Michelle Malkin wrote:
"Ron O" <pokemoto@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1111329058.061571.171510@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Jason Spaceman wrote:
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 00:59:28 -0500, "Geoff"
<gebobs@yahoo.nospam.com>
wrote:
"Jason Spaceman" <notreally@jspaceman.homelinux.org> wrote in
message
news:mnuk315psothgb0stikemi49b7u4jum2ht@4ax.com...
It looks as though Arkansas HB2607 (that ID bill introduced a
couple
of weeks ago) is dead. The news article below got the number
of
the
bill wrong, it is HB2607, not HB2608 as the article states.
Unfortunately, there's nothing to prevent a similar bill from
being
introduced next week.
True, it looks as though HB2607 died because of a screw up by a
rookie
legislator. He could always reintroduce it and send it to the
proper
committee next time around.
J. Spaceman
Actually the Wedgies are squirming in their seats and don't know
what
to do about getting the ignorant rubes that fell for the ID
propaganda
to back off. If any of this type of legislation passes, ID is
sunk.
Just look at the lengths that the Discovery Institute has gone to,
to
get the guys in Dover and Wisconsin to back off teaching "the
scientific theory of ID." The reason is that the only guys that
still
advocate teaching ID in the science class are ignorant, incompetent
and
or dishonest. There is no scientific theory of ID. Even the Dover
rubes that refused to back off totally had to drop the "scientific"
claim in the blurp that they had read to students. Guys like
Santorum
and the other Wedgies and the legal muscle trying to defend Dover
are
just calling ID a "concept." They don't even claim that it is a
scientific concept. They know better.
The guy responsible for this bill was just ignorant or incompetent.
I
doubt that he was dishonest about his beliefs. He just hasn't got
a
clue as to just what a scam ID is.
Two years ago the AAAS made these simple statements. The only
thing
that the Wedgies have come up with to counter them is that the
governing board relied on experts for the evaluation and some of
the
members didn't have personal experience with the ID literature. In
science you can't know everything and ID isn't worth knowing about,
so
that isn't such a big deal. It would be a big deal if the
scientists
that they relied on for the evaluation were wrong. The problem for
the
Wedgies is that the statements stand, and they can't counter them
with
legitimate arguments.
Quote AAAS text:
Recognizing that the "intelligent design theory" represents a
challenge
to the quality of science education, the Board of Directors of the
AAAS
unanimously adopts the following resolution:
Whereas, ID proponents claim that contemporary evolutionary theory
is
incapable of explaining the origin of the diversity of living
organisms;
Whereas, to date, the ID movement has failed to offer credible
scientific evidence to support their claim that ID undermines the
current scientifically accepted theory of evolution;
Whereas, the ID movement has not proposed a scientific means of
testing
its claims;
Therefore Be It Resolved, that the lack of scientific warrant for
so-called "intelligent design theory" makes it improper to include
as a
part of science education;
End Quote:
Until ID can be brought up to the standards of science it will not
be
science. The IDiots know this, so they are backing off as fast as
they
can. They even dropped ID for the "teach the controversy" scam,
but
even the rubes like this representative know that if you don't have
an
alternative it is just a scam to claim that there is a controversy.
So I say let them get one of these "teach ID bills" passed
somewhere.
Who are they going to get to defend ID when the guys that
perpetrated
the ID scam aren't willing to defend it? Did you see any Discovery
Institute fellows supporting ID in Dover? What we heard was that
they
do not support teaching ID at this time and that the guys in Dover
were
confused. Will ignorant rubes like this rep that don't even know
what
ID is, be the ones to defend ID? Newspaper accounts claimed that a
lawyer associated with the Discovery Institute was instumental in
getting the Grantville board to back off teaching ID. Did the
scientific theory of ID get taught in Ohio two years ago? Does any
of
this sound like the Wedgies want legislation passed advocating the
teaching of the nonexistent scientific theory of ID?
The Wedgies are suffering the fortune cookie curse of "your wish
will
be granted." Anyone that reads the Wedge document knows that
advocates
for ID was what the Wedgies were aiming for on school boards and
legislative bodies, but that was before 1998. They don't advocate
teaching ID anymore, but they are stuck with the old ID propaganda
and
haven't been able to get the rubes that fell for the ID scam to
catch
up and get in line with the new scam.
Ron Okimoto
They've failed with 'creation science'. They're failing with
'Intelligent
Design'. What new name will they come up with for the same old song?
Whatever it is, it's not science, never has been and never will be.
--
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
Michelle Malkin (Mickey) aa list#1
alt.atheism atheist/agnostic list name collector
BAAWA Knight & EAC Bible thumper thumper
http://questioner.www2.50megs.com
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
W
The new scam is called "teach the controversy." If you read the Ohio
model lesson plan you will find out that this is just an obfuscation
scam. It is the only thing that they have left. They have removed all
mention of ID from the new scam, and they are pretending that they
never meant to teach ID in the classroom. Since the failure of
scientific creationism the progression has been to first remove all
mention of God from the junk that they advocate and try and sound more
scientific. ID was the result. Since around 2000 the Wedgies figured
out that ID was a failure too, so they changed scams again and deleted
all mention of ID from the new scam. The new scam turns out to be the
old creationist obfuscation scam. If you don't have an alternative and
you can't defend your beliefs in public just try and throw as much dirt
on the opposition as you can. If they had something positive to
contribute they have never been able to put it forward. All they have
left are the negative arguments that don't sway anyone with a brain.
The real damning thing about the new scam isn't that creationism isn't
part of the controversy, but that the same scam artists that
perpetrated the ID scam are behind the new scam. They found that they
couldn't teach the Bible with a straight face, so they deleted all
biblical references and tried to teach about some generic designer.
When that failed they deleted everything about ID and tried a stupid
obfuscation scam that even their supporters do not understand. Just
look at the author of this bill and Kansas. These guys haven't got a
clue that ID isn't part of the controversy. There is nothing left to
delete, but the promises that something about creationism will be
taught somewhere somehow. In Ohio they tried to sneak creationism in
via web links, but those had to be deleted from the final lesson plan.
A wink and a nod as acknowledgement of the creationist agenda is all
they have left to provide for their creationist supporters.
My guess is that once the teach the controversy scam fails we will go
full circle and the Bible will be openly pushed as a viable alternative
again. The new push will be a direct attack on the separation clause
and will try and overturn past rulings. It will show that all of this
current junk was just a scam, but it will be a more honest approach.
Like it or not that is the way that things are supposed to work in this
country. My bet is that that is about the only option that they will
have left. They can't get more dishonest than they are, I hope.
Ron Okimoto
.
