| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"maff" |
| Date: |
11 Aug 2005 04:36:05 AM |
| Object: |
Don't insult our intelligence |
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
President Bush has let it be known that he thinks "intelligent design"
should be taught in schools, along with and as a balance to, the theory
of evolution. Evidence of intelligent design would imply an intelligent
designer, or God, as we Catholics call him.
But this intelligent designer must then have designed not just the
sublime patterns and polymer fabric of a spider's web, the musical
genius of a Palestrina or the star pattern of the Pleiades, but also
halitosis, haemorrhoids and spina bifida. These things were once
routinely accepted as the will of God. But once the revolution begun by
Darwin had advanced a bit, most Christians found it morally easier and
far more comfortable to leave God's will out of it, and ascribe the
fine detail of life's glories and discomforts to the accidents of
evolution by random mutation and natural selection. That way you didn't
have to blame the Almighty directly for ingrowing toenails, a prolapsed
***** or infection by Chagas disease. Such things became simply the
downside of life's glorious upside.
Life
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/
Tim Radford
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/248e6d29ebbf3e6a
http://snipurl.com/dho4
http://snipurl.com/dho1
.
|
|
| User: "Alfred A. Aburto Jr." |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
11 Aug 2005 09:29:52 AM |
|
|
maff wrote:
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
President Bush has let it be known that he thinks "intelligent design"
should be taught in schools, along with and as a balance to, the theory
of evolution. Evidence of intelligent design would imply an intelligent
designer, or God, as we Catholics call him.
But this intelligent designer must then have designed not just the
sublime patterns and polymer fabric of a spider's web, the musical
genius of a Palestrina or the star pattern of the Pleiades, but also
halitosis, haemorrhoids and spina bifida. These things were once
routinely accepted as the will of God. But once the revolution begun by
Darwin had advanced a bit, most Christians found it morally easier and
far more comfortable to leave God's will out of it, and ascribe the
fine detail of life's glories and discomforts to the accidents of
evolution by random mutation and natural selection. That way you didn't
have to blame the Almighty directly for ingrowing toenails, a prolapsed
***** or infection by Chagas disease. Such things became simply the
downside of life's glorious upside.
But one could always blame the devil, or some other evil entity, for
life's ills of course ...
ID is just based on a belief that there is intelligence behind it all.
But there is no "proof" of this. No substance behind this claim. It is
just a thought. ID is not a science. The people behind ID are trying to
fool the public into believing it is a science equivalent to biology or
to the concept of evolution. This is crazy ... yet ID is the "talk of
the town" ...
Life
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/
Tim Radford
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/248e6d29ebbf3e6a
http://snipurl.com/dho4
http://snipurl.com/dho1
.
|
|
|
| User: "Katt" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
11 Aug 2005 12:02:01 PM |
|
|
"Alfred A. Aburto Jr." <aburto@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:AhJKe.1701
ID is just based on a belief that there is intelligence behind it all.
But there is no "proof" of this. No substance behind this claim. It is
just a thought. ID is not a science. The people behind ID are trying to
fool the public into believing it is a science equivalent to biology or
to the concept of evolution. This is crazy ... yet ID is the "talk of
the town" ...
Indeed it *is* crazy. And not only is ID 'not a science' -- it's also
destructively *anti-science*, by virtue of the fact that it imposes entirely
arbitrary 'end points' on perfectly reasonable lines of scientific enquiry:
--------
Scientist A: Just look at the fantastic structure of this biological
metalloprotein! Amazing to see so many factors so finely tuned to allow
those steric conformational changes of the protein complex!
Scientist B: Wonderful, yes! It's a beautiful thing! Of course, you know
that it's 'irreducibly complex', don't you?
Scientist A: Really? How do you know?
Scientist B: Because Michael Behe says so! He's looked at it too, and he
says that something so complex and elegant just *has* to have had a
designer!
Scientist A: Golly. So it didn't just, umm, *evolve*, then? You know, by an
enormously extended non-teleological process featuring random mutation and
non-random cumulative selection....?
Scientist B: Certainly not! It's just *too complicated* for that. As Behe
says: 'What possible use would half a biomacromolecule be....?'
Scientist A: Well actually, I was gonna spend a bit of time tracing how this
one might have arisen from versions of other, simpler kinds of
oxygen-binding proteins still found in primitive marine invertebrates. It's
just a hypothesis, of course, but I think...
Scientist B: No way! That sort of stuff is just *a waste of time and money*!
I'm not having you frittering away our lab resources in the search for a
wholly naturalistic explanation when we already have a perfectly good
supernaturalistic one!
Scientist A: Well, what are we gonna do, then?
Scientist B: I suppose we could, uh, 'give thanks' for a bit? And then maybe
go and have a coffee somewhere...
Scientist A: Yes, but I'm thinking of *afterwards*? I mean, my entire
training is in ways of finding 'wholly naturalistic explanations' for
things. It's my job: it's *what I do*...!
Scientist B: Well, you do also play the piano a little, don't you...?
--------
Katt.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rick Merrill" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
13 Aug 2005 12:58:39 PM |
|
|
Katt wrote:
"Alfred A. Aburto Jr." <aburto@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:AhJKe.1701
ID is just based on a belief that there is intelligence behind it all.
But there is no "proof" of this. No substance behind this claim. It is
just a thought. ID is not a science. The people behind ID are trying to
fool the public into believing it is a science equivalent to biology or
to the concept of evolution. This is crazy ... yet ID is the "talk of
the town" ...
Indeed it *is* crazy. And not only is ID 'not a science' -- it's also
destructively *anti-science*, by virtue of the fact that it imposes entirely
arbitrary 'end points' on perfectly reasonable lines of scientific enquiry:
--------
Scientist A: Just look at the fantastic structure of this biological
metalloprotein! Amazing to see so many factors so finely tuned to allow
those steric conformational changes of the protein complex!
Scientist B: Wonderful, yes! It's a beautiful thing! Of course, you know
that it's 'irreducibly complex', don't you?
Scientist A: Really? How do you know?
Scientist B: Because Michael Behe says so! He's looked at it too, and he
says that something so complex and elegant just *has* to have had a
designer!
Scientist A: Golly. So it didn't just, umm, *evolve*, then? You know, by an
enormously extended non-teleological process featuring random mutation and
non-random cumulative selection....?
Scientist B: Certainly not! It's just *too complicated* for that. As Behe
says: 'What possible use would half a biomacromolecule be....?'
Scientist A: Well actually, I was gonna spend a bit of time tracing how this
one might have arisen from versions of other, simpler kinds of
oxygen-binding proteins still found in primitive marine invertebrates. It's
just a hypothesis, of course, but I think...
Scientist B: No way! That sort of stuff is just *a waste of time and money*!
I'm not having you frittering away our lab resources in the search for a
wholly naturalistic explanation when we already have a perfectly good
supernaturalistic one!
Scientist A: Well, what are we gonna do, then?
Scientist B: I suppose we could, uh, 'give thanks' for a bit? And then maybe
go and have a coffee somewhere...
Scientist A: Yes, but I'm thinking of *afterwards*? I mean, my entire
training is in ways of finding 'wholly naturalistic explanations' for
things. It's my job: it's *what I do*...!
Scientist B: Well, you do also play the piano a little, don't you...?
--------
Until that last line I couldn't see how you were going to work s_x into
this.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "scooter" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
11 Aug 2005 12:34:16 PM |
|
|
maff wrote:
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
President Bush has let it be known that he thinks "intelligent design"
should be taught in schools, along with and as a balance to, the theory
of evolution. Evidence of intelligent design would imply an intelligent
designer, or God, as we Catholics call him.
But this intelligent designer must then have designed not just the
sublime patterns and polymer fabric of a spider's web, the musical
genius of a Palestrina or the star pattern of the Pleiades, but also
halitosis, haemorrhoids and spina bifida. These things were once
routinely accepted as the will of God. But once the revolution begun by
Darwin had advanced a bit, most Christians found it morally easier and
far more comfortable to leave God's will out of it, and ascribe the
fine detail of life's glories and discomforts to the accidents of
evolution by random mutation and natural selection. That way you didn't
have to blame the Almighty directly for ingrowing toenails, a prolapsed
***** or infection by Chagas disease. Such things became simply the
downside of life's glorious upside.
Life
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/
Tim Radford
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/248e6d29ebbf3e6a
http://snipurl.com/dho4
http://snipurl.com/dho1
Hmmm, yes. This is sort of a reflection of how folks dealt with such
issues in the past. At times, looking to history can help us understand
social phenomena today. I'm not sure that is the case here. Ask
yourself: What would Ray Martinez say?. Although he is part of a fringe
group that may include himself and his beliefs, sometimes looking to
the fringes can shed light on what we are studying. For Ray, it is
probably punishment from god. Is that true of the other IDers? I
dunno--probably some.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
11 Aug 2005 01:25:30 PM |
|
|
scooter wrote:
maff wrote:
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
President Bush has let it be known that he thinks "intelligent design"
should be taught in schools, along with and as a balance to, the theory
of evolution. Evidence of intelligent design would imply an intelligent
designer, or God, as we Catholics call him.
But this intelligent designer must then have designed not just the
sublime patterns and polymer fabric of a spider's web, the musical
genius of a Palestrina or the star pattern of the Pleiades, but also
halitosis, haemorrhoids and spina bifida. These things were once
routinely accepted as the will of God. But once the revolution begun by
Darwin had advanced a bit, most Christians found it morally easier and
far more comfortable to leave God's will out of it, and ascribe the
fine detail of life's glories and discomforts to the accidents of
evolution by random mutation and natural selection. That way you didn't
have to blame the Almighty directly for ingrowing toenails, a prolapsed
***** or infection by Chagas disease. Such things became simply the
downside of life's glorious upside.
Life
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/
Tim Radford
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/248e6d29ebbf3e6a
http://snipurl.com/dho4
http://snipurl.com/dho1
Hmmm, yes. This is sort of a reflection of how folks dealt with such
issues in the past. At times, looking to history can help us understand
social phenomena today. I'm not sure that is the case here. Ask
yourself: What would Ray Martinez say?. Although he is part of a fringe
group that may include himself and his beliefs, sometimes looking to
the fringes can shed light on what we are studying. For Ray, it is
probably punishment from god. Is that true of the other IDers? I
dunno--probably some.
I may be wrong on this but a quick browse of the book on "Intelligent
Design" did not seem to go as far as insisting the creator or designer
was God.
If the premise that evolution did not occur but that living organisms
as now exist were designed it brings in the question of who did the
design.
Suggest GOD as the designer and you are right back to religeous debate.
Suggest KWathK the Thrugle passing buy earth in his Faster than light
drive, or maybe just sailing by on a light sail, stopped for a picnic
and created everything to pass a little time - and you had better
prepare to run and hide.
I wopuld like to see more fundamentalism in schools. It would save an
enormous amount of money on teaching. You would just need to teach the
kids one answer to any question of WHY.
The answer - because God wills it so. No further discussion required.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rick Merrill" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
13 Aug 2005 01:00:01 PM |
|
|
wrote:
scooter wrote:
maff wrote:
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
President Bush has let it be known that he thinks "intelligent design"
should be taught in schools, along with and as a balance to, the theory
of evolution. Evidence of intelligent design would imply an intelligent
designer, or God, as we Catholics call him.
But this intelligent designer must then have designed not just the
sublime patterns and polymer fabric of a spider's web, the musical
genius of a Palestrina or the star pattern of the Pleiades, but also
halitosis, haemorrhoids and spina bifida. These things were once
routinely accepted as the will of God. But once the revolution begun by
Darwin had advanced a bit, most Christians found it morally easier and
far more comfortable to leave God's will out of it, and ascribe the
fine detail of life's glories and discomforts to the accidents of
evolution by random mutation and natural selection. That way you didn't
have to blame the Almighty directly for ingrowing toenails, a prolapsed
***** or infection by Chagas disease. Such things became simply the
downside of life's glorious upside.
Life
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/
Tim Radford
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/248e6d29ebbf3e6a
http://snipurl.com/dho4
http://snipurl.com/dho1
Hmmm, yes. This is sort of a reflection of how folks dealt with such
issues in the past. At times, looking to history can help us understand
social phenomena today. I'm not sure that is the case here. Ask
yourself: What would Ray Martinez say?. Although he is part of a fringe
group that may include himself and his beliefs, sometimes looking to
the fringes can shed light on what we are studying. For Ray, it is
probably punishment from god. Is that true of the other IDers? I
dunno--probably some.
I may be wrong on this but a quick browse of the book on "Intelligent
Design" did not seem to go as far as insisting the creator or designer
was God.
If the premise that evolution did not occur but that living organisms
as now exist were designed it brings in the question of who did the
design.
Suggest GOD as the designer and you are right back to religeous debate.
Suggest KWathK the Thrugle passing buy earth in his Faster than light
drive, or maybe just sailing by on a light sail, stopped for a picnic
and created everything to pass a little time - and you had better
prepare to run and hide.
I wopuld like to see more fundamentalism in schools. It would save an
enormous amount of money on teaching. You would just need to teach the
kids one answer to any question of WHY.
The answer - because God wills it so. No further discussion required.
By Jove, that WOULD be a cost saver!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
11 Aug 2005 02:37:08 PM |
|
|
maff wrote:
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
What is shocking about the intelligent design
argument is that it isn't true and can hardly be honest. It looks, from a
distance, like a cynical attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical
teaching into the American school curriculum, against the intention of
America's own founding fathers and the US constitution.
This sort of crass ignorance is par for the course in any Guardian
article that deals with the US.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
11 Aug 2005 02:45:21 PM |
|
|
On 11 Aug 2005 12:37:08 -0700, in talk.origins
EKurtz99@aol.com wrote in
<1123789028.276671.41730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
maff wrote:
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
What is shocking about the intelligent design
argument is that it isn't true and can hardly be honest. It looks, from a
distance, like a cynical attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical
teaching into the American school curriculum, against the intention of
America's own founding fathers and the US constitution.
This sort of crass ignorance is par for the course in any Guardian
article that deals with the US.
What are you objecting to? Intelligent Design is a dishonest attempt to
force religious doctrines into schools. The Discovery Institute doesn't
care about science at all. The DI has been funded primarily by someone
who, at least at times, has been clearly identified with a theocratic
movement in the United States.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
11 Aug 2005 03:18:21 PM |
|
|
David Jensen wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005 12:37:08 -0700, in talk.origins
EKurtz99@aol.com wrote in
<1123789028.276671.41730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
maff wrote:
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
What is shocking about the intelligent design
argument is that it isn't true and can hardly be honest. It looks, from a
distance, like a cynical attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical
teaching into the American school curriculum, against the intention of
America's own founding fathers and the US constitution.
This sort of crass ignorance is par for the course in any Guardian
article that deals with the US.
What are you objecting to? Intelligent Design is a dishonest attempt to
force religious doctrines into schools. The Discovery Institute doesn't
care about science at all. The DI has been funded primarily by someone
who, at least at times, has been clearly identified with a theocratic
movement in the United States.
The promotion of ID as a fit subject for high-school biology classes is
not an "attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical teaching
into the American school curriculum"; that is Creationism. The *****
who wrote the article didn't do his homework. This obtuseness is
entirely typical of the reporting of US news and events in the
left-wing British press.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Stuart" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
11 Aug 2005 03:29:33 PM |
|
|
wrote:
David Jensen wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005 12:37:08 -0700, in talk.origins
wrote in
<1123789028.276671.41730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
maff wrote:
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
What is shocking about the intelligent design
argument is that it isn't true and can hardly be honest. It looks, from a
distance, like a cynical attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical
teaching into the American school curriculum, against the intention of
America's own founding fathers and the US constitution.
This sort of crass ignorance is par for the course in any Guardian
article that deals with the US.
What are you objecting to? Intelligent Design is a dishonest attempt to
force religious doctrines into schools. The Discovery Institute doesn't
care about science at all. The DI has been funded primarily by someone
who, at least at times, has been clearly identified with a theocratic
movement in the United States.
The promotion of ID as a fit subject for high-school biology classes is
not an "attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical teaching
into the American school curriculum"; that is Creationism. The *****
who wrote the article didn't do his homework. This obtuseness is
entirely typical of the reporting of US news and events in the
left-wing British press.
So that board member in Dover who said "somebody needs to stand up for
Jesus".. "2000 years ago somebody died on a cross" etc..
What was he on about?
STuart
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
11 Aug 2005 03:38:20 PM |
|
|
Stuart wrote:
EKurtz99@aol.com wrote:
David Jensen wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005 12:37:08 -0700, in talk.origins
EKurtz99@aol.com wrote in
<1123789028.276671.41730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
maff wrote:
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
What is shocking about the intelligent design
argument is that it isn't true and can hardly be honest. It looks, from a
distance, like a cynical attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical
teaching into the American school curriculum, against the intention of
America's own founding fathers and the US constitution.
This sort of crass ignorance is par for the course in any Guardian
article that deals with the US.
What are you objecting to? Intelligent Design is a dishonest attempt to
force religious doctrines into schools. The Discovery Institute doesn't
care about science at all. The DI has been funded primarily by someone
who, at least at times, has been clearly identified with a theocratic
movement in the United States.
The promotion of ID as a fit subject for high-school biology classes is
not an "attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical teaching
into the American school curriculum"; that is Creationism. The *****
who wrote the article didn't do his homework. This obtuseness is
entirely typical of the reporting of US news and events in the
left-wing British press.
So that board member in Dover who said "somebody needs to stand up for
Jesus".. "2000 years ago somebody died on a cross" etc..
What was he on about?
He was introducing an irrelevancy, just as you are.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Stuart" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
12 Aug 2005 12:18:17 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Stuart wrote:
wrote:
David Jensen wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005 12:37:08 -0700, in talk.origins
wrote in
<1123789028.276671.41730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
maff wrote:
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
What is shocking about the intelligent design
argument is that it isn't true and can hardly be honest. It looks, from a
distance, like a cynical attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical
teaching into the American school curriculum, against the intention of
America's own founding fathers and the US constitution.
This sort of crass ignorance is par for the course in any Guardian
article that deals with the US.
What are you objecting to? Intelligent Design is a dishonest attempt to
force religious doctrines into schools. The Discovery Institute doesn't
care about science at all. The DI has been funded primarily by someone
who, at least at times, has been clearly identified with a theocratic
movement in the United States.
The promotion of ID as a fit subject for high-school biology classes is
not an "attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical teaching
into the American school curriculum"; that is Creationism. The *****
who wrote the article didn't do his homework. This obtuseness is
entirely typical of the reporting of US news and events in the
left-wing British press.
So that board member in Dover who said "somebody needs to stand up for
Jesus".. "2000 years ago somebody died on a cross" etc..
What was he on about?
He was introducing an irrelevancy, just as you are.
He was, was he?
Funny how everybody who is trying to introduce this into the high
schools can't refrain from making remarks like that.
Why is that? Perhaps they're more clever than you and realize that ID
is just a smoke screen for religious indoctrination?
Or better, you believe the designer is a celestial biomechanic?
So who created the celestial biomechanic?
Stuart
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
11 Aug 2005 04:21:54 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Stuart wrote:
wrote:
David Jensen wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005 12:37:08 -0700, in talk.origins
wrote in
<1123789028.276671.41730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
maff wrote:
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
What is shocking about the intelligent design
argument is that it isn't true and can hardly be honest. It looks, from a
distance, like a cynical attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical
teaching into the American school curriculum, against the intention of
America's own founding fathers and the US constitution.
This sort of crass ignorance is par for the course in any Guardian
article that deals with the US.
What are you objecting to? Intelligent Design is a dishonest attempt to
force religious doctrines into schools. The Discovery Institute doesn't
care about science at all. The DI has been funded primarily by someone
who, at least at times, has been clearly identified with a theocratic
movement in the United States.
The promotion of ID as a fit subject for high-school biology classes is
not an "attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical teaching
into the American school curriculum"; that is Creationism. The *****
who wrote the article didn't do his homework. This obtuseness is
entirely typical of the reporting of US news and events in the
left-wing British press.
So that board member in Dover who said "somebody needs to stand up for
Jesus".. "2000 years ago somebody died on a cross" etc..
What was he on about?
He was introducing an irrelevancy, just as you are.
Whom would you propose as the Creator, if not the God of Abraham? And
if you think other possibilities are as likely, then who do you think
most supporters of this think itis?
Kermit
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "maff" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
11 Aug 2005 03:43:40 PM |
|
|
wrote:
David Jensen wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005 12:37:08 -0700, in talk.origins
wrote in
<1123789028.276671.41730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
maff wrote:
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
What is shocking about the intelligent design
argument is that it isn't true and can hardly be honest. It looks, from a
distance, like a cynical attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical
teaching into the American school curriculum, against the intention of
America's own founding fathers and the US constitution.
This sort of crass ignorance is par for the course in any Guardian
article that deals with the US.
What are you objecting to? Intelligent Design is a dishonest attempt to
force religious doctrines into schools. The Discovery Institute doesn't
care about science at all. The DI has been funded primarily by someone
who, at least at times, has been clearly identified with a theocratic
movement in the United States.
The promotion of ID as a fit subject for high-school biology classes is
not an "attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical teaching
into the American school curriculum"; that is Creationism. The *****
who wrote the article didn't do his homework. This obtuseness is
entirely typical of the reporting of US news and events in the
left-wing British press.
So you didn't know what Marx said of Confederate Christian fascists?
http://www.americancivilwar.org.uk/articles/art_marx.htm
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1861/us-civil-war/
Constitution of the Confederate States of America
http://americancivilwar.com/documents/confederate_constitution.html
March 11,1861
We, the people of the Confederate States, each State acting in its
sovereign and independent character, in order to form a permanent
federal government, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity,
and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our
posterity~invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God~do ordain and
establish this Constitution for the Confederate States of America.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
11 Aug 2005 04:20:38 PM |
|
|
On 11 Aug 2005 13:18:21 -0700, wrote:
David Jensen wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005 12:37:08 -0700, in talk.origins
wrote in
<1123789028.276671.41730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
maff wrote:
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
What is shocking about the intelligent design
argument is that it isn't true and can hardly be honest. It looks, from a
distance, like a cynical attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical
teaching into the American school curriculum, against the intention of
America's own founding fathers and the US constitution.
This sort of crass ignorance is par for the course in any Guardian
article that deals with the US.
What are you objecting to? Intelligent Design is a dishonest attempt to
force religious doctrines into schools. The Discovery Institute doesn't
care about science at all. The DI has been funded primarily by someone
who, at least at times, has been clearly identified with a theocratic
movement in the United States.
The promotion of ID as a fit subject for high-school biology classes is
not an "attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical teaching
into the American school curriculum"; that is Creationism. The *****
who wrote the article didn't do his homework. This obtuseness is
entirely typical of the reporting of US news and events in the
left-wing British press.
well, the only reason ID exists is because creationism can't be used
in public schools. it's sotto voce creationism.
ID does not exist in the scientific press.
---------------------------
to see who "wf3h" is, go to "qrz.com"
and enter 'wf3h' in the field
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
11 Aug 2005 03:39:06 PM |
|
|
On 11 Aug 2005 13:18:21 -0700, wrote:
David Jensen wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005 12:37:08 -0700, in talk.origins
wrote in
<1123789028.276671.41730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
maff wrote:
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
What is shocking about the intelligent design
argument is that it isn't true and can hardly be honest. It looks, from a
distance, like a cynical attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical
teaching into the American school curriculum, against the intention of
America's own founding fathers and the US constitution.
This sort of crass ignorance is par for the course in any Guardian
article that deals with the US.
What are you objecting to? Intelligent Design is a dishonest attempt to
force religious doctrines into schools. The Discovery Institute doesn't
care about science at all. The DI has been funded primarily by someone
who, at least at times, has been clearly identified with a theocratic
movement in the United States.
The promotion of ID as a fit subject for high-school biology classes is
not an "attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical teaching
into the American school curriculum"; that is Creationism. The *****
who wrote the article didn't do his homework. This obtuseness is
entirely typical of the reporting of US news and events in the
left-wing British press.
Anybody who pretends ID is not creationism in a new guise, is either
lying or stupid.
Which are you?
The Guardian was 100% correct in this case.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
11 Aug 2005 03:46:15 PM |
|
|
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005 13:18:21 -0700, wrote:
David Jensen wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005 12:37:08 -0700, in talk.origins
wrote in
<1123789028.276671.41730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
maff wrote:
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
What is shocking about the intelligent design
argument is that it isn't true and can hardly be honest. It looks, from a
distance, like a cynical attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical
teaching into the American school curriculum, against the intention of
America's own founding fathers and the US constitution.
This sort of crass ignorance is par for the course in any Guardian
article that deals with the US.
What are you objecting to? Intelligent Design is a dishonest attempt to
force religious doctrines into schools. The Discovery Institute doesn't
care about science at all. The DI has been funded primarily by someone
who, at least at times, has been clearly identified with a theocratic
movement in the United States.
The promotion of ID as a fit subject for high-school biology classes is
not an "attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical teaching
into the American school curriculum"; that is Creationism. The *****
who wrote the article didn't do his homework. This obtuseness is
entirely typical of the reporting of US news and events in the
left-wing British press.
Anybody who pretends ID is not creationism in a new guise, is either
lying or stupid.
Which are you?
The Guardian was 100% correct in this case.
The above is entirely false.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
11 Aug 2005 04:56:52 PM |
|
|
On 11 Aug 2005 13:46:15 -0700, wrote:
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005 13:18:21 -0700, wrote:
David Jensen wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005 12:37:08 -0700, in talk.origins
wrote in
<1123789028.276671.41730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
maff wrote:
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
What is shocking about the intelligent design
argument is that it isn't true and can hardly be honest. It looks, from a
distance, like a cynical attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical
teaching into the American school curriculum, against the intention of
America's own founding fathers and the US constitution.
This sort of crass ignorance is par for the course in any Guardian
article that deals with the US.
What are you objecting to? Intelligent Design is a dishonest attempt to
force religious doctrines into schools. The Discovery Institute doesn't
care about science at all. The DI has been funded primarily by someone
who, at least at times, has been clearly identified with a theocratic
movement in the United States.
The promotion of ID as a fit subject for high-school biology classes is
not an "attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical teaching
into the American school curriculum"; that is Creationism. The *****
who wrote the article didn't do his homework. This obtuseness is
entirely typical of the reporting of US news and events in the
left-wing British press.
Anybody who pretends ID is not creationism in a new guise, is either
lying or stupid.
Which are you?
The Guardian was 100% correct in this case.
The above is entirely false.
Which bits, dishonest lying creationist?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
11 Aug 2005 04:45:25 PM |
|
|
On 11 Aug 2005 13:46:15 -0700, in talk.origins
wrote in
<1123793175.482259.273550@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005 13:18:21 -0700, wrote:
David Jensen wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005 12:37:08 -0700, in talk.origins
wrote in
<1123789028.276671.41730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
maff wrote:
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
What is shocking about the intelligent design
argument is that it isn't true and can hardly be honest. It looks, from a
distance, like a cynical attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical
teaching into the American school curriculum, against the intention of
America's own founding fathers and the US constitution.
This sort of crass ignorance is par for the course in any Guardian
article that deals with the US.
What are you objecting to? Intelligent Design is a dishonest attempt to
force religious doctrines into schools. The Discovery Institute doesn't
care about science at all. The DI has been funded primarily by someone
who, at least at times, has been clearly identified with a theocratic
movement in the United States.
The promotion of ID as a fit subject for high-school biology classes is
not an "attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical teaching
into the American school curriculum"; that is Creationism. The *****
who wrote the article didn't do his homework. This obtuseness is
entirely typical of the reporting of US news and events in the
left-wing British press.
Anybody who pretends ID is not creationism in a new guise, is either
lying or stupid.
Which are you?
The Guardian was 100% correct in this case.
The above is entirely false.
Are you a Discovery Institute shill?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: Don't insult our intelligence |
11 Aug 2005 04:44:44 PM |
|
|
On 11 Aug 2005 13:18:21 -0700, in talk.origins
EKurtz99@aol.com wrote in
<1123791501.541893.96130@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
David Jensen wrote:
On 11 Aug 2005 12:37:08 -0700, in talk.origins
EKurtz99@aol.com wrote in
<1123789028.276671.41730@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>:
maff wrote:
Don't insult our intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/lastword/story/0,13228,1546180,00.html
The Bible has many things to teach us about life but it is no
substitute for science, Mr Bush, writes Tim Radford
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
What is shocking about the intelligent design
argument is that it isn't true and can hardly be honest. It looks, from a
distance, like a cynical attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical
teaching into the American school curriculum, against the intention of
America's own founding fathers and the US constitution.
This sort of crass ignorance is par for the course in any Guardian
article that deals with the US.
What are you objecting to? Intelligent Design is a dishonest attempt to
force religious doctrines into schools. The Discovery Institute doesn't
care about science at all. The DI has been funded primarily by someone
who, at least at times, has been clearly identified with a theocratic
movement in the United States.
The promotion of ID as a fit subject for high-school biology classes is
not an "attempt to introduce a literal version of Biblical teaching
into the American school curriculum"; that is Creationism. The *****
who wrote the article didn't do his homework. This obtuseness is
entirely typical of the reporting of US news and events in the
left-wing British press.
I guess you haven't read the Wedge Document. Intelligent Design is a
legalistic attempt invented by a lawyer to slide Creationism into
schools. No proponents of ID are opposed to Creationism. No proponents
of ID are doing real tests of their supposed hypothesis. No proponents
of ID are trying to develop a scientific theory of ID. No proponents of
ID are actively involved in research of the history of life on earth. ID
is a con game and Johnson and his crowd know that they aren't doing
science.
My experience is that only dishonest creationists and people who have
been conned by them who claim that ID is not creationism. At least some
creationists hate ID because they recognize that ID is dishonest about
who the Designer is.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
