Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
While I understand your frustration, I would much prefer a society with the confidence to continue exploring the possibilities of the age-old questions of human existence.
Sadly, such confidence is greatly lacking, as many of the posts in this forum so readily point to.
But, if we must explore possibilities of age-old questions of human existence, why put a Biblical story against Science? Why Christian beliefs? Why not Hindu, Buddhist, Taoist, or whatever beliefs as well?
Besides, we're mixing stories with theories, aren't we?
But, if we must explore possibilities of age-old questions of human existence, why put a Biblical story against Science? Why Christian beliefs? Why not Hindu, Buddhist, Taoist, or whatever beliefs as well?
Besides, we're mixing stories with theories, aren't we?
You are not being honest with the debate within this thread and as such are doing a disservice to your name - EinsteinsGhost.
Intelligent Design does not subscribe to Christianity's version of Creation. In fact, the Vatican has come out against Intelligent Design.
Please people, you must inform yourself of the issue if you are to be worthy to discuss said issue!
When those of you attack people who might some subscribe to some form of Intelligent Design by using terms such as "Jesus Freaks" you only discredit your own right to argue the point. Individuals comfortable throwing out such labels are equally comfortable with using terms such as Nig--ger, Bi--tch, Sp--c, J-ap, etc. The lacking intellectual and emotional maturity of such responses are not worthy of this forum.
The Intelligent Design debate is ongoing withing the scientific community, and within that arguement, there is little if any denotion of the theory belonging to any one religious group.
In fact, it is not a debate regarding religion, but rather the still vast unanswered questions on the origin of life - a topic as yet unanswered with certainty within the scientific community. Intelligent Design does not trap itself within the context of the Genesis Creation model, but rather is an open-minded approach to the clear biological patterns of life on earth. Intelligent Design is an appeal to science, not a distraction from it. To those who attempt to link Intelligent Design with the Biblical (or other religious text) version of creation are announcing to everyone you actually have no knowledge or understanding of Intelliegent Design - and likely just as little understanding of Darwinian Evolution theory as well.
I fully support the discussion of Intelligent Design within our public schools and institutions of higher learning, just as I support the Darwinian theory of evolution being discussed as well. Both should find their rightful place in a theoretical science setting. As it is now, Darwinian Theory has reversed its Scopes Trial history - its supporters now move to censor those who wish to further explore its strengths and shortcomings with with the religious ferver of the most ardent fundamentalist. The irony within this reality is considerable.
The vast majority of Americans believe in a Higher Power. Our public schools should not ignore this fact, but be willing to explore it. Push the boundaries of belief, marvel at the rich and varied history of humankind - some it positive, much of it negative, but almost all of it incredibly interesting.
So on that note, I offer up a link to a list of those within the scientific community who are willing to question the confining outline of Darwinian Theory:
Intelligent Design is not science. It's not an appeal to science, it's a challenge to science. Science is a progression, theories are replaced by better ones, methodology is steadily improved, standards are refined. Darwin is just a footnote in the theory of evolution. The theory of evolution is science, doing what science does, evolving to incorporate new information, responding to new data and findings. Science is about what is observable, what is provable, what we know. Theories take the increments of evidence and try to explain them. Evolution is not about the origins of life, only about how life adapts and develops in an environment.
Intelligent Design is not a theory that is amenable to being discarded as new evidence and data arises. That's why it is not science. It's masquerades as a scientific theory because it borrows data and evidence from science, but it doesn't embrace its own fallibility. Science, the empiric method, embraces that fallibility. While science seems to offer answers that go beyond our understanding of our world, the scientists who propose these explanations are not asking for a leap of faith. They are testing the limits of human understanding, pushing outward. Intelligent Design isn't pushing against limits, it's trying to reign in scientific inquiry. Go no further, you cannot hope to understand the complexity of life, and because it is so complex, it can only be explained by the existence of something greater than ourselves. Science is the hope that we can go beyond just appreciating the complexity. That step by step, piece by piece, study by study, we can understand the universe we live in, how it works, how we function within it.
While I understand your frustration, I would much prefer a society with the confidence to continue exploring the possibilities of the age-old questions of human existence.
Sadly, such confidence is greatly lacking, as many of the posts in this forum so readily point to.
Who cares? We're here. Let's deal with us in the now. We will never know, and you are obviously smart enough to realize this. Even when we THINK we have it right, there will be apposing views leaving uncertainty. It's like knowing a secret that will not change anything just for the sake of being nosey. I have my beliefs. If my beliefs are "the right beliefs", when it all comes down to it, all I will be able to say is "see...I told ya" to the opposite side. That's it.
Who cares? We're here. Let's deal with us in the now. We will never know, and you are obviously smart enough to realize this. Even when we THINK we have it right, there will be apposing views leaving uncertainty. It's like knowing a secret that will not change anything just for the sake of being nosey. I have my beliefs. If my beliefs are "the right beliefs", when it all comes down to it, all I will be able to say is "see...I told ya" to the opposite side. That's it.
Ah, but the inherent debate contained within this thread is for your right to share your opinion. To explore the possibilities. To enhance your own understanding and not be satisfied with what is handed to you as fact.
There are those who wish all discussion to end. To silence any opposition. To demand their view is to be the view.
That, my friend, is not science. That is a total loss of individual freedom.
While I understand your frustration, I would much prefer a society with the confidence to continue exploring the possibilities of the age-old questions of human existence.
Sadly, such confidence is greatly lacking, as many of the posts in this forum so readily point to.
We have a place to continue exploring the possibilities of the age-old questions of human existence----the discipline is called philosophy.
Plenty of people are confident enough to learn about competing philosophies and to embrace different beliefs. So confident that they don't feel the need to attack other disciplines like science.
Intelligent Design is not science. It's not an appeal to science, it's a challenge to science. Science is a progression, theories are replaced by better ones, methodology is steadily improved, standards are refined. Darwin is just a footnote in the theory of evolution. The theory of evolution is science, doing what science does, evolving to incorporate new information, responding to new data and findings. Science is about what is observable, what is provable, what we know. Theories take the increments of evidence and try to explain them. Evolution is not about the origins of life, only about how life adapts and develops in an environment.
Intelligent Design is not a theory that is amenable to being discarded as new evidence and data arises. That's why it is not science. It's masquerades as a scientific theory because it borrows data and evidence from science, but it doesn't embrace its own fallibility. Science, the empiric method, embraces that fallibility. While science seems to offer answers that go beyond our understanding of our world, the scientists who propose these explanations are not asking for a leap of faith. They are testing the limits of human understanding, pushing outward. Intelligent Design isn't pushing against limits, it's trying to reign in scientific inquiry. Go no further, you cannot hope to understand the complexity of life, and because it is so complex, it can only be explained by the existence of something greater than ourselves. Science is the hope that we can go beyond just appreciating the complexity. That step by step, piece by piece, study by study, we can understand the universe we live in, how it works, how we function within it.
_____
In your absolute defense of the Evolution Theory you have turned your back on the very principles of scientific discovery.
Again, here is a list within academia who are willing to propose possibilities within the scientific arguement, for Intelligent Design.
Such is the rich and varied history of human science - each bold step taken by those willing to explore beyond the imposed limits of the status quo...
-There are more things in Heaven and Earth Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
In your absolute defense of the Evolution Theory you have turned your back on the very principles of scientific discovery.
Again, here is a list within academia who are willing to propose possibilities within the scientific arguement, for Intelligent Design.
Such is the rich and varied history of human science - each bold step taken by those willing to explore beyond the imposed limits of the status quo...
-There are more things in Heaven and Earth Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
You don't get it. I'm not putting up an absolute defense of evolution theory. The theory that is most widely supported today, will change and move forward tomorrow, becoming more comprehensive, doing a better job of explaining the information that science turns up.
Intelligent Design---will it evolve? Will it be replaced by better theories as more data becomes available?
There are those who wish all discussion to end. To silence any opposition. To demand their view is to be the view.
That, my friend, is not science. That is a total loss of individual freedom.
As I previously said, reality is not democratic. Science, like any other discipline, has room for debate, but not for lunacy. Beliefs aren't entitled to "equality" just because they exist. Endorsing someone else's idea, no matter how deluded and lacking in evidentiary support as "scientific", merely for purposes of being democratic, isn't science either. That is total loss of scientific integrity. And intellectual honesty. And just plain old sanity.
Intelligent Design---will it evolve? Will it be replaced by better theories as more data becomes available?
An even more pertinent question would be -- cutting through all the BS -- how does any part of the Intelligent Design "theory" justify the personal theology of any given Bible-thumper? Because -- let's face it -- Intelligent Design isn't about scientific inquiry at all; it's about promoting religion.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
