| Welcome to Campfire Soapbox. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Dumbing Down Of America, 2 | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: May 12 2006, 11:46 AM (5,659 Views) | |
| abradf2519 | May 24 2006, 11:10 AM Post #136 |
|
Member
|
Source
Source You can be a conspericy theorist, looking for conspiracies in everything, or you can just read the published words of the ID scientists. |
|
Alan Milan, New York, USA | |
![]() |
|
| abradf2519 | May 24 2006, 11:26 AM Post #137 |
|
Member
|
So some ID scientists are Christians. Do you expect them to deny their faith just because they are scientists? The are not being two faced, they are being real. Its not what these guys are saying being quoted out of context by sleazy reporters. Its what they are theorising and what research they are doing. For example, look at this quote from MLK:
It appears that he is saying that blacks have "limited vision". The reality, is the quote was taken out of context, and is not what King was saying at all. Source of the quote |
|
Alan Milan, New York, USA | |
![]() |
|
| abradf2519 | May 24 2006, 11:28 AM Post #138 |
|
Member
|
I repeat my question: Is ID a valid concept? Anyone want to go on record saying that ID is impossible? |
|
Alan Milan, New York, USA | |
![]() |
|
| ngc1514 | May 24 2006, 11:59 AM Post #139 |
![]()
Member
|
There is a difference between being "a valid concept" and being a scientific theory. That there is a huge flock of invisible, purple unicorns (those type unicorns come in flocks rather than herds) in my basement is a "valid concept." There's not a whole lot of evidence to support the existence of those blasted unicorns, but it remains a "valid concept." A solipsist, who believes that the universe came into existence at the same time he did, is also a valid concept. But who cares? In religion, Yog-Sothoth is a valid concept; even if Doc and I differ on whether he was the creator or destroyer of worlds. The world is filled with valid concepts that only assume "reality" (however you wish to measure that) when compared to the universe around us. The valid concepts found in the the mind of a schizophrenic have little to do with how the rest of us live our lives. ID is, similarly, a "valid concept" for which there isn't any evidence. So what? |
Eric
| |
![]() |
|
| teryt | May 24 2006, 12:24 PM Post #140 |
![]()
Missing in Action Member
|
Well . . . my point still is that schools should at least be presenting things other than the almighty evolution. To me it is the height of arrogance to just teach only evolution as THE total solution, when it is still a theory (no matter how well researched it seems to be). Their are other viewpoints that deserve some consideration. OK, so lets say a science textbook starts a chapter all about evolution - at least acknowledge that there are other ideas out there! Textbooks I've seen don't do that, but maybe (hopefully) that isn't the case with all of them. What's so hard about that!? Yes. Research is so often countermanded by something later. After all, we are just all men, no matter how smart we are, how much time's been invested, or how sophisticated our systems are - we still make some pretty big misteaks (sic)! |
My Boast is Christ ![]() Soon to have MBA (I'll perhaps be smart then) Recovering Perfectionist Christian Hedonist | |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | May 24 2006, 12:38 PM Post #141 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
Alan, I provided links. Most of my citations come from the leaders of the ID movement and come their published works. What is it that bothers you about ID being a new form of Creationism? You're a religious man, you should be happy it is. What do you call someone who says one thing to some and the opposite to others? |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | May 24 2006, 12:42 PM Post #142 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
Teryt "Well . . . my point still is that schools should at least be presenting things other than the almighty evolution. To me it is the height of arrogance to just teach only evolution as THE total solution, when it is still a theory (no matter how well researched it seems to be). Their are other viewpoints that deserve some consideration. OK, so lets say a science textbook starts a chapter all about evolution - at least acknowledge that there are other ideas out there! Textbooks I've seen don't do that, but maybe (hopefully) that isn't the case with all of them." They do, Teryt, evolution is a few pages in a biology textbook. What they teach is evolution is the best scientific explanation to date. The only ones painting evolution any other way is you and Alan. But it's good to hear you would also support the teaching of IDOID. It's premises and conclusions are identical to ID afterall, except they ask who designed the intelligent designer. And why not, the designer is irreducibly complex. |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| teryt | May 24 2006, 12:50 PM Post #143 |
![]()
Missing in Action Member
|
To me, this statement is illogical & arrogant. I tell students when they see hyperbole like "any" (or nothing, always, etc.) in a question or statement on a test, that it is likely not valid. The use of the word "any" is an example of modality logic. Saying there isn't any evidence is illogical. You might not like it, or accept it (because it doesn't meet the norms you subscribe to), but . . . I suppose one man's evidence is another man's folly.
|
My Boast is Christ ![]() Soon to have MBA (I'll perhaps be smart then) Recovering Perfectionist Christian Hedonist | |
![]() |
|
| ngc1514 | May 24 2006, 12:51 PM Post #144 |
![]()
Member
|
HA! There... he said it! "... still a theory...." Of course it's a theory and it will ALWAYS remain a theory. That is the mostest fundamental idea behind what a theory *IS*! And there, ladies and gentlemen, we see why the non-scientific community can't distinguish between ID and evolution. Thank you, teryt. |
Eric
| |
![]() |
|
| ngc1514 | May 24 2006, 12:55 PM Post #145 |
![]()
Member
|
Well, don't just claim it's illogical and arrogant - PROVE it! I say there is no evidence for ID and you, apparently, are claiming the other side of the debate. Cite the evidence. That would be a much stronger argument than calling it "illogical and arrogant." |
Eric
| |
![]() |
|
| DocInBird | May 24 2006, 01:11 PM Post #146 |
|
Member
|
ID is taught in the schools, but at an appropriate level. It is a course in graduate school in college as one of the options. Why in the world would you want this rammed down the throats of elementary school kids? |
|
--doc Just Doc and Orson (German Shepherd) wandering around North America. | |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | May 24 2006, 04:23 PM Post #147 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
Teryt, you say, "I tell students when they see hyperbole like "any" (or nothing, always, etc.) in a question or statement on a test, that it is likely not valid." I agree, when people use all or none, it is likely, to some degree, not absolute. Now explain your logical leap from what is likely to an absolute conclusion: "To me, this statement is illogical & arrogant." I suppose one man's evidence is another man's folly. Why'd you stop attacking evolution and defending ID? That was more interesting to explore. |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| teryt | May 24 2006, 05:26 PM Post #148 |
![]()
Missing in Action Member
|
Not sure I understand your question - so now I have to defend what we agree was illogical in Eric's statement? I don't know that I was really attacking evolution - isn't it assumed that there are unexplained holes in it, that time & research may, or may not validate? ERIC: We are not communicating well bud! And since communication is one of those two way thingies, I'll assume I haven't done a very good job. DocInBird: "Rammed down their throats!?" This is partically how I see evolution (even thought I would also defend parts of it). |
My Boast is Christ ![]() Soon to have MBA (I'll perhaps be smart then) Recovering Perfectionist Christian Hedonist | |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | May 24 2006, 05:45 PM Post #149 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
Teryt, I was asking if you saw the illogic in your leap from likely to absolutely in your own statements about another's use of words--I mean, why devolve this discussion into a war of words, when the substance is far more interesting? What holes are you referring to? The ones evolutionary science will find and fill, or those fabricated by IDers? If you could refer to something specific we might be able to discuss it. Do you mean this one back when you weren't attacking evolution and said: "To me, the biggest stretch of evolution is the original assembly of chemicals, etc. that somehow produces life." Remember that one? Having nothing to do with evolution? Or this vague non-attack: "But me thinks there is just too much that evolution, as a whole system, hasn't been able to explain"? To which you argued "For instance, when one looks at the billions of codes in DNA, that all perfectly give the map to create the larger organism, it seems to me to smack of someone who has had to put this system together." When it's easy to find scientific explanations, like Evolution of the Genetic Codes, Evolution of Genes, Genomes, and the Genetic Code, and so many more. |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| ngc1514 | May 24 2006, 06:35 PM Post #150 |
![]()
Member
|
I thought we were doing just fine. I just wish you would get down to something specific in your defense of ID rather than generalities. For someone who claims not to know a lot about ID or evolution, you write a whole bunch about them! Not that there's anything wrong with this, of course. I'd just prefer to get down into the mud and rassle over some of these questions rather than worry about logical fallacies and linguistics. Why do you think ID has any merit at all? Other than the obvious: because it's not evolution. Alas, this will have to wait. I'm heading out for a 4 day weekend with the camper and telescope where I will spend many happy hours observing objects by means of Optical Theory that are held together and moving according to the Theory of Universal Gravitation and shining brightly by the Theory of Relativity. Some of the more distant objects will be cosmologically red shifted due to the Big Bang Theory and we'll see evidence of the Impact Theory on the moon. We'll use some sophisticated hardware that works through applications of Quantum Theory and Circuit Theory and a few of the guys will play with stuff that uses Antenna Theory. Finally, we will heat our food and chill our drinks with Kinetic Theory. Only a theory.... sheesh. |
Eric
| |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Soapbox · Next Topic » |











1:28 PM Jul 11