|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: ICR Sues Texas | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13046 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 2.7 |
Dawn Bertot writes: This in no way however is a slap in the face to the design argument, which of course supports itself If anywhere in this thread someone suggested that the denial of accreditation to ICR's master's program constituted a rejection of the design argument as described by you, then they were mistaken. Please do not mention your design arguments in this thread any more. They are off-topic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2325 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
Dawn Bertot's ideas are not the topic of this thread. Dawn should work on his topic proposal if he wants to discuss these ideas. Off-topic content hidden. --Admin
Dawn Bertot writes:
Yes, and pointing out that if ICR took your approach, they would be violating parsimony, and, therefore, not be practicing good science, which means they won;t be getting accreditation, seems to be on topic to me.
Careful now, we are trying to stay on topic. If ICR took this approach, they might meet with much greater success.
No they wouldn't, as I pointed out.
Ive debated it publically and would do so again and again, with anyone willing to step up to the plate. Its to easy to miss.
Let me see if I can get to the gist of your argument as I understand it from this thread: You say that order points to design. You also say that the same evidence that you say points to design, also point s to "evolution/the order being "self caused"". So far so good? So, basically, you are saying that the evidence we have now can be used to come to the conclusion of self caused or design. Well, if this is the case, we have to dismiss design as violating parsimony, as it adds unneccessary elements to the explanation. Therefore, were ICR to follow this path, they still wouldn't get accreditation. Edited by Admin, : Add hide.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Granny Magda Member Posts: 2462 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.1 |
Hi DB,
I agree that the introduction of the miraculous or a specific religion into church and state matters is probably not going to fly. They should not expect, nor should they be disappointed when they are rejected Agreed. In fact, I don't suppose that they ever expected to succeed.
To make it clear, I think ICR is on the right track, they simply need a little fine tuning. The tuning would simply be that they present creation from the standpoint of design exclusively. That won't work either. The Dover vs. Kitzmiller ruling makes it clear that, as far as US law is concerned, ID is simply another form of creationism. That means that the courts will deem an ID based course to be just as religious as an explicitly creationist one. You are free to disagree with that all you want (on another thread) but from a pragmatic point of view, emphasising design won't help ICR's case. Mutate and Survive "A curious aspect of the theory of evolution is that everybody thinks he understands it." - Jacques Monod
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6
|
The Dover vs. Kitzmiller ruling makes it clear that, as far as US law is concerned, ID is simply another form of creationism. To be fair, the ruling focused on the book "Of Pandas and People" which the science teachers were forced to reference during science class. ID as presented was found to be religious in nature, and did not pass the Lemon test. However, I don't think any of us would be surprised if the Dover case did weigh in to the decision made by the board when they denied ICR accreditation.
You are free to disagree with that all you want (on another thread) but from a pragmatic point of view, emphasising design won't help ICR's case. A pragmatic view is exactly what we should be using here. What type of career in the sciences will a graduate from the PhD program at ICR have? Will they be equipped to do cutting edge research in the biological sciences? I think the answer is no, and emphatically no. The goal of this PhD program was not producing scientists who go on to do scientific research. They wanted to produce preachers who were knowledgable of all the creationist, anti-evolution canards that we have seen for the last 50 years. That's it. They wanted to teach apologetics, not science.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
To make it clear, I think ICR is on the right track, they simply need a little fine tuning. The tuning would simply be that they present creation from the standpoint of design exclusively. I agree that the introduction of the miraculous or a specific religion into church and state matters is probably not going to fly. It is true that the more they pretend not to be creationists, the better they will be able to pretend that they're doing science. The trouble is that they are creationists. The whole point of the ICR is to serve as a creationist propaganda front. The only reason anyone would want to do their "science education" course in the first place is to learn how to make children into creationists.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13046 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 2.7 |
If I could clarify what I believe to be on topic...
Discussion of how ICR might modify their curriculum to improve their chances of gaining accreditation in Texas is on topic. Dawn's ideas that involves "rules of evidence" and that asserts that things are "ordered of themselves" and so forth are all off-topic. Dawn is working on a topic proposal to discuss these ideas.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 113 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
won't work either. The Dover vs. Kitzmiller ruling makes it clear that, as far as US law is concerned, ID is simply another form of creationism. That means that the courts will deem an ID based course to be just as religious as an explicitly creationist one. You are free to disagree with that all you want (on another thread) but from a pragmatic point of view, emphasising design won't help ICR's case. Just a quick note not to be off topic That is why the right type and form of debater is necessary in those situations. Most of the time it is individuals that cannot represent the case as it should be represented. Either the people presenting the case are simplistic and limited in thier abilities or the people recieving the information are to simplistic and do not understand what is being presented The right type of debater is necessary to help them. I am of that type and have did it many times In either case we have been instructed not to discuss it pass the points I have made above. ill try and take it to another thread and develope it with percy Hope to see you there Dawn Bertot Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given. Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
Maybe your next post can be some vuja de. It would really be nice to some something new.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 113 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
The trouble is that they are creationists. The whole point of the ICR is to serve as a creationist propaganda front. The only reason anyone would want to do their "science education" course in the first place is to learn how to make children into creationists. Another point one might explore is what are the particular fields and expertise of the people making these decisions, in the negative int he first place. Are they already predisposed to decision against ICR to begin with. Do we have a balanced and fair panel, dispersing judgements in the first place. I am am not saying they are not, but it would be interesting to see what thier fields and person views are to begin with Dawn Bertot
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Are they already predisposed to decision against ICR to begin with. Do we have a balanced and fair panel, dispersing judgements in the first place. Hopefully they are predisposed to decide against the utter dishonesty like what was presented by ICR. That is their job. ID and Creationism can never be science simply because they begin with a conclusion. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 113 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
Hopefully they are predisposed to decide against the utter dishonesty like what was presented by ICR. That is their job. ID and Creationism can never be science simply because they begin with a conclusion. So when you say "hopefully", that is a good indication that you have no idea about thier fields, perspectives and opinions concerning these matters. it would be interesting to see IF ANYONE COULD PRESENT IT. Design or creationism suffers no defeat, simply because these people choose otherwise Dawn Bertot
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
Another point one might explore is what are the particular fields and expertise of the people making these decisions, Are you asking about the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board? Have you heard of google?Home - THECB Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
So when you say "hopefully", that is a good indication that you have no idea about thier fields, perspectives and opinions concerning these matters. it would be interesting to see IF ANYONE COULD PRESENT IT. I only need to know what their duty is and their duty was to determine if the curriculum is adequate to justify accreditation.
Design or creationism suffers no defeat, simply because these people choose otherwise The issue was whether or not the program met the minimum standards for accreditation. The Committee did their job. Edited by jar, : fix subtitle Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 113 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
The Institute for Creation Research Brings a Flawed Lawsuit Against the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board Texas Citizens for Science Claims ICR Has No Valid Legal Justification for Its Litigation A Report and Analysis bySteven Schafersman, Ph.D. President, Texas Citizens for Science 2009 April 20 Updated: 2009 December 3 Updated: 2010 June 22 Updated: 2010 September 1 The Institute for Creation Research (ICR) filed a lawsuit against the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB) on Tuesday, 2009 April 16. The lawsuit names as defendants the eight members of the THECB in both their official and individual capacities, thus making it expensive for each member. No doubt all will be represented by the same team of attorneys, but each will have to consider their individual financial liability, which will be unappealing and discouraging to them. This will intimidate them to settle with terms favorable to ICR. ICR could have just sued the THECB as an institution, but that would not be mean-spirited and intimidating enough for the litigious ICR. In addition, probably all of the appointed THECB members are social and religious conservatives appointed by Governor Rick Perry who presumably would want ICR to have its Masters Degree in Science Education, and would certainly have voted in favor of ICR if Dr. Paredes had originally recommended that. The THECB members correctly decided, however, that they must support Commissioner Paredes' recommendation, which he reached after carefully evaluating ICR's application using a team of professional scientists and science education professors who had the actual expertise to perform the evaluation. (The first evaluation team had no one on it who was competent to professionally evaluate ICR.) Theo writesAre you asking about the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board? Yep, I read the whole thing and as I suspected simplicity of mind, beyond belief, on both sides. Nothing of the actual truth was presented in any of this on either side THEN AMAZINGLY, in a real OBJECTIVE move, the BOARDs, (which I examined each members credentials) actual decisions and decision making processes and functions are disregarded and they go straight to a team of "PROFESSIONAL SCIENTIST". Hmmmmmm? No examination of the real evidence or objectivity by the so-called "professional scientists", They simply hijacked the boards decisions and became the board themselves Hmmmmmm? Quote"The THECB members correctly decided, however, that they must support Commissioner Paredes' recommendation, which he reached after carefully evaluating ICR's application using a team of professional scientists and science education professors who had the actual expertise to perform the evaluation. (The first evaluation team had no one on it who was competent to professionally evaluate ICR.) Unfortunate. Professional scientist and not professional thinkers I wonder what the first evaluation team IS PROFESSIONALLY COMPOTENT TO EVLAUATE? IF THEY COULDNT DO THAT, CAN THEY DO ANYTHING ELSE COMPOTENTLY? It would only take me 20 minutes to convince the THECB otherwise Dawn Bertot Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dwise1 Member Posts: 5952 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7 |
It would only take me 20 minutes to convince the THECB otherwise With all due respect (which I normally state is not intended in the Woody Allen sense, but in your case I will make an exception), I have seen your BS posted here. Repeatedly. There was an expression in college: "If you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, then baffle them with your bullshit." Dawn, all I have ever seen you post here has been pure bullshit. Do you want to present a case for the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board? Do so! Right here and now!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024