Thumb about the HIV and malaria portions of his book).

If you feel that I don't deserve any more of your time, when it's you who is trying to convince us all that ID belongs in a science class, then bugger off out of the thread.

Message 107 of 283 (649153) 01-20-2012 9:24 PM

Reply to: Message 102 by Percy 01-20-2012 9:06 PM

I was working on Adequate's trolling. Often when I make a good point he trolls it. I pointed out in an earlier post that ID was the only scientific discipline that had to face an entrance exam (court case). He called that "bizarre". So I asked him to specify any other scientific discipline that won a court case, and of course he melted down. It was fun.

Message 108 of 283 (649154) 01-20-2012 9:29 PM

Reply to: Message 83 by marc9000 01-20-2012 8:25 PM

What exactly is it that you fear Stephen Weinberg is going to do?

--Percy

Message 109 of 283 (649155) 01-20-2012 9:30 PM

Reply to: Message 105 by Coyote 01-20-2012 9:10 PM

It is practiced by imperfect humans, just as religion is.

Science does, but the imperfect humans that practice it rely on dogma, revelation, faith and belief just the same as religious people. They make just as questionable political decisions as anybody else. Seems like I remember you to be a conservative. Surely you should know how imperfect liberal evolutionists political opinions are.

Message 110 of 283 (649156) 01-20-2012 9:34 PM

Reply to: Message 87 by marc9000 01-20-2012 8:36 PM

Well, again, if this is true, then the advantage is with science. If the fact that I am not currently living in a cave eating raw squirrel and dying of polio requires a technical violation of the First Amendment, then what I say is fuck the First Amendment up the ass with a cactus. Or better still, let's rewrite it so that it says: "Congress shall establish atheism good and hard, and religious people shall be prodded with pointy sticks until it hurts."

Science is worth having. If you feel that it treads on the toes of your imaginary friend, then that's not a reason to give up science, it's a reason to tread on invisible toes.

Message 111 of 283 (649157) 01-20-2012 9:37 PM

Reply to: Message 84 by marc9000 01-20-2012 8:30 PM

I think I understand the problem here. You think that since science tells us what is true, then if God isn't included he must be ruled out.

But science doesn't tell us what is true. Science only tells us what is likely true based upon the available evidence (tentativity), and only about the natural world. God is not of the natural world. God transcends the natural world.

--Percy

Message 112 of 283 (649158) 01-20-2012 9:39 PM

Reply to: Message 108 by Percy 01-20-2012 9:29 PM

Encourage the scientific community (often through education) to use its respected position to promote liberal political policies, like morally troubling medical experimentation, global warming hysteria, irresponsible government spending, and of course, downgrading religion in science classes. There's nothing in science that promotes financial responsibility. The book of Proverbs does, but what does it matter? If Genesis is false, Proverbs must be too, right? We're seeing that attitude in government today.

Message 113 of 283 (649159) 01-20-2012 9:41 PM

Reply to: Message 107 by marc9000 01-20-2012 9:24 PM

I am glad that you enjoy your hallucinations. Otherwise they'd be completely pointless.

Message 114 of 283 (649160) 01-20-2012 9:41 PM

Reply to: Message 111 by Percy 01-20-2012 9:37 PM

It tells atheists what is true. Just ask them.

Goodnight.

Message 115 of 283 (649161) 01-20-2012 9:46 PM

Reply to: Message 112 by marc9000 01-20-2012 9:39 PM

The Gospel of Matthew, on the other hand ...

Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? [...] Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? [...] Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself.

Message 116 of 283 (649162) 01-20-2012 9:51 PM

Reply to: Message 112 by marc9000 01-20-2012 9:39 PM

You seem overflowing with paranoia and nonsense tonight, so I think I shall go to bed and try to catch you at a better time.

--Percy

Message 118 of 283 (649166) 01-20-2012 10:16 PM

Reply to: Message 109 by marc9000 01-20-2012 9:30 PM

That is an absolutely useless argument against my point. You are probably relying on the myth of "the fall" for this, but that's just another bit of scripture you are using in place of evidence.

Religion is based on squishy subjects, "divine revelation," dogma, scripture, and the rest. The last thing religion wants is to be tested scientifically against evidence. Over the decades it hasn't fared too well.

Science is based on evidence--which exactly the opposite of religion. If you can show where any particular part of science is incorrect--using real evidence, not revelation, scripture and the rest--then that part of science will be changed.

Science changes a lot, but this doesn't happen because some creationist posts his beliefs on a creationist website somewhere. If creationists have something, then peer-reviewed scientific journals are the place to submit. But again, that's the last place creationists want to be as their beliefs will be judged against real-world evidence.

"Liberal evolutionists?" I am a conservative, but I have taught evolution at the university level! So much for your argument.

And no, science does not rely on "dogma, revelation, faith and belief just the same as religious people." Science relies on evidence, which is the opposite. And this will be the case no matter how often you post this misrepresentation.

Message 119 of 283 (649167) 01-20-2012 10:38 PM

Reply to: Message 107 by marc9000 01-20-2012 9:24 PM

If ID researchers produce good science that is important enough to not be ignored, then scientists will themselves be insisting that ID be in the classroom.

What happened, in reality, is that religious fundamentalists tried to do an end run around both the constitution and science, by using politics (rather than science) to get it into the science classroom.

If you want ID in the classroom, then call off the lawyers, call off the theologists, call off the religious politicians. Get some good scientists working on ID, to see if they can come up with important science.

Message 120 of 283 (649172) 01-21-2012 3:22 AM

Reply to: Message 87 by marc9000 01-20-2012 8:36 PM

quote:

---

Not that simple. Science is controlled by people with a naturalistic worldview. It’s equivalent to religion. Its establishment in public education makes it in violation of the First Amendment.

---

You've admitted that all the bills are inspired by a desire to distort science classes to favour uor religious beliefs. You can't come up with any other good arguments as to why ID belongs in science classes so it really does seem that that is all there is to it.

It is your argument that is simplistic. Science isn't not inherently atheistic. Many believers accept the findings of science - including evolution. Some even write popular books promoting the compatibility of their brand of Christianity with science. It's quite odd that you don't seem to notice those books at all.

It really seems that the only " patheism" in science that you are really worried about is science that contradicts the beliefs of your sect.

As has already been pointed out, the way to correct a real violation of the First Amendment is no to mandate another violation, even more egregious than the first. The remedy is to stop the violation. All you would have to do is to show that evolution is not valid science or that there is no valid secular reason for teaching it in schools and it would be withdrawn. Unfortunately for you, it's rather easier to spout crazy falsehoods on a website than it is to get a court to accepts them. The fact that you don't want to follow the correct course is a pretty clear sign that even you don't believe what you were saying.

quote:

---

There was no atheist organization in the U.S. founders time. They couldn’t see organized atheism as a worldview complete with all the closed mindedness, rituals, and desire to dominate people who don’t share their faith as religion sometimes can. A worship of the earth (environmentalism, global warming etc) and a strong faith in big government is a big part of their rituals and domination.

---

And no rational person sees that even now, because it's a delusion invented by Far right "Christians" (more like Satanists if you ask me) angry that their domination is being challenged. Let us not forget that you are the one who wants to increase government power in this case. It's all about getting your own way -by whatever means are handy. You're not concerned about being dominated - you are angry that YOUR desire for domination is being thwarted.