Evolution has survived about 150 years of very rigourous testing.
Nothing else in science has been tested so much, or has passed all the
respective challenges. If fundies want creationism or ID or the
universe being blown out of the demon phred's butt, that's OK but it
has to fit within the constraints of scientific theories. Moreover
does it adequately explain the existant data? Or does it offer a more
adequate model that the currently established theory. The religiously
motivated propaganda cannot meet the most basic test of
falsifiability. So that automatically invalidates these concepts from
being taught in science classes.

Predictability? Again ID, creatinism etc offer no way to make testable
predictions from the model. Again because of that they are not
scientific models, and therefore should not be taught as science.
Religion, or mythology, yes. but as a scientific model of a
phenomenon, no.

larry

On 12/23/05, Chesty Puller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "And then there's the religious aspect: why do some Christians feel the
> need to force their religion on others?  Are they insecure about it?"
>
> The real problem with disallowing  ID in schools is that evolution
> contradicts creationism.  Although you place your trust in science, some
> people place their trust in their religion, and you cannot ask that they do
> otherwise. This has become a topic because the schools are not being
> religion-neutral, they are teaching things which are specifically
> anti-religious, which in itself is atheist, and therefore against the
> Constiution.  Which is why the ID people, and yes, it's creationism at it's
> root, albeit denomination-neutral (It could be Allah, God, Yahweh, Zeus,
> Vishnu, Buddha, the spaghetti-eating monster from outer-space... take your
> pick), are fighting for it - they don't want their religious beliefs
> trampled on by science, or by the schools.
>
> To be fair to all parties, the issue should be withdrawn from public
> schools.  However, that's cheating the kids, which is why they've presented
> a religion-neutral form of creationism.
>
> And I don't get what they big fight is about on the anti-ID side.  So your
> kid is taught:  "Evolution is proven by science.  However,  some people
> believe that evolution is not true, that somebody must have created it. Take
> your pick."
>
> And then there's the (anti) religious aspect: why do some secularists feel
> the need to force their faithless views on others?  Are they insecure about
> them?
>
> - Matt
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gruss Gott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "CF-Community" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 9:00 AM
> Subject: Re: ID is a pretty sh*tty science
>
>
> >> G Unit wrote:
> >> This NY Times editorial about the recent Dover decision against
> >> intelligent design is perfectly
> >
> > Here's the problem: ID in schools is a shill to turn secular schools
> > into religious schools.  The most ironic part is that these Christians
> > are lying about their motives.  Why do they need to lie?  Why not just
> > come clean and admit why they want it and what they intend?
> >
> > And ID is a valid perspective.  IDers will argue that while it's not
> > testable, neither is the Big Bang.  The difference between the two
> > that the Big Bang Theory was derived via math while ID was just
> > thought up.
> >
> > And then there's the religious aspect: why do some Christians feel the
> > need to force their religion on others?  Are they insecure about it?
> >
> >
>
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Protect Your PC from viruses, hackers, spam and more. Buy PC-cillin with Easy 
Installation & Support 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=61

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:189735
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to