Why must intelligent design be stopped

[Sava]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Why does it have to be taught in high school, when it benefits the folks who go to university?

the same reason we teach people about the THEORY of gravity

[Ben Kenobi]

Let them teach ID in Sunday school or in church, where it belongs. Evolution is a scientific theory... ID isn't.

Let's teach sciience in the class room, and leave religion for Sunday School...

Excellent. More physics, math and chemistry then.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
The current biological theories with evolution aren't working very well.

Yes, they are. You repeat this often, but offer no evidence to support it. Evolutionary theory is working quite well. In fact, understanding of it has led to major medical breakthroughs. No such success is on record for ID.

Life is not a closed system.

Then it does act contrary to entropy, in that entropy depends upon a closed system.

This is the single stupidest response yet in this thread.

[Ben Kenobi]

the same reason we teach people about the THEORY of gravity

We also got taught, or at least I did, about how they derived the theory from observation. I don't recall them saying the same about evolution, other than that it was an indisputable fact.

The reason we teach the theory of gravity, is because we also get taught where it breaks down, and doesn't work so well. Why should evolution be any different?

[Kuciwalker]

Then it does act contrary to entropy, in that entropy depends upon a closed system.

/me reads that sentence

/me is forced into a permanent state of WTF

[Ben Kenobi]

Kuci, newtonian mechanics. I'm not talking about other stuff they save for uni students.

[Kuciwalker]

Dude, that sentence was completely meaningless.

[Patroklos]

understanding where life on Earth comes from is useless?

Practically, yes.

And the weakest part of evolution is where life came from, it is good at explaining how we get from A to B to C to D, but I have yet to hear a good explanation from science about what the hell we were doing at A to begin with.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
We also got taught, or at least I did, about how they derived the theory from observation. I don't recall them saying the same about evolution, other than that it was an indisputable fact.

You must have gone to a ****ty school then, as I clearly remember the whole discussion about Origin of the Species, Darwin's observations that led to his theory, and a whole host of biological discoveries then and since then that have all supported evolution.

What discoveries support intelligent design, again?

[Kontiki]

If nothing else, I always enjoy Ben's superfluous commas.

[Ben Kenobi]

What do you mean Kuci? What's not to understand.

If you are teaching science, you also want to show how science works, how they came up with the theory. Newtonian mechanics is a good way to show that since you get to see Kepler and how he is the bridge between the observations of Tycho, and Newton.

I don't see them questioning biology or evolution, because it is the current reigning theory, and thus, indisputably correct.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Practically, yes.

And the weakest part of evolution is where life came from, it is good at explaining how we get from A to B to C to D, but I have yet to hear a good explanation from science about what the hell we were doing at A to begin with.

And you're exactly wrong, in fact I've read of several recent experiments (actually read the papers) in the generation of artificial life, and the basic processes by which life originated are pretty well understood.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
What do you mean Kuci? What's not to understand.

Nothing, it's just a completely meaningless statement. Life is inconsistent with entropy? Wha?

If you are teaching science, you also want to show how science works, how they came up with the theory. Newtonian mechanics is a good way to show that since you get to see Kepler and how he is the bridge between the observations of Tycho, and Newton.

Interesting, that, since we SKIPPED those people in physics and just started off with Newton's laws... also interesting that Kepler's laws are observed to be true and in fact can be derived from Newton's. The same cannot be said of ID and evolution.

[Ben Kenobi]

You must have gone to a ****ty school then, as I clearly remember the whole discussion about Origin of the Species, Darwin's observations that led to his theory, and a whole host of biological discoveries then and since then that have all supported evolution.

That I got in university, in a history of science, that also taught the critiques his contemporaries levelled at the theory. Particularly for the materialist and reductionist consequences.

Secondly, regarding Darwin's observation, he went to Galapagos, and saw differences between different birds of the same species, in their adaptation to their natural habitat on the islands. That's all. From that we get the whole theory that man came from apes, and further down the line, that we grew from organic molecules in a soup. Yet none of this has been directly observed.

[Whoha]

Originally posted by Patroklos

But Sava, while you were compressing a millenium of academic work into the 10 odd years of your adult life, did you happen to learn how SPY-1D radar's RF energy is separated into thousands of beams through the phased arrays and then sector to create a 3D image?

Or even why all the mechanics in your PlayStation work.

Or do you take it on faith?

those are things that can be observed in action, and we can empirically say that they always work(The sun is going to come up tomorrow for example).

His playstation works because it works, its that simple .

Originally posted by Atahualpa
Yeah? Remind me of what happened when the world didn't turn out to be flat

It is flat, and being accelerated upwards at 9.8 m/s^2. Its just gravity that is causing it to appear round