|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: TOE and the Reasons for Doubt | |||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10385 Joined: Member Rating: 5.8 |
What the ID argument says is that you don't know. We do know that homologs of flagellar proteins do you have selectable function which falsifies the claim that there are no selectable steps in the construction of the flagella. So what is the ID step by step explanation for the construction of the flagella? If there is no detailed ID explanation then it had to evolve somehow, just by default, right? Isn't this exactly how the ID argument works?
You make up that there could have been other uses for all the thousands of parts that are involved in every one of the millions upon millions of systems and bodily functions on earth. We don't have to make it up. It is a fact. Homologs of the flagellar proteins are found in the type III secretory system.
If your side was truly an honest scientific endeavor, it would INSIST that everyone of the weaknesses of your argument be taught in every school in the country. Why schools where the audience is largely ignorant of the science behind it? Why not do some research and present it at scientific conferences or submit the research to peer reviewed journals? You know, do some actual science instead of making flawed arguments to school boards?
|
|||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10385 Joined: Member Rating: 5.8 |
So what are you saying, that the strengths and weaknesses of the theory shouldn't be taught because you feel it is a strategy? That scientists have not found an evolutionary pathway for every feature in every species is not a weakness of the theory. It is a lack of knowledge. That is why we need to train new scientists, to figure these things out. The problem here is that IDers are not interested in figuring out these mysteries. They want to stop research into these areas before the answer is found. That is the whole reason for trying to do away with teaching evolution in schools. ID is the cockroach that scurries away when the light of knowedge hits the room.
|
|||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16113 Joined: |
The ID movement if you want to cal it that, makes some pretty simple demands. Allow the discussion of all aspects of the ToE in schools, including the strengths and weaknesses of the theory. However, what creationist liars mean by "weaknesses" is halfwitted lies that they've made up. The "weaknesses" are the same worthless anti-scientific propaganda that they've failed to smuggle into school under the rubrics of "creation science" and "intelligent design", and putting a new label on this doesn't make it any less shit. Anyone finding a real weakness in the theory should publish. Indoctrinating schoolchildren with pathetic lies might serve creationists' political agenda, but is no substitute for actual science.
They are AGAINST teaching both the strengths AND weaknesses of the theory-even though polls show that 3/4 of all Americans are for this. I'd be for teaching any real weaknesses.
So if any side can be said to be stifling science ... Bullshit is not science. I'm happy to "stifle" bullshit, if by "stifle" you mean "not make compulsory in public schools".
... it appears to be yours, because of your own fear of open discussion. Interesting lie. What we are actually afraid of is a situation where science teachers are forced to tell what they know to be lies to students who deserve better. We're all in favor of open discussion. Indeed, I believe we're currently having one. To compel science teachers to lie to children is not, however, "open discussion".
|
|||||||||||||
Blue Jay Member (Idle past 3020 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: |
Hi, Dash.
Bolder-dash writes: So what are you saying, that the strengths and weaknesses of the theory shouldn't be taught because you feel it is a strategy? So children should not be taught accurately because your side wants to win a strategy war? The "weaknesses" that creationists want taught are not actually weaknesses of the ToE, but are the exact same talking points that creationists have wanted to pass into science curricula for a very long time. It's at least a bit more honest of creationists though, because they're no longer presented these talking points as their own counter-theory, but only as arguments (complaints, really) against ToE. But, they're still the same inaccurate and meritless talking points that they've always been. Basically, the education of children is far more accurate now than it would be if this creationist strategy were to be implemented. -Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
|
|||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 162 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Bolder-dash writes: So what are you saying, that the strengths and weaknesses of the theory shouldn't be taught because you feel it is a strategy? So children should not be taught accurately because your side wants to win a strategy war? That is about the level of intellectual honesty your side has fallen to. Here is the big problem. Even if the Theory of Evolution was falsified it adds NO weight, validity or support for the nonsense called Intelligent Design, Creationism or Special Creation. If you want help in understanding what you need to do for Intelligent Design, Special Creation or Creationism to be taken at all seriously, I started a thread years ago with the steps you need to take. We always try to help the Creationists and ID supporters by trying to teach them what they need to do.
quote: From this thread Edited by jar, : fix sub-title Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025