|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: ID and the bias inherent in human nature | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
christian atheist Inactive Member |
Don't you think what's hindering the ID movement is it's too political? If it's not ready to be presented yet, then why try to force it into schools? This requires a lot of money and time that could be better spent in research.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Clark Inactive Member |
Limbo writes: I would argue that the biases in the scientific community and in the media are retarding the development of the ID theory. I would argue Christians have had the money, education, and inclination for at least 140 years (if not a lot longer) to come up with a viable theory. Currently they're not even close to having one.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Limbo Inactive Member |
quote: Who said it wasn't ready to be presented? Just because it isn't fully developed doesn't mean it isn't ready to be presented. It's like a newborn baby. See it for what it is, not for what you expect it to be. People expect too much from it too soon. And who is talking about schools? "It takes two to tango", and it takes two to make something political. In this case...one to force it out of school and one to force it in.
quote: Harsh man, harsh. This kind of angry, intolerant, dismissive attitude is exactly what I'm talking about. All you need is a few influential people in the scientific community and in the media to think that way and presto! You have a chain reaction that leads to the current situation. I mean, c'mon Clark. Jeesh. "Not even close". Really? This message has been edited by Limbo, 04-28-2005 08:44 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
I think that our views of what ID is are very different.
But I'm not expecting too much of ID, too soon. It's people in the ID movement who have been trying to force the pace. Nor is it true that it takes two to raise a political issue. The ID movement is using political means to try to influence the science curriculum - against the current mainstream scientific consensus. I can't think of any genuine scientific movement that has done that. Evolution changed the scientific consensus and only got into schools on the back of that achievement. Why can't ID do the same ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wounded King Member Posts: 4149 From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA Joined: |
"Not even close". Really? Yes, really. If there is one then perhaps you could direct us all as to where to find it. Where is the ID equivalent of Darwin's 'On the Origin of Species'? Is it Behe's 'Darwin's black box'? Is it Dembski's 'No Free Lunch'? Where is the clearly articulated central basis for a science of ID. The Panda's Thumb cogently asks what happened to the coherent theory Dembski predicted would be forthcoming from Mike Gene when he received tenure. TTFN, WK
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Limbo Inactive Member |
ID is very compatable with MUCH of standard evolution theory. Evolution says that species change in response to environmental and genetic factors over the course of many generations. That is not incompatable at all with ID.
The vast majority of people don't really understand TOE, and even fewer understand ID. Unless you go to the source, and read what the ID people themselves say, you are getting an incomplete picture. If all you know of ID comes from places like The Panda's Thumb, then you are biased without even realizing it. This message has been edited by Limbo, 04-28-2005 09:23 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: That's a misleading statement. ID represents a whole range of positions. Including positions which are incompatible with a lot of evolutionary theory - and other branches of science. Young Earth Creationism is recognised as being a legitimate ID position. The only dispute between the ID movement and YEC organisations is that the YEC organisations - unsurprisingly - continue their exclusive commitment to promoting their own views, rather than choosing to subordinate themselves to the more inclusive ID "Big Tent" strategy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wounded King Member Posts: 4149 From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA Joined: |
Was that supposed to address my post number 20? If so it failed miserably.
TTFN, WK
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Limbo Inactive Member |
It was not. Much of what people say is not worthy of a responce. Sorry.
If any of you are brave enough to risk gaining a real understanding of ID, watch this presentation: Conservative news, politics, opinion, breaking news analysis, political cartoons and commentary - Townhall This message has been edited by Limbo, 04-28-2005 09:36 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 196 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
It was not. Much of what people say is not worthy of a responce. Sorry. Declaring victory and running didn't work in Vietnam, and it doesn't work here.
If any of you are brave enough to risk gaining a real understanding of ID, watch this presentation: We don't argue by link around here. If you think there's something worth saying, say it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wounded King Member Posts: 4149 From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA Joined: |
So its not worth producing evidence to back up pretty much the most important claim in your argument? If ID does have a viable coherent theory then it would have much more weight and be given due consideration, . What an interesting approach to debate you do have.
TTFN, WK P.S. Is a streaming audio hosted on a conservative political website really the best forum to present groundbreaking theoretical scientific research?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dsv Member (Idle past 4752 days) Posts: 220 From: Secret Underground Hideout Joined: |
Limbo writes: If all you know of ID comes from places like The Panda's Thumb, then you are biased without even realizing it. I have read a lot of ID material. Tell me, who must I read in order to have the clear understanding of ID that you seem to possess? WK mentioned Behe and Dembski, are you saying even they are biased to what you would call "orthodox scientific method"? Where is this enlightening ID literature that we are missing?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 196 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
P.S. Is a streaming audio hosted on a conservative political website really the best forum to present groundbreaking theoretical scientific research? And really low quality streaming audio at that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CK Member (Idle past 4156 days) Posts: 3221 Joined: |
Well, generally science isn't done by streaming audio.....
Can you point us towards a paper or two that you feel best sums up the ID position? This message has been edited by General Krull, 28-Apr-2005 10:16 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Limbo Inactive Member |
quote: quote: quote: examples of bias causing dismisal of ID a priori. Humans never cease to amaze me. If Galileo were alive today, would be proud of the way the scientific community deals with opposing ideas? Do you think he would see the mindset of his ancient antagonists in all your posts? AND ITS A VIDEO PEOPLE. CLICK IT. This message has been edited by Limbo, 04-28-2005 10:24 AM This message has been edited by Limbo, 04-28-2005 10:24 AM
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024