|
|
|
R.Wreck
SFN Regular
USA
1191 Posts |
 Posted - 10/07/2005 : 18:32:29
|
The plaintiff's side in the Dover PA trial over Intelligent Design Creationism exposed it's religious basis:
quote:
In the sixth day of the trial in U.S. Middle District Court, plaintiffs' attorneys used the testimony of Barbara Forrest, a Southeastern Louisiana University philosophy professor, to connect a series of dots regarding the history of the intelligent design movement and creationism.
The author of "Creationism's Trojan Horse," Forrest painted a picture of a covert religious movement — one that presented itself as scientific to the media and mainstream public. But under the surface, she said, leaders plotted not only a revolution in science, but also of modern culture.
In repeated accounts, she outlined how intelligent design's founders wanted nothing more than to have their concept permeate all religious, cultural and political life.
...
"Intelligent design is just the Logos theology of John's Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory," William Dembski, one of the movement's chief proponents, said in a 1999 interview in Touchstone, a Christian magazine that Forrest cited in her testimony.
...
"Christ is never an addendum to a scientific theory, but always a completion," Dembski wrote in his book, "Intelligent Design."
Forrest, under questioning by plaintiffs' attorney Eric Rothschild, spoke of the "wedge strategy," the brainchild of Phillip Johnson, founder of the intelligent design movement and now-retired Berkley University law professor.
Johnson wrote that he believed that evolution contradicts not only the Book of Genesis "but every word in the Bible." In his article, "How the evolution debate can be won," which was presented in court, Johnson proposed an intellectual movement "in the universities and churches.
Johnson's strategy was later outlined in a fundraising document produced by the pro-intelligent-design Discovery Institute's Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture, posted on the Internet in 1999.
The first sentence of the document states: "The proposition that human beings are created in the image of God is one of the bedrock principles on which Western civilization was built."
The Discovery Institute of Creationism apparently was not even smart enough to read about the trial before lying:
quote:
Discovery, in a statement issued Wednesday night, denied any links to creationism.
"The scientific theory of intelligent design is agnostic regarding the source of design and has no commitment to defending Genesis, the Bible or any other sacred text," the statement said.
In a related story:
quote:
Quote of the day
"Creation means that various forms of life began abruptly through the agency of an intelligent creator, with their distinctive features already intact — fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks, and wings, etc." — Version of textbook "Of Pandas and People," before 1987 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Edwards v. Aguillard striking down the concept of creation science as legitimate science.
"Intelligent design means that various forms of life began abruptly through an intelligent agency, with their distinctive features already intact — fish with fins and scales, birds with feathers, beaks, and wings, etc." — "Of Pandas and People," after 1987 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Edwards v. Aguillard.
Similar substitutions were made throughout the textbook, according to Wednesday's testimony.
Those in support of god's little helpers the school board presented their best evvidence outside of court:
quote:
If Charles Darwin could have attended a meeting in Dover on Thursday, he would have been shocked by the disrespect shown his theory, according to his great-great-grandson Matthew Chapman.
Chapman was among about 150 people, including about 20 members of the media, who came to Dover Fire Station (6) for a presentation involving a video of "More Reasons Why Evolution is Stupid."
The group watched the video, by Kent Hovind, and listened to commentary from the Rev. Jim Grove, a Loganville pastor, who said he wanted the area voters to know "the truth." Grove had a variety of reading materials available and was selling the two-hour Hovind video for $9.95.
They're watcing Hovine videos (only $9.95) to support ID Creationsim??!!! Holy Crap! They can't even keep their nonsense straight.
It's probably too early to tell how this will all turn out, but so far the ID Creationism side is being made to look pretty pathetic.
|
The foundation of morality is to . . . give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibliities of knowledge.
T. H. Huxley
The Cattle Prod of Enlightened Compassion
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 10/08/2005 : 00:19:58 [Permalink]
|
It is pathetic. They have exactly nothing for evidential support of their claim. Like Hovind, they have only hand-waving, bullshit and loud voices.
But I too, hesitate to make any predictions, courts being what they are....
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
 |
|
|
llDayo
New Member
USA
24 Posts |
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 10/11/2005 : 01:03:52 [Permalink]
|
Hey, thanks for the link. Long read but fascinating.
Sadly I have fears that the jury will do as all humans do and interpret what is being said through their own preconceived ideas. If they understand science they'll see through the BS. If they don't understand science, the jury will likely think ID is science.
The presentation by the ID defender reminded me of the tap dance scene by Richard Gere, (lawyer), in 'Chicago'. The believers actually don't see what is wrong with their arguments. They close their minds to the evidence and logic and just make the world in their minds what they want it to be. |
|
|
|
llDayo
New Member
USA
24 Posts |
Posted - 10/11/2005 : 05:59:38 [Permalink]
|
| I may be wrong but I don't think this case has a jury. I forget where I read about that and I don't know what type of trial it's called but I think it's just a judge. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 10/11/2005 : 10:45:36 [Permalink]
|
Yeah, bench trial.... no jury.
The judge will make the decision.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 10/11/2005 : 13:31:29 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by llDayo
I may be wrong but I don't think this case has a jury. I forget where I read about that and I don't know what type of trial it's called but I think it's just a judge.
I knew I didn't know and should have looked it up but then I just said Oh well someone will correct me if there is no jury. So at least the judge will have had an education. That's a plus unless his name was Moore. |
|
|
|
llDayo
New Member
USA
24 Posts |
Posted - 10/12/2005 : 06:43:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
I knew I didn't know and should have looked it up but then I just said Oh well someone will correct me if there is no jury. So at least the judge will have had an education. That's a plus unless his name was Moore.
If you read some of the transcripts for the case you'll notice the judge seems to be a very smart person. He may have been selected for this case based on his knowledge of the topic. I think this case will go smoothly  |
|
|
|
Starman
SFN Regular
Sweden
1613 Posts |
Posted - 10/13/2005 : 00:16:50 [Permalink]
|
How can it be possible for a school board to waste taxpayer money in this way?
What kind of legal and civil action can be made against a school board that abuse their mandate in this way?
If you are to ignorant about science to separate science from non-science you are not fit to be on a school board.
Unless these perverts have to pay for their BS, this will happen again and again and again.
Dover Science Teachers Speak Out |
"Any religion that makes a form of torture into an icon that they worship seems to me a pretty sick sort of religion quite honestly"
-- Terry Jones |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 10/16/2005 : 00:59:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Starman
How can it be possible for a school board to waste taxpayer money in this way?
What kind of legal and civil action can be made against a school board that abuse their mandate in this way?
If you are to ignorant about science to separate science from non-science you are not fit to be on a school board.
Unless these perverts have to pay for their BS, this will happen again and again and again.
Dover Science Teachers Speak Out
Well members do get elected. The problems have often been when a vocal minority sneaks in past a complacent majority. If I recall, one of these recent situations led to the board members losing the subsequent election.
It's probably tough when you live in a heavily religious community. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 10/16/2005 : 03:09:27 [Permalink]
|
| That was Kansas in 1999/2000. And now they've elected themselves another bunch of creationists. We'll find out soon if history repeats itself. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Starman
SFN Regular
Sweden
1613 Posts |
Posted - 10/17/2005 : 03:16:37 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigalquote:
Originally posted by Starman
What kind of legal and civil action can be made against a school board that abuse their mandate in this way?
Well members do get elected. The problems have often been when a vocal minority sneaks in past a complacent majority. If I recall, one of these recent situations led to the board members losing the subsequent election.
But being elected should not keep you from having a responsibility.
If you are elected to sponsor education but instead waste taxpayer money to support religion you have abused your position and should be held legally accountable. |
"Any religion that makes a form of torture into an icon that they worship seems to me a pretty sick sort of religion quite honestly"
-- Terry Jones |
|
|
|
Starman
SFN Regular
Sweden
1613 Posts |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2005 : 04:05:48 [Permalink]
|
From the Guardian article:quote:
The plaintiffs are represented by a team put together by the American Civil Liberties Union and Americans United for Separation of Church and State. The school district is being represented by the Thomas More Law Center, a public-interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Mich., that says its mission is to defend the religious freedom of Christians.
So that's what this is all about! The Christians are being persecuted by gawdless science! Odd though, that we've not heard of any being fed to lions or recently crucified (except by other Christians) or otherwise persecuted, or even slightly abused. Unless, of course, not allowing them to dictate all aspects of everyone's life counts as taking away freedoms.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
Starman
SFN Regular
Sweden
1613 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2005 : 04:51:31 [Permalink]
|
From NY Times quote:
Asked whether intelligent design is religion, or "based on any religious beliefs," Mr. Behe said, "No, it isn't."
"It is based entirely on observable, physical evidence from nature," he said.
...
Mr. Behe said the "best and most striking example of design" is the bacterial flagellum,... ...and said it was impossible avoid concluding that the mechanism was "a purposeful arrangement of parts."
...
Mr. Behe testified that intelligent design was science and that it made testable claims.
...
Mr. Muise then asked whether natural selection could "explain the existence" of DNA, the immune system or blood clotting. Mr. Behe said no.
perjury
n : criminal offense of making false statements under oath [syn: bearing false witness, lying under oath]
|
|
|
|
Fripp
SFN Regular
USA
727 Posts |
Posted - 10/18/2005 : 05:15:32 [Permalink]
|
I live in the Philadelphia area, so this has been constant news in the local paper, the Philadelphia Inquirer. This morning, a very fair and balanced look at ID and its shortcomings was published. Here's the link for the story, and I have also provided the entire text because there is a free registration process that you may or may not want to do.
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/12928255.htm
(Emphases are mine)
Can faith, science coexist?
Evolution and Christianity are not incompatible, many believe.
By Faye Flam, Inquirer Staff Writer
For centuries, religious believers have sought signs of God's designing hand in nature's mysteries - whether the orderly motions of the sun, moon and planets, the intricate beauty of an insect's wing, or the complexity of the human eye.
Others say it's the nature of faith not to require evidence.
The term intelligent design entered popular discourse recently, but the philosophy behind it goes back to antiquity. Some philosophers, theologians and religious scientists say the age-old battle unnecessarily pits religion against science, and religion tends to lose.
University of Pennsylvania anatomy professor Peter Dodson said his Catholic faith does not require an intelligent designer to leave clues in nature. "I'm an evolutionary biologist and I'm a Christian, and these issues are not problematic for me."
Dodson, who has lectured on the relationship between religion and science, said the intelligent-design argument falls into an old philosophical notion called "God of the gaps" - the search for signs of the supernatural in otherwise unexplainable natural phenomena.
Isaac Newton proposed something like this, said Wesley Wildman, a professor of theology at Boston University. Where he failed to explain the more complex interactions between heavenly bodies with his own laws, Newton proposed the hand of God intervening directly to keep the solar system orderly.
Today's proponents of intelligent design have argued that science can't explain the complexity of some single-celled organisms or the machinery of the human eye. They suggest a designer's intervention.
Filling the gaps
The trouble with this as theology is that when science fills these gaps in, Dodson said, it can squeeze the role of God out. Just as physics later found natural explanations for what Newton attributed to God's outreach, so biology may more fully explain complex cellular machinery in the future.
Dodson said his faith is unaffected by science because his God wouldn't necessarily leave traces - not in the fossil record or in DNA or anywhere in nature. For him and other scientific believers, absence of evidence is not evidence of God's absence.
In the past, intelligent design had less science to compete with, said Boston's Wildman, who identifies himself as an evangelical Protestant. In the fourth century B.C., Aristotle anticipated evolution and even proposed something like natural selection, but then rejected it because he thought nature was too complex to have emerged without an intelligent designer. In the 13th century, Wildman said, St. Thomas Aquinas argued persuasively that the natural world was intelligently designed by God.
The idea behind intelligent design pervades branches of all three major monotheistic religions - Judaism, Christianity and Islam, he said. All three have also sprouted branches in which faith does not rest on evidence for the divine in nature.
Theology and science
Some of today's proponents of intelligent design say it's not just theology - it's science. Todd Moody, a philosophy professor of St. Joseph's University, takes this view, arguing that the design theory debated in a Dover, Pa., courtroom is not necessarily a religious idea because it doesn't specify whether the designer is a supernatural power or not. "There's no way to know," he said. "It could be Klingons."
But the idea that aliens came to Earth and tweaked evolution doesn't qualify as science, said Michael Weisberg, a University of Pennsylvania philosophy professor. There's no evidence in its favor, nor is there any proposed way to get that evidence. "To move from speculation to scientific hypothesis, one has not just to assert something," he said, "but to show how it can be tested."
Though the current debate focuses on biology, plenty of other areas of science also gape with holes. Astronomy still can't explain the nature of the "dark matter" that seems to pervade the universe. Einstein's general relativity breaks down in describing the world at a subatomic scale.
Dodson says evolution is singled out not for anything it says about God but for what it seems to say about humanity. "I think the biggest problem for religious believers is the insistence that humans are an accident of an uncaring cosmos," he said.
Shuffling of genes through sex and mutation generates the variety from which natural selection can work. The chance encounter with an asteroid probably killed the dinosaurs, opening a new niche for the mammals that eventually spawned humanity. The late Stephen Jay Gould and other prominent scientists have said if we ran the clock back, evolution might produce a different mix of plants and animals and possibly a world with no human beings.
By adding a guiding hand, intelligent design allows its adherents to continue to believe humans were destined to be here - that we're here for a reason.
Boston's Wildman said his faith does not depend on the notion of humanity as central to the purpose of the universe. "It's a silly conceit and it makes human beings feel better to think that way - that the whole success of the universe turns on the success of the human project."
He said the tradition of ascribing so much importance to humanity goes back to the notion of a chosen people in the Old Testament. For Christians it comes from the belief that Jesus was God's son.
But such a God looks too small, too tribal and too humanlike, he said, to avoid getting pushed out of the ever narrowing gaps in science. That in turn can reinforce the notion that to be scientific you must be an atheist.
For him, a human-centered God is an approximation of the real thing, "and the real thing is beyond human comprehension."
|
"What the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?"
"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought my Dark Lord of the Sith could protect a small thermal exhaust port that's only 2-meters wide! That thing wasn't even fully paid off yet! You have any idea what this is going to do to my credit?!?!"
"What? Oh, oh, 'just rebuild it'? Oh, real [bleep]ing original. And who's gonna give me a loan, jackhole? You? You got an ATM on that torso LiteBrite?" |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
