Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 113 (8749 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-26-2017 4:56 PM
121 online now:
dwise1, frako, kjsimons, PaulK (4 members, 117 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Roshankumar1234
Post Volume:
Total: 809,070 Year: 13,676/21,208 Month: 3,158/3,605 Week: 500/933 Day: 38/51 Hour: 0/1

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
78
9
1011
...
14Next
Author Topic:   Is Intelligent Design Religion in the Guise of Science?
Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 1009 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 121 of 204 (448775)
01-15-2008 7:34 AM
Reply to: Message 86 by Beretta
01-13-2008 5:04 AM


Re: lights out
Beretta:

So if other Christians believe in evolution does that mean evolution is a religion? If non-Christians believe that ID has a point, does that mean it is not a religion? Does what I personally believe make ID unscientific? Do you understand the controversy at all?

Nice try, but firing scattershot questions can't dig you out.

You said 'I'll go with the God of the Bible' as your justification for accepting ID. You treated the concepts as synonyms.

The premise is inherently religious. You have answered the question in the title of the thread.


Archer

All species are transitional.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Beretta, posted 01-13-2008 5:04 AM Beretta has not yet responded

  
Beretta
Member (Idle past 3009 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 122 of 204 (448835)
01-15-2008 12:37 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by nator
01-13-2008 8:38 AM


Re: Branching Off
Should we "teach the controversy" regarding if the Holocaust happened?

Yes. teach that too -very important when the truth becomes distorted according to someone's agenda. History tends to repeat itself if we live in ignorance of what mankind is capable of or try to pretend that something didn't happen that did.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by nator, posted 01-13-2008 8:38 AM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by cavediver, posted 01-15-2008 12:52 PM Beretta has not yet responded
 Message 128 by nator, posted 01-16-2008 9:55 AM Beretta has not yet responded

  
Beretta
Member (Idle past 3009 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 123 of 204 (448838)
01-15-2008 12:43 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by nator
01-13-2008 8:46 AM


Re: And Should it be Taught in Our Schools?
ID in science classrooms threatens in the same way Holocaust denial in history classrooms threatens

How so?
The holocaust is a well documented fact of history and the enormous possibility that God played a massive part in human history is also worth knowing about. If it's rubbish then don't worry about it having an effect -if it's true then everyone needs to know that there is a controversy and that we didn't necessarily evolve from pond scum by pure accident. Compare and contrast instead of indoctrinating into one viewpoint and insisting that it is truth if there's a good chance that it is not.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by nator, posted 01-13-2008 8:46 AM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by nator, posted 01-16-2008 10:18 AM Beretta has not yet responded
 Message 133 by Granny Magda, posted 01-16-2008 7:01 PM Beretta has responded

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 1055 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 124 of 204 (448842)
01-15-2008 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by Beretta
01-15-2008 12:37 PM


Re: Branching Off
Should we "teach the controversy" regarding if the Holocaust happened?

Yes. teach that too -very important when the truth becomes distorted according to someone's agenda. History tends to repeat itself if we live in ignorance of what mankind is capable of or try to pretend that something didn't happen that did.

Ah, I see. So you are proposing something like:

Most people including over 99% of the experts (Historians/Biologists) agree that (the Holocaust is a historical fact/the Theory of Evolution is the best explanation of the development of life), but there is a fringe element (Holocaust deniers/IDers) that claim that (the Holocaust didn't happen/the Theory of Evolution is wrong) despite all of the evidence produced to the contrary. The fringe element claims that the evidence has been misunderstood, but it has to be said that they are largely ridiculed amongst those 99% of experts.

Or perhaps you meant:

There are two competing theories: (Holocaust, no Holocaust/Theory of Evoultion, Intelligent Design) both with their supporters and detractors. It is not for us to tell you which is true. Here is the evidence for the (Holocaust/Theory of Evolution)... and here is the evidence for (no Holocaust/Intelligent Design), er wait, I'm sure it was here a minute ago...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Beretta, posted 01-15-2008 12:37 PM Beretta has not yet responded

  
Beretta
Member (Idle past 3009 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 125 of 204 (448844)
01-15-2008 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by nator
01-13-2008 9:46 AM


Re: And Should it be Taught in Our Schools?
DNA tests show that humans are related to non-humans.

Not really. apparently we are also related to bugs and bacteria and so many things -but is that really what the results show or is it a wishful interpretation based on a presumptive worldview. Was the 'evidence' forced to fit the initial belief system?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by nator, posted 01-13-2008 9:46 AM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by cavediver, posted 01-15-2008 1:00 PM Beretta has not yet responded
 Message 127 by Organicmachination, posted 01-15-2008 3:34 PM Beretta has not yet responded
 Message 131 by nator, posted 01-16-2008 10:22 AM Beretta has responded

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 1055 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 126 of 204 (448845)
01-15-2008 1:00 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by Beretta
01-15-2008 12:53 PM


Re: And Should it be Taught in Our Schools?
Not really. apparently we are also related to bugs and bacteria and so many things

Yes, of course we are!

On a related topic, why not pop over to my new thread on human-chimp hybrids? I'd appreciate your input.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by Beretta, posted 01-15-2008 12:53 PM Beretta has not yet responded

  
Organicmachination
Member (Idle past 3121 days)
Posts: 105
From: Pullman, WA, USA
Joined: 12-30-2007


Message 127 of 204 (448882)
01-15-2008 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by Beretta
01-15-2008 12:53 PM


Re: And Should it be Taught in Our Schools?
Yes, it is really what the results show us. Scientists are not fitting the evidence to the conclusion, because that is not what science is all about. Science is about making a hypothesis, testing it and then revising it as necessary. Science has shown that all life forms, from us to the little sea slug, contain the same genes for development and maintenance, but it is the variable expression of these genes that accounts for the vast differences. What does our presumptive worldview have to do with it? Don't try to turn science into a philosophical argument. Philosophy has no place in the hard science that shows these things to be true. Read up on homeotic genes and epigenetics before trying to discredit these findings. In fact, read any college level biology textbook (like Campbell and Reece, Biology, 7th edition) and you will see the science behind these claims. They have nothing to do with anyone's worldview.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by Beretta, posted 01-15-2008 12:53 PM Beretta has not yet responded

    
nator
Member (Idle past 2054 days)
Posts: 12961
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 128 of 204 (449055)
01-16-2008 9:55 AM
Reply to: Message 122 by Beretta
01-15-2008 12:37 PM


Re: Branching Off
Should we "teach the controversy" regarding if the Holocaust happened?

quote:
Yes. teach that too -very important when the truth becomes distorted according to someone's agenda. History tends to repeat itself if we live in ignorance of what mankind is capable of or try to pretend that something didn't happen that did.

So, we should teach, in history class, that the Holocaust never happened, as if it is a valid interpretation of the historical data?

Seriously?

Also, I'd appreciate a reply to the questions I asked in Message #106

Edited by nator, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Beretta, posted 01-15-2008 12:37 PM Beretta has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by jar, posted 01-16-2008 9:59 AM nator has not yet responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 28838
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 129 of 204 (449057)
01-16-2008 9:59 AM
Reply to: Message 128 by nator
01-16-2008 9:55 AM


Re: Branching Off
So, we should teach, in history class, that the Holocaust never happened?

No, we should teach that some ignorant people believe that it did not happened just as some ignorant people believe in ID.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by nator, posted 01-16-2008 9:55 AM nator has not yet responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2054 days)
Posts: 12961
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 130 of 204 (449060)
01-16-2008 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 123 by Beretta
01-15-2008 12:43 PM


Re: And Should it be Taught in Our Schools?
ID in science classrooms threatens in the same way Holocaust denial in history classrooms threatens.

quote:
How so?
The holocaust is a well documented fact of history

...and yet, there is a small but passionate and vocal group of people who disagree with the mainstream academic interpretation of the evidence of the Holocaust and think that keeping their view of what happened out of history classrooms is unfair. They claim persecution and blackballing by the academic community, have their own conferences and journals, and are otherwise extremely similar to the Creationists in attitude and intent.

If we allow Creationists to put religious, nonscientific pseudoscience in the science curricula, why shouldn't we also allow any and all pseudoscholarly crackpot fringe ideas that people want to be taught in any subject?

quote:
and the enormous possibility that God played a massive part in human history is also worth knowing about.

What part did God play in which events? How do you know?

Look, public schools should teach mainstream scholarly history in history class, and mainstream scholarly science in science class, and mainstream scholarly grammar and composition in English class.

quote:
If it's rubbish then don't worry about it having an effect -

That's crap. Rubbish can and does often have an effect.

Why do you think that people believe that if they kill themselves in a suicide bombing, they will go directly to heaven and enjoy many virgins? Rubbish, to be sure, wouldn't you say?

quote:
if it's true then everyone needs to know that there is a controversy and that we didn't necessarily evolve from pond scum by pure accident.

There isn't a scientific controversy.

Again, yours is a unscientific view that is just as dangerous in science classrooms as the unsupported view that the Holocaust never happened is to the history classroom.

In other words, we shouldn't teach as science or history that which is not supported by the facts.

If you believe your view is scientifically supported by the facts of nature, then you need to present the scientific model that explains the facts of nature.

Until you do that, why should we include your unscientific view in a science classroom?

quote:
Compare and contrast instead of indoctrinating into one viewpoint and insisting that it is truth if there's a good chance that it is not.

So, are you saying that the idea that the Holocaust didn't really happen like the maintream historians all think it did should be presented as an equally valid viewpoint?

How about the idea that aliens built the pyramids?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Beretta, posted 01-15-2008 12:43 PM Beretta has not yet responded

    
nator
Member (Idle past 2054 days)
Posts: 12961
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 131 of 204 (449061)
01-16-2008 10:22 AM
Reply to: Message 125 by Beretta
01-15-2008 12:53 PM


Re: And Should it be Taught in Our Schools?
DNA tests show that humans are related to non-humans.

quote:
Not really.

Yes really.

quote:
apparently we are also related to bugs and bacteria and so many things -but is that really what the results show or is it a wishful interpretation based on a presumptive worldview. Was the 'evidence' forced to fit the initial belief system?

Do you believe that people can "interpret" DNA paternity tests to fit their preconceptions?

For example, how might someone do that with the following test?:



This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by Beretta, posted 01-15-2008 12:53 PM Beretta has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by Beretta, posted 01-17-2008 5:47 AM nator has responded

    
FliesOnly
Member (Idle past 1557 days)
Posts: 797
From: Michigan
Joined: 12-01-2003


Message 132 of 204 (449067)
01-16-2008 11:06 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Hyroglyphx
01-02-2008 5:07 PM


Re: And Should it be Taught in Our Schools?
Nemesis Juggernaut writes:

So here is the problem that I see: This systematic suppression of ID is nothing less than coercion. But if you think not, then I am curious to hear why it is you and so many others feel threatened by it. Why does ID threaten?

Because it encourages people to not ask questions. Why ask a difficult question that may very well require lots of hard work and serious investigation (hey, maybe even dedicating you life to searching for the answer) when you could simply say..."Eureka, God did it!!"?

We complain about how we, as a Country, are falling behind other developed Nations in the areas of math and science, and yet you want this crap to be taught in our schools. What would we teach? That rather than following the scientific method in our search for answers, let's instead just stop when the questions become too difficult (or might cause a bit of a hiccup in our religious beliefs), and proclaim the answer to be "God"? Thank you...but no.

ID brings nothing to the table, and is a waste of valubale time.

Edited by FliesOnly, : To fix a poor sentence.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Hyroglyphx, posted 01-02-2008 5:07 PM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by Beretta, posted 01-17-2008 5:42 AM FliesOnly has responded

  
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2301
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007


Message 133 of 204 (449129)
01-16-2008 7:01 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by Beretta
01-15-2008 12:43 PM


Re: And Should it be Taught in Our Schools?
Beretta writes:

The holocaust is a well documented fact of history and the enormous possibility that God played a massive part in human history is also worth knowing about.

Yes, the holocaust should be taught in history class, and the belief that god has influenced world history could be taught in comparative religion classes. Religion should not be allowed to creep into science classes.

Beretta writes:

If it's rubbish then don't worry about it having an effect -if it's true then everyone needs to know that there is a controversy

IF it's true then yes. So by your own argument, we would have to know that something is true before teaching it. ID has not provided evidence of its truth, so it stays off the curriculum. There is no controversy.

Beretta writes:

we didn't necessarily evolve from pond scum by pure accident

Do you never tire of repeating the same ridiculous straw-man version of evolution?

Beretta writes:

Compare and contrast instead of indoctrinating into one viewpoint and insisting that it is truth if there's a good chance that it is not.

Again, "IF there is a good chance it's not". There is no evidence that ID has a good chance of being true. In fact, the opposite is the case.


Mutate and Survive
This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Beretta, posted 01-15-2008 12:43 PM Beretta has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by Beretta, posted 01-17-2008 5:31 AM Granny Magda has responded

    
Beretta
Member (Idle past 3009 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 134 of 204 (449203)
01-17-2008 5:31 AM
Reply to: Message 133 by Granny Magda
01-16-2008 7:01 PM


Re: And Should it be Taught in Our Schools?
Hello Granny

the belief that god has influenced world history could be taught in comparative religion classes. Religion should not be allowed to creep into science classes.

Well this is the problem you see. We don't want the religious stuff in science class either. We want the science in science class.All the stuff about different religions and what they believe can stay in religious class -you're absolutely right there.

What we want is for teachers to present the evidence that is provable for evolution- the natural selection and variability part and then to explain that anything more than that is an historical concept and that certain assumptions are made according to one's worldview of what has happened in the past.

Class should go something like this:

Evolutionists believe that everything can and must be explained in purely material terms (no God or creative intelligence of any kind allowed)...and then go on to explain uniformatarian assumptions, macroevolutionary assumptions used in analysing fossils and on and on to the question of origins explained from a purely materialistic viewpoint. What can or cannot be proven should be explained and what is absolutely proven should be explained as well as what the differences are.

From the ID perspective, what are the assumptions, worldviews, historical reasons for these assumptions. What do ID proponents believe in a scientific sense and why?Why don't they accept the 'material only' outlook and what is their take on the situation.

Then it should be clearly explained that scientific advances based on empirical science (not historical concepts and worldviews like evolution and creation) are what are responsible for technological advances like sending men to the moon, computers, cellphones etc.

All of this will help kids to think critically about how assumptions are used and where they derive from in the first place. This way they can separate pure science from philisophical belief systems instead of having one belief system systematically jammed down their unsuspecting throats as 'science' while the other very real scientific possibility gets relegated to the 'religion' or 'fairytale' section of their education.

Since neither historical worldview can be categorically proven (how can you repeat history except perhaps with a time machine)- kids can decide for themselves which sounds more feasible with the whole picture presented to them and those that don't like the idea of there being a God can opt for the material and those that know God can continue to believe in the light of supporting scientific evidence. Where's the threat? Technology continues to advance using empirical science and the question of origins gets relegated to its correct place.People get to think critically again and we can all be happy.

So by your own argument, we would have to know that something is true before teaching it.

Yes which is why we shouldn't be teaching any more than micro -evolution (natural selection and variability) as fact.

Beretta writes:
we didn't necessarily evolve from pond scum by pure accident

Do you never tire of repeating the same ridiculous straw-man version of evolution?

What is your simplified version? Did we come from the minerals in the rocks, or did we come from chemicals (washed out of the rocks) in the primordial soup -(a more dignified method of describing the primordial pond scum that gave birth to our early ancestors)Is your great,greatgreatgreat++++ grandparent a rock or do you prefer to start at the single-celled organism as your earliest relative? This is not a straw man argument -it had to start somewhere and the stories presented pretty much as fact in our science classes boil down to exactly these sorts of scenarios.It doesn't sound quite so 'scientific' this way but lets call a rock a rock and make it simple and easily understood for the kids.

There is no evidence that ID has a good chance of being true. In fact, the opposite is the case.

Evidence, what evidence??? Keep your eyes shut tight and you will never see. You are a very loyal member of the Darwin Party that much is clear and loyalty is a great trait but the truth of what the argument is all about has got to leak through at some stage.There's a paradigm shift going on -your philosophy is old and tired. Wake up to reality -lots of people are and the truth of what real science is,is infinitely satisfying.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by Granny Magda, posted 01-16-2008 7:01 PM Granny Magda has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by Rrhain, posted 01-17-2008 6:00 AM Beretta has not yet responded
 Message 144 by PaulK, posted 01-17-2008 7:52 AM Beretta has not yet responded
 Message 147 by Percy, posted 01-17-2008 10:09 AM Beretta has not yet responded
 Message 157 by Granny Magda, posted 01-17-2008 7:56 PM Beretta has not yet responded

  
Beretta
Member (Idle past 3009 days)
Posts: 422
From: South Africa
Joined: 10-29-2007


Message 135 of 204 (449204)
01-17-2008 5:42 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by FliesOnly
01-16-2008 11:06 AM


Re: And Should it be Taught in Our Schools?
(ID).. encourages people to not ask questions

Not so, it encourages people to think critically and divide pure empirical science from materialist philosophies.

when you could simply say..."Eureka, God did it!!"?

or...eureka, evolution did it!!!

We complain about how we, as a Country, are falling behind other developed Nations in the areas of math and science

This is actually not true, technological advances continue in the absence of evolutionary assumptions. Only natural selection and variability have anything to do with science. Origins philosophies do not put men on the men. It only imagines where men came from in the first place -an unprovable historical concept.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by FliesOnly, posted 01-16-2008 11:06 AM FliesOnly has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by Rrhain, posted 01-17-2008 6:37 AM Beretta has not yet responded
 Message 145 by FliesOnly, posted 01-17-2008 8:07 AM Beretta has responded

  
Prev1
...
78
9
1011
...
14Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017