|
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
 Posted - 08/13/2010 : 06:35:25
|
I was just reminded that the end of this year marks the fifth anniversary since the Kitzmiller v. Dover case. The landmark federal case, tried in Pennsylvania, over the teaching "Intelligent Design" in public schools. It delivered a devastating blow to the teaching ID in the classrooms. I read this quite a while back and posted it on the skepticality forum (RIP). Responses on that forum were in agreement that this is an excellent interview with Judge John E. Jones III, about the case and all that was involved. The writer opens with Gitschier: I am very excited to meet you. There are roughly three areas I want to talk to you about.
Jones: Do my best.
Gitschier: One has to do with your background—your thinking about evolution, intelligent design, creationism—going into the trial, your experience during the trial, and then afterwards—how this might have changed you.
The second is to help me through the legal stuff. I'm not a lawyer and I'm going to be writing this for an audience of geneticists.
The third is a shorter question—the ramifications of this decision on public education in the US. |
Each of these three points are covered in great detail. Thoughts? SS
|
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2010 : 09:43:30 [Permalink]
|
Link.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
 |
|
|
Farseeker
Skeptic Friend
Canada
76 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2010 : 20:12:41 [Permalink]
|
Did not read the details
As a life long systems analyst, I must say I feel the issue is a tempest in a teapot.
Clearly, this is an area where belief rules.
So, why get bent out of shape? One way or the other? All the evidence is not yet in.
Intelligent design makes no sense unless there is a (or multiple) designer(s). In a sense, my friend is a designer for his dog breeding program. Does anyone dispute that race horses, poodles or chickens are the result of someone's design?
Evolution as currently described to me, makes no sense.
That said, recent research does show that genes can be modified by current influences and those influences are passed to the next generation.
O. Paun, R. M. Bateman, M. F. Fay, M. Hedren, L. Civeyrel, M. W. Chase. Stable epigenetic effects impact adaptation in allopolyploid orchids (Dactylorhiza: Orchidaceae). Molecular Biology and Evolution, 2010; DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msq150
That starts to make more sense. But prior to this type of research, "believers" pushed evolutionary theory as if it had all the answers. It didn't. Now it is better.
Ted
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2010 : 21:30:26 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Farseeker
Did not read the details
As a life long systems analyst, I must say I feel the issue is a tempest in a teapot.
Clearly, this is an area where belief rules.
So, why get bent out of shape? One way or the other? All the evidence is not yet in. |
Oh, goody. Another engineer who won't educate himself but thinks his conclusion is better than that of millions of biologists.
Really, if you're going to remind everyone that the opinions of experts aren't always correct, especially outside their areas of expertise, you have to apply that to yourself.
Furthermore, it will never be the case (for any theory) that all the evidence will be "in." Waiting for all the evidence before drawing a conclusion will require that you wait for all eternity.| Intelligent design makes no sense unless there is a (or multiple) designer(s). In a sense, my friend is a designer for his dog breeding program. Does anyone dispute that race horses, poodles or chickens are the result of someone's design? |
You're making a classic mistake: the examples you give are all of human design (in terms of artificial selection), and in fact, every example we have of purposeful design is of human design. So taking your argument to its logical conclusion, humans must have designed all life on this planet, even humans. This is, of course, absurd.| Evolution as currently described to me, makes no sense. |
Your confusion and ignorance are not evidence that the theory is wrong. If it were otherwise, no theory could hold any water because someone is ignorant and/or confused by it.That said, recent research does show that genes can be modified by current influences and those influences are passed to the next generation.
O. Paun, R. M. Bateman, M. F. Fay, M. Hedren, L. Civeyrel, M. W. Chase. Stable epigenetic effects impact adaptation in allopolyploid orchids (Dactylorhiza: Orchidaceae). Molecular Biology and Evolution, 2010; DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msq150
That starts to make more sense. But prior to this type of research, "believers" pushed evolutionary theory as if it had all the answers. It didn't. Now it is better. |
Oh, good grief. What a ludicrous argument. If genes weren't modifiable, evolution would have been impossible.
And really, in a scientific context, saying anyone has "pushed" anything "as if it had all the answers" is nothing but a cheap shot and a heavy insult, because it's nothing but a straw man (can you name one person who has said, on record, that evolutionary theory "has all the answers?"). Is that really where you want to go with this? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2010 : 22:22:09 [Permalink]
|
Farseeker said:
| Evolution as currently described to me, makes no sense. |
Yeah, because it's such a great idea to let your ignorance of a topic guide your conclusions.
What, specifically, did you object to about ToE before you allegedly read that epigenetics paper?
And obviously you didn't really understand that epigenetics paper. I'll help you there- The evidence it presents is that some things can influence the state a gene is in, and that the gene can be passed on to a new generation in that state. It doesn't change the gene, but rather how the gene is expressed. All very interesting really, but it doesn't have the impact on ToE you seem to have given it. It's not some data point that has led anyone (except, apparently, you) to say that "in light of this data point ToE suddenly makes sense to me now!"
| But prior to this type of research, "believers" pushed evolutionary theory as if it had all the answers. |
First, your calling those who have examined the evidence for ToE and found it compelling "believers" is little more than an insult. But it was nice of you to put your personal ignorance on public display for everyone to see.
|
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 |
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2010 : 22:44:06 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
And obviously you didn't really understand that epigenetics paper. I'll help you there- The evidence it presents is that some things can influence the state a gene is in, and that the gene can be passed on to a new generation in that state. It doesn't change the gene, but rather how the gene is expressed. |
The logical extension of that thought is a really good point: the theory of evolution was on tremendously solid ground long before modern, DNA-based genetics was well-understood (or even discovered). In its broadest outline, evolutionary theory doesn't depend upon any particular mechanism of inheritance or any particular mechanism of converting inherited characters into a particular phylogeny. Darwin didn't know anything about either one, yet he still got natural selection and common descent correct.
The idea that the basics of evolution make no sense without epigenetics is just wrong, considering the fact that if every organism had identical DNA and different epigenetic factors, natural selection and common descent would still work identically to how Darwin thought. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 08/14/2010 : 00:02:49 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Farseeker
Evolution as currently described to me, makes no sense.
|
What have you been uses for your sources?
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 08/14/2010 : 06:35:04 [Permalink]
|
Thanks for adding the link H.Humbert. I missed adding it, obviously.
After reading some replies I am again wondering what could be the benefit of discussing literature with illiterates who have the ability to read and choose not to but sill comment as though they have. This happens often here, on many topics.
Farseeker please try reading the article and your guaranteed to learn something. I don't know why you would not read the provided link and then comment about your inability to understand the ToE. That is not what the article was about. SS |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
| Edited by - sailingsoul on 08/14/2010 06:36:33 |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 08/14/2010 : 11:14:25 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Farseeker
"believers" pushed evolutionary theory as if it had all the answers. |
Classic creationist bullshit comment.
 |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Lurkings Of The Discovery Instituite
