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.
Intelligent design has been found by federal courts to be nothing more than pure creationism in disguise. Creationism in public schools as science violates the First Amendment.
Just listen to yourself!!! The courts have decided??? Since when are judges scientists?
What the courts actually decided was to censor what kids can hear, and ensuring public schools would remain indoctrination centers to install beliefs, rather than teach.
Intelligent design is not an endorsement of any religion ... therefore those arguments are red herrings. The issue is that evolution theory is so full of crap and holes, it cannot stand up on it's own merits, therefore no competing or contradictory theories will be tolerated.
God Bless the United Socialist States of America ... land of the deceived and home of the depraved.
So, from what I'm reading here, the only evidence of intelligent design is that life is too complex to be explained by evolution? Again, attacking another theory is not proving your own. What evidence is there that actually points to a supernatural being "designing" a universe as we know it?
From what I see, those that support the evolution theory are constantly questioning the theory, looking for ways to fill in the gaps in knowledge and understanding, and testing their hypothesis. While the ID folks don't feel the need to do so, only saying that since these issues are too hard to understand, a creator must be responsile. Am I missing anything?
What makes you believe that you or anyone else with a mere human brain may be able to understand the ultimate nature of things.
You may very well be correct about our limited understanding. Also, our vantage point may not be sufficient for us to see the big picture. Yet the church faithful have concluded a first cause is a non-starter. Seems like a rush to ignorance to me.
I am honestly trying to understand the logic behind teaching creationism (which is a perfectly valid religious belief, IMO) in science classrooms. IRL, I do not know one person, religious or not, who thinks this is a wise idea to teach it as science, so I am trying to become acquainted with the viewpoint behind it here.
Just listen to yourself!!! The courts have decided??? Since when are judges scientists?
You really don't know how any of this works, do you?
Expert testimony was given and evaluated. The ID people presumably put on their best case with their best expert.
He was not persuasive, because while the judge may not be a scientist, he is formally trained in logic.
Unlike your typical Creationist or ID proponent.
Quote:
What the courts actually decided was to censor what kids can hear, and ensuring public schools would remain indoctrination centers to install beliefs, rather than teach.
No, the court chose to properly apply the Establishment clause, and correctly surmised that ID was just Creationism with some legal lipstick on it.
Quote:
Intelligent design is not an endorsement of any religion ... therefore those arguments are red herrings.
You already lost that argument.
Quote:
The issue is that evolution theory is so full of crap and holes, it cannot stand up on it's own merits, therefore no competing or contradictory theories will be tolerated.
This statement has no relation to reality whatsoever. That you choose to be ignorant and intellectually honest about this topic isn't really an argument.
Quote:
God Bless the United Socialist States of America ... land of the deceived and home of the depraved.
And this has not a thing to do with socialism, but thanks once again for showing us all that this is an ideological issue to you, not a factual one.
See and here is the problem....If its tax money,teach both....
Thats the problem with "your side"...you want what you want and tuff crap on everyone else, well it doesnt work that way.
What gives the right to one side over the other?
Teach both and let the students decide......what are you affraid of?
Just listen to yourself!!! The courts have decided??? Since when are judges scientists?
What the courts actually decided was to censor what kids can hear, and ensuring public schools would remain indoctrination centers to install beliefs, rather than teach.
Intelligent design is not an endorsement of any religion ... therefore those arguments are red herrings. The issue is that evolution theory is so full of crap and holes, it cannot stand up on it's own merits, therefore no competing or contradictory theories will be tolerated.
God Bless the United Socialist States of America ... land of the deceived and home of the depraved.
So, you think that the theory of evolution is yet another conspiracy perpetrated by your government? Sort of like the other conspiracies you believe in? Why am I not surprised? The theory of evolution is accepted by science world wide, and ID nonsense is just that...Nonsense.
So, you think that the theory of evolution is yet another conspiracy perpetrated by your government? Sort of like the other conspiracies you believe in? Why am I not surprised? The theory of evolution is accepted by science world wide, and ID nonsense is just that...Nonsense.
Like I said earlier in this thread, this so-called debate has much more to do with the psychology of some people than it does with legitimate disagreement over facts.
And teaching them one side of a story is teaching the what to think, not how to think!!!!
Teach them both theories ... Intelligent design and Evolution, and let them make up their own minds .... if you are at all interested in them learning how to think.
The problem is, where would you teach ID?
Its not a scientifically theory, so has no place being taught as a scientific alternative to evolution. So, would it be part of religious education class?
Perhaps there needs to be clarity:
Scientific theory:
Hypothesis + how well explains observable evidence + mechanism
So, the question comes:
What is the ID mechanism?
Has ID ever been observed?
Is there any observable evidence that any interference with evolution has ever occurred?
The answer to these questions is non, and no and no, thus what you have there is still a 'hypothesis' which is as good or bad as any other randomly generated hypothesis. So, 'elves did it', just as valid. 'Apples have formed an alliance with cats, forming capples, which wish to raise humans to serve them' equally valid.
The question isn't is ID right or wrong, but can it be judged as part of the scientific process. Which it can't. So can it be taught as competition to evolution? No, it can't.
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.
