News Bush Endorsement Of 'Intelligent Design' In Public Schools

[Evo]

Signs of hope: a few weeks ago, prior to W's pronouncement, George Will said on ABC Sunday am TV, "Intelligent design is not a scientific theory. It cannot be disproved.'


In the interest of scientific fairness, I recently visited the website of Seattle's Discovery Institute, a major intellectual center for Intelligent design(ID) I know quite a few thoughtful, highly educated and sophisticated people who kind-of buy the "fair-is-fair' game played by the ID folks. So I wanted ammunition, and boy did I find it. There's lies, and damn lies, and ID propaganda -- it's so bad, that ... sputter, sputter. These are highly dishonest people who are after power.

Sad to say, they are masters of PR and politics so far: for example, "Well, evolution is just a theory." People who don't know much about science will say, 'Yeah/ Geez, i never thought of that,... The use of "just" is brilliant. But the logic of the details of ID are tortured, patently absurd at times, and at best , badly written. No redeeming features that i could find. They can be defeated by their own words. Check it out (Discovery institute) for a not-so-good laugh.
Regards,
Reilly Atkinson

I wish I had more time, there have been numerous discussions here about the crackpottery of the "Discovery Institute".

 

[Skyhunter]

I read endless variations of this "not in science class" bull, as if teaching it in any non-mythical context in a public setting would prove acceptable to you. If on the off chance philosophy of science ever made its way back to grade school, wouldn't be odd not to discuss alternatives to naturalism? Or would you only accept that if naturalism was presented as the prevailing view of reality?

Rev Prez

Are you suggesting that ID be taught in science class?

If so please present a reasonable argument. Making ad hominem attacks on others gives the impression you have no viable argument.

Gravity, electricity, and evolution are all theories, and theories should be tested and challenged, how else does our understanding of the universe progress?

That said, may I suggest we use scientific method to test and challenge them.

 

[Rev Prez]

Are you suggesting that ID be taught in science class?

I'm suggesting it might be worth it if only to piss off the more zealous Christian-haters out there.

If so please present a reasonable argument.

1. I'm no fan of anal retentive atheists and whatever pisses them off is good.
2. ID presents a sharply unscientific alternative view of biological, geological and cosmological history before some 7,000 years ago
3. There is no noteworthy harm in holding such an unscientific view.
C. Teaching ID in science class is on the whole a good thing.

Making ad hominem attacks on others gives the impression you have no viable argument.

I assume you take that on faith.

Gravity, electricity, and evolution are all theories, and theories should be tested and challenged...

Says who? Most people go their entire lives without testing or challenging the science behind lightbulbs, gyroscopes and aspirin. I say test and challenge as it suits you and those you get along with, not as it suits a handful of Dexters venting their Catholic school frustrations on line.

That said, may I suggest we use scientific method to test and challenge them.

Which is as meaningless and irrelevant a platitude as our dear astronauts vacuous observations.

Rev Prez

 

[Rev Prez]

You are rather offensive, and have been from the get-go.

You're easy to offend.

Are you sure you're a reverend? You rather put me off religion.

No, I'm not. See you in hell, but see my profile first.

Transcription and *translation* not transportation...

If that's the only error I made, God bless me.

I teach at the college level, to pre-nursing students, not high school.

Either way we're talking about a mundane subject to people who have other interests.

Which aspect of infection and contagious diseases would you like me to drop from your nurses, or your children's nurses, education?

The only thing I asked you to drop where the dramatics.

How did atheism get dragged into this?

That would be when you brought up Bruce Alberts and the NAS.

One week we talk about the major kingdoms in the five kingdom system (phylogeny) describing characteristic features. This ties into evolution, directly.

So does everything else in biology. Shall we dispense with the bull? I asked you to tell us how much time you spend on evolution as it pertains to each of these subjects and others, not whether biology has something to do with evolution. By your own count it amounts to no more than 35 percent of the material. It's probably far less, unless you're just randomly spitting "evolution rulez!" every other sentence.

Now Rev, I really don't see a fruitful discussion emerging out of this.

Honesty helps.

The NAS an atheist group indeed!

Yes, it is. [http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/sci_relig.htm],[http://www.atheists.org/flash.line/atheism1.htm ]

Even Jesus knew the world wasn't black and white.)

Really? Mr. No One Comes Through the Father But Through Me?

Rev Prez

 

[Rev Prez]

The Krebs cycle is an excellent example of molecular evolution.

What in biology isn't? If all you're going to do is say "such and such is an excellent example of evolution," then I'm not sure exactly what value there is in you teaching the subject. You could say "such and such is an excellent example of foo" and be just as insightful.

Rev Prez

 

[Gokul43201]

1. I'm no fan of anal retentive atheists and whatever pisses them off is good.

Grow up.

2. ID presents a sharply unscientific alternative view of biological, geological and cosmological history before some 7,000 years ago

This is reason for it to NOT be taught in science class.

3. There is no noteworthy harm in holding such an unscientific view.

Yeah, say that to the Languedocians !

C. Teaching ID in science class is on the whole a good thing.

There's a missing link between your reasons and conclusion, Rev Prez : it's called logic. Oh, but wait...if science class may lack science, then reasoning may lack logic...got it !

 

[The Smoking Man]

What in biology isn't? If all you're going to do is say "such and such is an excellent example of evolution," then I'm not sure exactly what value there is in you teaching the subject. You could say "such and such is an excellent example of foo" and be just as insightful.

Rev Prez

I think I just lost the title of 'the biggest a$$hole on this system'.

Damn Rev, I feel really good about myself now knowing what you face in the mirror each morning.

 

[arildno]

Rev Prez has for a long time posted here at PF his political views which seethe with his thorough contempt for anyone disagreeing with him.
In addition, he is systematically scoffing science in favour of Biblical literalism.

His thorough, inbred contempt for others makes him an enemy of democratic values&morality, and his unfounded ridicule of the great Western tradition of critical, scientific thinking makes him into a proponent of irrationality and superstition.

In my view, he is unworthy of being a member of PF any longer.