‘Intelligent design’ faces first big court test

Eon said:
Science IS the process of breaking things down into little, categorisable, pieces and accurately labelling them.

That's what he's doing here - what's the problem?

Intelligent Design as a theory is about as intellectually honest as L. Ron Hubbard's stuff about space aliens wanting your money.
Click to expand...


No problem, I believe everyone should research thier prespective views to the fullest.

I was just trying to get back to the task at hand, talking about the Intellgent design debate.
 
Science IS the process of breaking things down into little, categorisable, pieces and accurately labelling them.
Click to expand...

Technically... science is anything that can be tested with the scientific method.
 
How do you isolate evolution and categorize it? Nobody but God was there at the beginning of time (according to Genesis), so how could you isolate what happened and categorize it?
 
the argument is not being argued "intelligently"

The argument (and the media) have positioned the Intelligent Design argument against Evolution, as if it was a face off between "equal opponents". Nothing could be farther from the truth. The actual argument goes much farther back in time than the evolution of species.

Hugh Ross does a FAR better job of arguing the position than I do:

http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/design.shtml?main

I can remember one book I read that made the argument this way:
"The universe exists, it follows certain laws; but why should it exist? and why does it follow these laws?" Thus the anthropic principle...

I don't believe much argument has been done in this arena, the secularists instead have kept on suckering us into arguing "evolution".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's all well and good mjbee, but the argument at hand is how/why to teach Intelligent Design as a part of the science curriculum.

If ID can't be verified by science, what business does it have being a part of the science curriculum?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nobody is suckering anybody into anything. The minute you have a discussion that proceeds from scientific principles it is clear that one system fits the evidence we have to date and one system does not.

The minute somebody starts talking about a theory that is consistent, plausible and falsifiable, then I'll study it as a science.

Right now there's a theory and there's an opinion. No competition between the two.
 
you missed my point

your argument is not being framed correctly Dark Virtue... it isn't a question of one v.s. the other... one could equally make the argument that Evolution is not 100% verifiable by your standards either... the knife cuts both ways

my purpose in bringing up the link I did is simply to point out that many scientists have thought through the intelligent design issue (maybe not by that name but it is the same)... Fred Hoyle for one postulates that the only way he could think that life came about on earth was by extraterrestial means... there is much more in agreement with science and religion on this one than you really want to take on...

you should know that nothing is 100% verifiable in science... there is always a variable, yet you hold religion and the whole idea of God to a standard that science itself cannot uphold...

and I am making an argument for how it should be taught (either Hugh Ross OR Fred Hoyle could do the job), it just doesn't fit your template or stereotype of what a Christian should think like...:D )
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well I found this article this morning. Sad, very sad.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationw...ec16,1,6097507.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

The sticker debate played out in Cobb County, an area north of Atlanta where science teachers used to rip pages out of textbooks rather than discuss evolution.

As a compromise, the school board decided in March 2002 to apply a sticker to the inside cover of every textbook. It read: "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered."
Click to expand...

Hmmm...maybe I should have similar stickers made and slap them on the inside cover of every Bible I come across.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top