Teachers take a stand against anti-evolution teaching order

[Theben]

Originally posted by Lincoln
but without knowing the origin of life to begin with one can not state that natural selection is not directed by the same of source of life.

Which is why evolution is a theory. No credible scientist will call it a law. Plz pay attention.

[Guynemer]

Kindly present scientific evidence of design.

I'm breathless with anticipation.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by Lincoln
Some scientists refuse to follow an"illusion"... Richard Dawkins for example admits that there is apparent design in life but he calls it an illusion, but without knowing the origin of life to begin with one can not state that natural selection is not directed by the same of source of life. ID simply states that the implication of design is NOT an illusion. Why should we be forced to follow illusions in the name of science?

I think the mainstream Christian view would be that it was God who created the conditions for life and set the forces of evolution in progress.

[Lincoln]

Sucj fear among great minds... History repeats itself I suppose. And it was Richard Dawkins who said the apparent design in nature was an illusion not me.

[Theben]

Maybe we should push for a law that requires microbiology to be discussed in all bible study courses?

[Guynemer]

Fear? I don't fear intelligent design.

I simply recognize it as philosophy and theology--not science.


EDIT: that's some good thinking, Theben.

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by Guynemer
Kindly present scientific evidence of design.

I'm breathless with anticipation.

Punch in "intelligent design" on google and get back to me. Or read my book.

[Theben]

Originally posted by Lincoln
Sucj fear among great minds... History repeats itself I suppose. And it was Richard Dawkins who said the apparent design in nature was an illusion not me.

OH NOES!!1!11 One person said something and evolution is totally discredited!! Liek we r pwneD!!1

My fear, such as it is, is that the after a few years the nation will be swarming with blithering idiots who couldn't tell the scientific method from their grocery list.

[Guynemer]

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse


I think the mainstream Christian view would be that it was God who created the conditions for life and set the forces of evolution in progress.

ID is generally about origins. ID does not oppose the process of evolution but it questions the origin of some species without direction somewhere along the line. I know questioning is not scientific anymore but they do it anyway.

[Lincoln]

Just when this was getting fun I have to go to bed. My sweety is waiting...

[Alexander's Horse]

some species being humans I imagine....

[Theben]

Objectivity results from the use of the scientific method without philosophic or religious assumptions in seeking answers to the question: Where do we come from?

The mission statement, so to speak.

The theory of intelligent design (ID) holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause rather than an undirected process such as natural selection.

Emphasis added, which pretty much refutes any claim to being able to 'coincide with' evolution.

ID proponents believe science should be conducted objectively, without regard to the implications of its findings. This is particularly necessary in origins science because of its historical (and thus very subjective) nature, and because it is a science that unavoidably impacts religion

So they must look at it objectively but admit it's very subjective in nature?

They must use the scientific method w/o religious assumptions but it's a science that "unavoidably impacts religion"?

Should I bother to keep reading? I haven't read past the 1st page.

[Lorizael]

This is why Intelligent Design should not be taught in a science class.

People say that Intelligent Design is not necessarily creationism, not necessarily god. The way I look at it, there are two possible sources of intelligence in design.

Aliens.

or

Gods.

If aliens, the aliens need a source, which can either be explained by more intelligent design, or evolution. If more intelligent design, we go back a step and repeat.

If gods, then we are dealing with theology and not science, so it shouldn't be taught in science class.

[Alexander's Horse]

I agree that intelligent design doesn't really belong in the science class.

That's because it is not scientifically provable.

But science and the sciencific method is not very good at the "why" or "who" questions. They belong to other disciplines.