1. Attachments are working again! Check out this thread for more details and to report any other bugs.

'Intelligent Design' Gets Bush's Nod

Discussion in 'Fred's House of Pancakes' started by IsrAmeriPrius, Aug 2, 2005.

  1. rflagg

    rflagg Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    947
    9
    0
    Location:
    Springfield, VA
    Stay tuned for what will be the main debate of the 2008 presidential elections: Is the Earth really round, or flat?

    -m.
     
  2. galaxee

    galaxee mostly benevolent

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    9,810
    466
    0
    Location:
    MD
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    I thought "intelligent" design implicated that there was some kind of "intelligence" behind the complexities of development of all the diverse beings of the earth.

    That would pretty much require some direction from some "intelligent" being that existed before the earth...

    sounds suspiciously like this known/loved/feared entity in a very old book.

    Wonder how many high school kids would come to that same conclusion? It's not much of a reach. I'm not even tapping into my hard, data-driven scientific mind yet today (need more caffeine to jump-start it)
     
  3. FBear

    FBear Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2004
    355
    23
    0
    Location:
    Maplewood, NJ
    Vehicle:
    2015 Prius v wagon
    Model:
    Four
    I hate saying this but GW is wiley, he is not stupid just simple minded. Pointed in a direction he will continue in that direction even if he hit a stone wall. Just look at all his statements on the enviroment, he has been saying we need to study the enviroment more before we do anything since his first campaign. His statements on inteligent design are soley to appease his conservative base. Inteligent design is the religious right using secular language to both hide and inject God and biblical ideas into the discussion of how things occured. Inteligent design is also a wedge strategy to help sway public opinion and policymakers. It is not about science it is just a debate about religon and philosophy.
     
  4. hawkjm73

    hawkjm73 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2005
    258
    1
    0
    Location:
    Phoenix, Arizona
    No, not really. All intelligent design requires is something that can make desisions that affect the progress of events. It can also be applied to other origins theories. For an example: Doctors are intelligent designers for evolution. A doctor is an intelligent entity. He can decide to save a life that would otherwise have ended due to genetic features that would have otherwise hampered that life's ability to survive and procreate. Over many doctors and millions of saved lives, the overall outcome of the human race can thus be altered by intelligent creatures making decisions. Now, do we allow doctors the perks of creatorship? Of course not. Intelligent design, in its broadest sense, requires nothing that need to be called a creator. Creationism is a much more focused aspect of intelligent design, and here is where a creator is required. But, it is still up to any individual belief system to decide if the specific creator requires worship, or even acknowledgment.
     
  5. galaxee

    galaxee mostly benevolent

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    9,810
    466
    0
    Location:
    MD
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    That's one form of something called "artificial selection." Evolutionary theory claims it affects the outcome of a population.

    So now ID preaches evolution? Or are they simply stealing ideas and trying to turn them around?
     
  6. seeh2o

    seeh2o Prius OG

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2004
    447
    16
    0
    Location:
    City of Angels
    Vehicle:
    2013 Prius
    Model:
    Persona
    Sadly, if "intelligent design" is taught along with the theory of evolution we may well end up with students who have no strong concept of either theory, but a luke warm mixed up understanding of both schools of thought. This causes its own set of problems in the long run. Sounds dangerous to me, there's nothing worse than a half-nice person understanding of concepts, especially if one is based a book of stories written by old men trying to immortalize themselves.

    I can attest first hand to the problems of being taught two systems, each in a mediocre way. While I was in junior high the powers that be in our local school system could not decide on whether to teach us the Imperial system or the metric system of measurement (which essentially 98% of the industrialized nations on this planet use). Hence, we were taught both - sort of. Most of the students in my grade level came away with little to no good understanding of either system. We've had to self teach ourselves both systems. Great preparation for the real world, eh?

    Further, in my humble opinion, "Intelligent design" is simply semantic political spin for the extreme "Christian" right wing (also known as the American Taliban) religious agenda. Horsesh*t by any other name.
     
  7. DanH

    DanH New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    201
    0
    0
    Honestly now, there is a big gap between accepting the idea of a something that put this universe into motion and ingaging with God of Christianity. One is just to accept an idea about something the other is to engage in a relationship.

    (I know I am going to catch some heat for that one, but I had to say something from 'the other side'.)
     
  8. azemission

    azemission New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2005
    23
    0
    0
    Location:
    Long Island, NY
    Evolutionism and Creationism is just equally probable. Evolution is so called a science that cannot be tested and duplicated. Creationism is often taught in faith. But what's the difference when evolution is simply taught and been accepted by faith as well. How many of us actually experimented with evolution in our high school classes? Most of us just took the words of the text book and believed.
     
  9. TonyPSchaefer

    TonyPSchaefer Your Friendly Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    14,816
    2,498
    66
    Location:
    Far-North Chicagoland
    Vehicle:
    2017 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Prime Advanced
    I don't normally get involved in the back-and-forth debates, usually because sometimes it's days before I have time to respond and by then the discussion is dead. But I would like to clarify what I said.

    In the part that you quoted, it's possible to assume that I'm talking about Evolution vs. God. Actually, it ties in with the part you didn't quote, talking about God vs. god. My god versus your god versus the Greek gods versus the Egyptian gods versus other gods I'm not familiar with. If I understood you correctly, you partially agreed with me when you said, in parentheses, "or at least those relevant to the cultures represented in the group".

    When I said that the schools teaching Intelligent Design would become institutions for religious conversion, I didn't mean swaying scientific children to become religious children. Rather, I meant the conversion of children raised to believe in their culture's creationist views into children forced to provide answers counter to those views.

    Fr. William and Sr. Mary Kate taught me to accept what they told me on blind faith alone. Saint Thomas Aquinas taught me to accept religion but continue to pursue science and free thought. That I'm aware, Fr. William and Sr. Mary Kate have yet to be canonized. I grew up practically in the shadows of a monastery and loved chanting mass in Latin and German. I have two brothers who work there now. I attend mass regularly and recite the Apostle's Creed with everyone else. Then I go home and read Scientific American.

    You asked me to look at the argument from the other side of the fence. I think that I am. I look at it from the perspective of the parent who raised their children to believe that the Greek gods still live in Mt Olympus, that Zues killed Kronos, that all which is written in The Metemorphesis is true and accurate. I would not want my children being forced to write that someone else's religious beliefs are more accurate than ours.

    The core of my original argument is that if we're going to introduce my religious persuation into American public schools, we should also make room for all the others. It's a slippery slope.
     
  10. prius04

    prius04 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    1,161
    0
    0
    Location:
    NorthEast USA
    At one time the Arab world was at the forefront of scientific thought and accomplishment. Then a wave of anti-intellectualism and fundamentalism took hold across the Arab world. Those anti-intellectuals burned the library of Alexandria, as well as other great places of learning and scientific thought.

    The result was a dark age for the Arab world that continues to this day.

    From some of the anti-science and pro creationism/ intelligent design hokum I've read above, history may be repeating itself in this country.

    Better have your kids or grandkids start learning Chinese or Hindi.
     
  11. Randy

    Randy Junior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    54
    0
    0
    Location:
    Maryland
    What we should be asking is "What are some examples of Intelligent Design?"

    One example would be..."On earth, oxygen comprises 21 percent of the atmosphere. That precise figure is an anthropic constant that makes life on earth possible. If oxygen were 25 percent, fires would erupt spontaneously: if it were 15 percent, human beings would suffocate."
    Another example would be...the gravitational interaction that the earth has with the moon."If the interaction were greater than it currently is, tidal effects on the oceans, atmosphere, and rotational period would be too severe. If it were less, orbital changes would cause climate instabilities. In either event, life on earth would be impossible."

    Now how can people be against teaching this information to our children? If one is against the teaching of ID they are against the teaching of the above examples to our children.
    Randy
     
  12. galaxee

    galaxee mostly benevolent

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    9,810
    466
    0
    Location:
    MD
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    well. if all that weren't true randy, life wouldn't have begun on earth at all. it would have started on some other planet that was more hospitable. simple as that. i'm sure you've heard from evolutionary theory, if you've done your homework on this issue, that the evolution of plant species affected the amounts of oxygen in the air and that allowed other species to move onto land.

    the problem with your argument here is that you're assuming humans were premade and just placed here. like fish into a fishtank. sure, if the temperature or pH is off, the fish are going to die. but it's not like that. if the earth weren't a good place for life to begin, it wouldn't have started. humans would have never existed, along with the millions of other species that inhabit this place.

    i wouldn't want my children to be told in school any of that. the factual parts, yes. but in the context that some higher being designed this place and put us here... no. that doesn't belong in schools. period.
     
  13. IsrAmeriPrius

    IsrAmeriPrius Progressive Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2004
    4,333
    7
    0
    Location:
    Southern California
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    Intelligent design is a matter of faith, not a matter of science. Thus, it belongs in religious education classes, not in science or other academic classes taught in public schools, except for historical and cultural studies.

    Every culture and faith has its own beliefs about creation. That is something best left for religious educators, not the public schools.
     
  14. prius04

    prius04 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    1,161
    0
    0
    Location:
    NorthEast USA
    There is nothing in these factoids that would lend any credence to intel design. Do you have any evidence that 21% 02 levels can only exist because some one or some thing intelligently made it so?

    Here's another cute factoid.
    Water does something weird when it freezes. It gets LARGER. When water freezes, it takes up more volume than when it is liquid. This phenomenon is actually rare in the universe.

    Thus, ice floats when it freezes. And ice has the potential to destroy rock when it freezes. If water shrunk when it froze, all ice would sink to the bottom of the ocean and much of it would never melt. And mountains would never crumble to the sea. So if all ice sunk, the planet would not be able to sustain humans.

    So it must have taken a brilliant guide to make sure this happened. There could be no other way.

    (ice - 9 works a little different.)
     
  15. FBear

    FBear Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2004
    355
    23
    0
    Location:
    Maplewood, NJ
    Vehicle:
    2015 Prius v wagon
    Model:
    Four
    azemission stated "Evolutionism and Creationism is just equally probable." Yea right, that statement is true only if you have faith and absolutely no knowledge of science. There is tons of proof of evolution. There are spieces on two different continents that have the same genetic roots that have developed into two separate subspecies. The only thing driving the changes were the two different environments that each lived. You actually want to tell me with a straight face that some inteligent designer made those two animals that are genetically identical but developemently different!!!
     
  16. TonyPSchaefer

    TonyPSchaefer Your Friendly Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    14,816
    2,498
    66
    Location:
    Far-North Chicagoland
    Vehicle:
    2017 Prius Prime
    Model:
    Prime Advanced
    I still want to know who's Intelligent Design we are the result of.

    Pick one god and prove all other Intelligent Design theory as bumkis. This is the only way you will make me happy with introducing ID into schools. And no, just because Bush happens to agree with your theory of Intelligent Design does not make it the right one.

    Or perhaps you want to believe that all the gods got together and divvied up the global population. In which case, you are going to have to teach all religion views of Intelligent Design since we have no federal religion that can be legally enforced.
     
  17. IsrAmeriPrius

    IsrAmeriPrius Progressive Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2004
    4,333
    7
    0
    Location:
    Southern California
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TonyPSchaefer\";p=\"113883)</div>
    You'll never pass for an MOT.

    :wink:

    The word is Bubkes

    bubkes also bupkes or bupkus . . . . noun plural but singular in construction [Yiddish (probably short for kozebubkes, literally, goat droppings), plural of bubke, bobke, diminutive of bub, bob bean, of Slavic origin; akin to Polish bób bean] (1942) : the least amount : BEANS <won't win bubkes this year — Ivan Maisel>; also : NOTHING <received bubkes at nomination time — Lewis Beale>
     
  18. jkash

    jkash Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    889
    18
    0
    Location:
    West Hills, CA
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    This very subject came up today in my summer school class. My students are studying the 1920's this week. We have been watching the wonderful ABC News series called America's Time. One of the segments discussed the Scopes Trial. That led to a discussion of the teaching of evolution or creationism. I have no problem as a teacher discussing both points of view and allowing the students to make up their minds for themselves.
     
  19. IsrAmeriPrius

    IsrAmeriPrius Progressive Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2004
    4,333
    7
    0
    Location:
    Southern California
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jkash\";p=\"113888)</div>
    I agree that it totally appropriate for discussion in a social science class; however, general consensus in the scientific community is called for any scientific theory which is taught in the exact science courses.

    --Edited to correct a typographical error.
     
  20. galaxee

    galaxee mostly benevolent

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    9,810
    466
    0
    Location:
    MD
    Vehicle:
    2005 Prius
    i agree with IAP. mixing science and religious issues is like trying to mix oil and water...

    things will have to be shaken up
    it won't look pretty
    they'll never mix well
    and eventually they'll separate again