Well, the Comment Threat of the Previous Post has Become Quite Long Enough, so I Figure it is Time to Start a New Post. I Thought that this Post was going to be in Response to one of the Links that BB-Idaho Left in the Previous Comment Threat, but it Looks Like it is Going to be about a Link of my Own Instead.
In the Last of my Comments, as of the Time of this New Post, I Left Two Links that Explain why Intelligent Design Research is Indeed a Science and here are the Links again.
Does Intelligent Design Theory Implement the Scientific Method?
Intelligent Design Based upon the Scientific Method, Not Blind Faith.
The First of these Links is Very Short; Just a One Paragraph Answer to the Given Question.
As I was Reading through the Second of the Above Links, I Realized that the IDEA Center (That is Intelligent Design and Evolution Awareness Center) is not Actually Pushing for the Requiring of Intelligent Design being Taught as an "Alternative" at the Present Time, but only that the Students should be Exposed in an Honest Manner to the Scientific Problems with Darwinian Evolution.
The Reason for this is not because Intelligent Design Theory can not be Supported Scientifically, but because "the Political Climate is too hostile at this time."
The IDEA Center does, however, Encourage "extracurricular IDEA Clubs, where they can have free discussions on intelligent design."
The Scientific Method, which they do Use, is Explained Very Well in this Article.
Some Other Interesting Things to Note are that Intelligent Design Scientists Treat any Belief that they may have that can not be Scientifically Tested as Unscientific and Irrelevant and they do not Attempt to Test Questions that are Purely Religious in Nature.
They Only Claim "Intelligent Causation", or that "Life had an Intelligent Source."
You will see in this Article the Distinction made between Intelligent Design and "Creationism", a Distinction that is Continually Ignored because of the Opposition's Desire to Discredit Intelligent Design.
I Like this Statement; "Modern-Day Galileos, Mr. Trent also writes that 'Not so long ago, it was immoral to claim the Earth went around the sun.', but he doesn't recognize that there are modern-day Galileos who are being persecuted because they question the Darwinian paradigm." and also, "It seems the persecution of scientists hasn't ended, but now it is the Darwinists who are behaving like the intolerant dogmatists of old."
You'll have to Read the Article for more Details.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
23 comments:
I guess I lost my last post
below. Lucky you, it was too long, mostly about sugar beets and querying about the ID theory concern ing the over 280 million separate species
(most of which have died out).
The IDEA Center is run by
Casey Luskin..I have exchanged a number of e-mails with him at his other
location, the Discovery Institute (duh!) He is a lawyer.
Galileo was hounded, true. But not by his fellow scientists, he was persecuted by the church.
Now then, how many ID proponents have been burned at the stake?
Their sole complaint is that their creationism in ID clothing doesn't pass
scientific muster.
And so the wedge strategy. It seems basic
that prior to criticizing
science, one should understand it. Not these days, apparently. Gotta go with Voltaire..Ecrasez
L'Infame!
Actually BB,
You didn't Lose your Last Post. You Might See it Yet. I'm just having Trouble Deciding what to do about it. It's not Off Subject. It's just that Unlike Z, I do not Like Long Comment Threads, so I Was Considering Posting it here, yet I'm a little Busy Now, so you will just have to be Patient. I'll Respond to Both of your Comments a Little Later, but right now I've got to Run.
I'm Finding it Hard to Believe, BB, that you were not Impressed with the Intelligent Design Stuff Presented by Discovery Institute and now the IDEA Center, because I sure was.
Just Because the Villains have Changed from the Church to Scientists does not Prove that it is not Happening. They actually did a Documentary on the Subject Called "Expelled" that Explained how Scientists were Discriminated Against and were Losing their Jobs due to their Belief in Intelligent Design.
Oh Man, this is Tiring. Speciation doesn't Pass Scientific Muster either. Creationism and ID are not the Same Thing. The Wedge Strategy was Put Out by Creationists. Intelligent Design Scientist do Understand Science. I'm Tired of these False Accusations, BB, that are Based on Bias, not Fact.
Did you Even Bother to Read the Linked Article?
Just in Case you haven't Noticed, BB, I did Post the Comment that you Think you had Lost. The Comment and my Response to it are Beneath the Previous Post.
hey there Lista..I will read the article and stew on it for a bit..thanks for the intellectual stimulation!
Thanks for Coming by, Angel. To be Honest, I've become a little Concerned about something that the Wikipedia Said about the Wedge Strategy, as Brought to my Attention by BB-Idaho. My Natural Inclination is to Disregard it because of the Prejudice and Persecution that I Know Exists in Relation to Intelligent Design Scientists, yet I Really do Try to be as Unbiased as Possible and in Order to do so, I'm afraid I am going to have to Take another Look at that.
Aside from that One Thing, however, BB's Comment is Full of False Accusations that he is simply Echoing from the things the Evolutionist Typically say about their Opponent.
"BB's Comment is Full of False Accusations.."
Oh my goodness! Let's review Phase II of the
'Wedge Document'-
"Phase II. The primary purpose of Phase II is to prepare the popular reception of our ideas. The best and truest research can languish unread and unused unless it is properly publicized. For this reason we seek to cultivate and convince influential individuals in pnnt and broadcast media, as well as think tank leaders, scientists and academics, congressional staff, talk show hosts, college and seminary presidents and faculty, future talent and potential academic allies. Because of his long tenure in politics, journalism and public policy, Discovery President Bruce Chapman brings to the project rare knowledge and acquaintance of key op-ed writers, journalists, and political leaders. This combination of scientific and scholarly expertise and media and political connections makes the Wedge unique, and also prevents it from being "merely academic." Other activities include production of a PBS documentary on intelligent design and its implications, and popular op-ed publishing. Alongside a focus on influential opinion-makers, we also seek to build up a popular base of support among our natural constituency, namely, Chnstians. We will do this primarily through apologetics seminars. We intend these to encourage and equip believers with new scientific evidence's that support the faith, as well as to "popularize" our ideas in the broader culture."
As a scientist, I find that not only non scientific, but simply some sort of ad campaign.
So, "I'm Finding it Hard to Believe, BB, that you were not Impressed with the Intelligent Design Stuff Presented by Discovery Institute and now the IDEA Center, because I sure was."
Sure you were..because you are a consumer. I was not, because I am (or was) a scientist. Like I've reiterated, I've talked to these folks, they are very nice...and they have an ax to grind. If they ever come up with any scientific
data, more power to them.
If not, then they are just
hacks that decry 'materialism'. That is OK too,....but it ain't science. OK?
Blogger n Me..don't get along. My 'treatise' was rejected because 'your URL
is too long'?!
Anyhoo, a bit taken back
by 'full of false accusations' because I just
don't do that, never have, never will.
If you carefully read the
'wedge document' which is
acknowledged by the ID folks, you will note it is broken into three phases.
Phase 1 boils down to 'we need to do research'..sure
do, if you are going up against scientists.
Phase 2 involves using
all sorts of media to push their agenda..basically
an advertising program to
get accepted.
Phase 3 ..the final goal,
to replace science with
their version.
Phase 1 has failed so far. Phase 2 is going great guns..America is the only country in the world
where many people 'don't believe in evolution'
(well, except for the 99.9% of scientists)
Phase 3 IMO cannot happen without a return to total
theocracy like the Dark Ages. That is the situation as I see it, I am not 'echoing the things evolutionists say'. But
evolutionists may be echoing things I am saying. :) Nor am I out to convert anyone to my
view of things, just alert them to the complexities
of real science and to think for themselves.
I've had Lots of Experiences with the "your URL is too Long" Message, but have Learned to Ignore it because more Times than not, the Comment is Posted Regardless of the Message and so Rest Assured that I do have your Long Comment and will be Posting and Getting to it Later. I Thought I'd just Start with the Shorter One for Now.
I Know that the False Accusations do not Originate from you, BB. You are just Misinformed.
Also, Please Note, that I Said "Aside from that One Thing" and that One Thing is the Wedge Document. As a Recap, though, I did not Like your Statements "Creationism in ID Clothing", "Doesn't Pass Scientific Muster" and "Prior to Criticizing Science, One Should Understand it."
You may have not Been Impressed with the Scientific Nature of the ID Scientists, but I was and I also Know that Creation and ID are not the Same Thing. Creationists do not Even Try to be Scientific. They just Quote Scriptures and what they say is Based on Faith. To suggest that ID is this way is a Lie.
Even if some of what the Wedge Document Says Turns Out to be True, I am Quite Certain that it is Exaggerated and I Simply will not Accept any Exaggerated Accusations, nor Extra Things Added to it that can not be Proved.
There is Nothing Wrong with Advertising for the Sake of Getting One's Ideas Accepted. Phase 3 is the One that I Question and also do not Agree with.
What I'd Really Like to do is Write to the Discovery Institute Guy and Ask him about it.
I Wrote More, but I'm Tired, so I'm going to Take a Break and Look at some other Blogs and Posts.
Ok, Maybe I Will Finish this After all.
As to the Wedge Document, I Disagree that Phase 1 has Failed. It may have Failed in the Convencing of those Committed to the Status Quo, but they have Not Failed to Produce Impressive Evidence. You are just too Biased to see it.
I am also Quite Convinced that that 99.9% Number is Extremely Biased to the Point of being an Out Right Lie, just as Z-man Pointed Out on an Earlier Post, One of the ".1%" of the Scientists that do not Believe in Evolution is Albert Einstein. I Meant to Comment on that Jokingly that "Gee! He must be the Only One!" and "Gee! Wasn't Einstein an Idiot?!"
"I'm not out to convert anyone to my view of things, just alert them to the complexities of real science and to think for themselves."
I Ditto that, except I may Feel a Little more Urgent About it because Most People are already Aware or your Side of the Issue, but not Necessarily of Mine. And I am Also Well Aware of how Common it is for Persecution to Occur in Relation to anything at all that is even Remotely Christian.
Thanks for your Summary of the Wedge Document, for those who do not wish to Take the Time to Read the Full Description in the Wikipedia.
Ok. Now in Response to the First of your Two Recent Comments. What is so Wrong, BB, with an Ad Campaign to get One's Ideas Out there? And why would you Consider that Unscientific. Is a Scientist not Allowed to Speak Outside of his Laboratory? Is he Locked in a Cage so that he is not Allowed to do any Other Activity other than Research? What you are Saying just doesn't make any Sense.
You are a Highly Biased Scientist that Sees Only what you want to see in the Evidence just Like those you would Accuse of the Same.
You have Closed your Mind and have Blinders on and Don't even Know it. Sorry to Offend, but what I'm saying is True and Each Person has to Read the Evidence for themselves.
I spent 30 years researching initiating explosives. Believe me,
bias and wishful thinking
are two things that can get one blown to molecules in short order. If accusing me of 'bias, closed mind, blinders' makes you feel better, fine. Scientist ad campaign? Never had time for that....
Fine. Then if you are not Biased, then you already Know that Speciation can not be Proved and that Random Chance in the Absence of a Creator is no More Provable than the Existence of a Creator.
You also Know that Things such as Psychology, Sociology and Archeology are all Soft Sciences, not Hard Sciences, Evolution is the Same Way and is Mostly Based on Theory. Deep Down, you do Know that what I'm saying is True. Considering this, Why do you Insist that Intelligent Design Theory has to Prove itself to be a Hard Science in Order for it to be Recognized?
If the Certainty of Speciation was an Ingredient Needed in a Certain Explosive Receptive, then Please do Warn me so that I can Stay Clear of your Lab, Cause I can Guarantee you that it Will Explode before you want it to.
Your Presence or Lack of Bias has Nothing to do with my Feelings. That's a Cope Out and you Know it.
Look, life could have had an intelligent designer...Anything is possible. However, ID is not a science and there is no evidence of an intelligent creator. I mean, the whole argument behind it actually contradicts itself:
ID people say that something as complex as humans or the Earth are too "perfect" to have just happened so there must have been a creator... The problem there is that you then have the same question that has to be answered about THAT creator. If we, with all of our flaws, are too complex to have just evolved, then an all perfect even more evolved being would also have to have had an even higher creator. I mean, isn't that the main position of ID?? That complex life can't just appear out of thin air?? If that is the case, you just disproved God...Unless of course you can find his creator.
In reality it is evolution that states that higher life forms couldn't have just spontaneously appeared and that complex life came from lower forms of life, which is exactly what we find in the fossil records. You never find a poodle next to Trilobites and Ambulocetus (the walking whale).
Evolution does not disprove God, nor does it try to. Evolution does not state that we definitely did not come from a higher power at some point in time. All evolution does is point out that the story in the Bible is not how we got here. But that's nothing new; the bible also claims that insects have 4 legs, the Sun revolves around the Earth (which is flat and square and rests on pillars), camels don't have split hooves, bats are birds and that epilepsy could be cured by exorcisms, all of which we know are not true.
For references:
http://toadthoughts.blogspot.com/2008/03/what-our-world-would-be-like-if-bible.html
And you should really watch my video on evolution to answer more of your questions.
You Know, I was Actually Wondering if I was going to be Moving to a New Subject in my Next Post, yet I Keep Finding New Interest in this One. A Lot of my Thoughts on the Subject in Relation to Actual Evidence for Intelligent Design can be Found in the Comment Section of an Earlier Post, Equations we Live By/Gen/Evolution v. Intelligent Design.
The Idea of Random Chance, Independent of a Creator, is the Idea that is Called into Question and that can not be Proved. Also, Speciation has not been Proved.
All I'll Saying is that Evolution should be Taught Honestly as a Theory, not as if it is an Established Fact, because it is not.
"All evolution does is point out that the story in the Bible is not how we got here."
Disproving the Bible is a Pretty Serious Thing, Toad, and that in itself is Enough to Justify Insisting that Evolutionists Admit that what they are saying is Theory and not Fact.
"the bible also claims that insects have 4 legs, the Sun revolves around the Earth (which is flat and square and rests on pillars), camels don't have split hooves, bats are birds and that epilepsy could be cured by exorcisms."
Can you Tell me where these Scripture Verses are, or are you just Assuming that which you Really don't Know? Don't just Assume that just Because the Church Once Said so, that it is Actually in the Bible.
I Think you're Wrong, but I do Thank You for Dropping By.
I Hope that you Read the Links that are in my Post, Toad. To Simply State that ID is not a Science is just a Statement, yet the Links Explain Why there are others who Disagree with you.
Again, the references are on my blog. And yes, disproving the Bible (much of it anyway) is very easy. For instance, the census that takes place during Jesus' birth did not happen when Jesus was supposedly born.
Yes, we can prove speciation (ambulocetus-the walking whale) and we can prove decent with modification, we have transitional fossils such as Ambulocetus, Homo-Erectus, Archaeopteryx and it is all clearly defined in the fossil record where lower forms of life come first, the more complex forms of life come later. Ever wonder why we have a tail bone?(ill give you a hint, it has something to do with tails) Appendix? Why we get goose bumps? Why I only have 3 wisdom teeth? Why the bones in my hand are almost exactly like the bones in the wing of a bat or the hand of a Chimp? Or why an Ostrich or chicken has wings?? or why rabbits eat their own poop?? Why we can't breathe and swallow our food at the same time, why the eye has blind spots, why humans get hemorrhoids, so many people need glasses, Whales have leg bones, some snakes have a pelvis,why some humans can develop vestigial gills (my ex girlfriends uncle),why cave fish have eye sockets, not because these were intelligently planned out by someone and if it was, they are retarded because these were very bad choices..Not to mention small pox, cancer, AIDS, etc.
ID is not a science, no matter who agrees with me. People out there may have disagreed with me that the hale-bopp comet didn't have god behind it waiting to take people to Heaven(as some believed)but that doesn't make it a theory worth considering. Millions of people thought our entire grid was going to collapse on 1/1/2000 but it didn't happen and many people disagree with my premise that Bush and Cheney didn't fly the planes into the WTC on 9/11 by remote control but that doesn't make them right.
We do not Actually Know when Christ was born. The Bible doesn't Say. Even if you disprove the Calendar based on BC and AD, you still have not Disproved the Bible.
I have Written you another Rather Long Response to the Post you Left a Link to. I'm just Putting Off Delivering it, because I Wanted to Look Up Some Stuff.
Just Because you Can Spout Out Stuff in Large Enough Numbers that No One could Possibly Find the Time to Explain the Faultiness of each and every Item in the Blogging Setting does not Prove your Case.
BB has Already Left Some Links to some Supposed Proofs of Speciation and they can all be Debunked. You can Call it Evidence if you Like, but Nothing can be Proved.
Speciation can not be Proved just as Intelligent Design can not be Proved, so if Intelligent Design is not Science for that Reason, then Darwinism is also not Science. If the Use of the Scientific Method is the Test, though, then Intelligent Design Qualifies as a Science.
This Discussion is Now Officially Closed until After Christmas. I have not Deleted anything. Your Comments will simply be Stored in Moderation until After Christmas. My Excuse. I'm just Busy.
Oh goodie..its after Christmas. Back in 2007, I exchanged some
e-mails with C. Luskin of the
'Discovery Institute':
Mr. Luskin,
I apologize if my frustration appears as "hate and vitriol" and projected at you. In my hometown newspaper today, a typical letter to the editor was printed. Let me quote in part:
"Neo-Darwinism is a dead end. Evolution is a religious, not a scientific belief. This comic book-caliber theory is backed by only sparse and fragmented evidence that has been extrapolated way beyond the bounds of scientific objectivity. When honest scientists begin to question this pseudo-scientific and overtly religious belief, these fanatical Darwinians are quick to defend their state-sponsored religious idea . The preferred pledge of the faithful reads: One nation under Darwin.... . With the final nail being driven into the coffin of this pseudo-scientific theory, the God-haters will have to find a different lie to lean on. Not real long on facts, but now there's some vitriol." And that kind of thinking that upsets me.
Mr. Luskin's reply in part:
"Dear Bob,
Thanks so much for your kind reply. I understand one’s frustration when one agrees with what they consider to be misguided public policies and bad letters. Quite frankly, the letter you quoted below is pretty bad and pretty offensive. Many evolutionists are not “God-hatesr” and evolution is a scientific theory which needs to be taught in schools. So I would probably join you in not liking the article that was misguided, and I would agree with you that it had inappropriate vitriol. You have my sympathies in that regard."
One of these persons discredits
intelligent design...can you guess
which?
Huh? I Guess I Never did get back to this, for my Previous Comment was Written Prior to Christmas of Last Year, that is not just Prior to the New Year, but actually a Year Ago, 2010, and now someone has Submitted a Comment to this Blog Again and Guess what? I'm tired and there are some Non-Christmas Things that are Stressing me just a little and Occupying my Mind. I've got so many Unfinished Conversations all over the Web. Sometimes this just seems to be the Nature of Blogging.
Patience, my Friend. I'm even Behind in Responding to Emails.
Why? You Ask. Well, it's Music Business mainly. We just got a New Pastor and this always seems to Create Changes and Confusion. I'm Ok. I just Need some Time to Adjust to some Changes in my Schedule and this makes Focusing on Blogging Difficult.
I'll get Back to you, though. I Promise.
Since you didn't get back to me,
I should mention that current
paleoanthropological thinking
puts homo sapiens ancestors millions of years back and it is thought there were various species
and subspecies that branched. Indeed, current DNA study tends to support that thinking. Nevertheless, here is some startling human/ape interaction ..the mountain
gorilla has not been as successful
as homo sapiens. There are over
5 billion of us and only 720 of
them left. Kind of a fascinating
video.....
Oh Gee! It is getting Harder and Harder for me to Find the Time to Tend to my Blog the way I would like to. In Reading your January 3 Comment, though, it seems that I Might have Written some sort of a Response to it. It's just a Matter of Finding it in my Word Processor.
Meanwhile, that Video is Awesome, BB. Thanks.
Post a Comment