Potential "anti-ID" argument, but need your opinion
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-06-2013, 05:37 PM
RE: Potential "anti-ID" argument, but need your opinion
(28-06-2013 05:15 PM)Free Thought Wrote:  
(28-06-2013 03:09 PM)kim Wrote:  I loved that dissection - a giraffe - astounding! Clap


Disturbingly, I kept wondering what it tastes like. Shy

I bet it tastes like chicken.
Everything tastes like chicken.

Ya know what DOES taste like chicken...Gator. Tastes like a chicken but eats like a steak...ummm gator. Not surprising since they both have lizard ancestors but a Giraffe? ...Probably tastes like a big stringy deer.

Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2013, 05:37 PM
RE: Potential "anti-ID" argument, but need your opinion
(28-06-2013 11:15 AM)DeavonReye Wrote:  I was thinking about the idea of "intelligent design" and how our bodies are [evidence of them NOT having intelligence in some aspect]. Some have pointed out the apendex, the blindspot in the eye [and the flipped image], . . . . but the other day, I was questioning "human body hair". What is the purpose FOR body hair [arms, legs, and on guys, chest, back, etc]? Does if fill a need? What about those who have very little body hair? Are they being neglacted in some area?

Or, is human body hair a part of our primate ancestory that no longer serves a specific purpose? It doesn't keep us warm! It doesn't keep the sun from burning the skin!

Opinions?

Check out this thread

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...-RE-Design

“I suppose our capacity for self-delusion is boundless."
― John Steinbeck, Travels with Charley: In Search of America
“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man's reasoning powers are not above the monkey's." - Mark Twain in Eruption
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Full Circle's post
29-06-2013, 11:30 AM
RE: Potential "anti-ID" argument, but need your opinion
The conclusion from Judge John Jones decision in the Kitzmiller v Dover School Board case.

Quote:H. Conclusion

The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts
of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board’s ID Policy violates the
Establishment Clause. In making this determination, we have addressed the
seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and
moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious,
antecedents.

Both Defendants and many of the leading proponents of ID make a bedrock
assumption which is utterly false. Their presupposition is that evolutionary theory
is antithetical to a belief in the existence of a supreme being and to religion in
general. Repeatedly in this trial, Plaintiffs’ scientific experts testified that the
theory of evolution represents good science, is overwhelmingly accepted by the
scientific community, and that it in no way conflicts with, nor does it deny, the
existence of a divine creator.

To be sure, Darwin’s theory of evolution is imperfect. However, the fact
that a scientific theory cannot yet render an explanation on every point should not
be used as a pretext to thrust an untestable alternative hypothesis grounded in
religion into the science classroom or to misrepresent well-established scientific
propositions.


The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the
Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals,
who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would
time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID
Policy.


With that said, we do not question that many of the leading advocates of ID
have bona fide and deeply held beliefs which drive their scholarly endeavors. Nor
do we controvert that ID should continue to be studied, debated, and discussed. As
stated, our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom.

http://ncse.com/files/pub/legal/kitzmill...cision.pdf

The only thing I disagree with His Honor on is the bolded part 2. It is not ironic at all that devout assholes would lie for their god. It is typical of them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Minimalist's post
01-07-2013, 07:11 AM
RE: Potential "anti-ID" argument, but need your opinion
Full Circle. . . . . .can't thank you enough!!! :-D
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: