The Theory of Intelligent Design
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-01-2015, 09:54 PM
RE: The Theory of Intelligent Design
Quote:These guys can't not know that ID isn't a scientific theory.

Excuse me but they testified in court that it was.

https://www.bu.edu/lawlibrary/PDFs/resea...miller.pdf

Quote:Dr. Haught testified that this argument for the existence of God was advanced early in the 19th century by Reverend Paley and defense expert witnesses Behe and Minnich admitted that their argument for ID based on the ‘‘purposeful arrangement of parts’’ is the same one that Paley made for design. (9:7–8 (Haught); Trial Tr. vol. 23, Behe Test., 55–57, Oct. 19, 2005; Trial Tr. vol. 38, Minnich Test., 44, Nov. 4, 2005). The only apparent difference between the argument made by Paley and the argument for ID, as expressed by defense expert witnesses Behe and Minnich, is that ID’s ‘‘official position’’ does not acknowledge that the designer is God.

However, as Dr. Haught testified, anyone familiar with Western religious thought would immediately make the association that the tactically unnamed designer is God, as the description of the designer in Of Pandas and People (hereinafter ‘‘ Pan
das ’’) is a ‘‘master intellect,’’ strongly suggesting a supernatural deity as opposed to any intelligent actor known to exist in the natural world. (P–11 at 85). Moreover, it is notable that both Professors Behe and Minnich admitted their personal view is that the designer is God and Professor Minnich testified that he understands many leading advocates of ID to believe the designer to be God. 21:90 (Behe); 38:36–38 (Minnich))


Such admissions getting them a kick in the teeth from the judge.

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 Estab-
lishment 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.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-01-2015, 10:22 PM (This post was last modified: 06-01-2015 10:28 PM by Stevil.)
RE: The Theory of Intelligent Design
(06-01-2015 09:54 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  
Quote:These guys can't not know that ID isn't a scientific theory.

Excuse me but they testified in court that it was.
At no point in that quote did it state that they testified that the argument of ID qualifies as a scientific theory, but yes, great to see that the courts acknowledged that it wasn't science.
The judge by the way was hand picked by the Bush.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_E._Jones_III
Quote:Jones was assigned to the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District bench trial, the first direct challenge brought in the federal courts against a school district that mandated the teaching of intelligent design. He was praised by Tom Ridge, former Pennsylvania Governor and former head of the Department of Homeland Security, who said that "I can't imagine a better judge presiding over such an emotionally charged issue... he has an inquisitive mind, a penetrating intellect and an incredible sense of humor."[1]

On December 20, 2005, Jones ruled that the mandate was unconstitutional in a 139-page decision.[2]

After the ruling was handed down, some pundits immediately attacked it, notably Bill O'Reilly on Fox News accusing Jones of being a fascist and an activist judge. Casey Luskin and Jonathan Witt of the Discovery Institute, and activist Phyllis Schlafly, have leveled similar charges.[3] Jones also received death threats as a result of which he and his family were given around-the-clock federal protection.[4]

In a speech to the Anti-Defamation League on February 10, 2006 he responded to critics who claimed that he had "stabbed the evangelicals who got him onto the federal bench right in the back"[3] by noting that his duty was to the Constitution and not to special interest groups
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stevil's post
07-01-2015, 01:25 AM
RE: The Theory of Intelligent Design
Theory? Bollocks. It's an unsubstantiated assertion.

Erm, I'm sure you all knew that Tongue

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2015, 07:57 AM
RE: The Theory of Intelligent Design
They have a vague definition of complexity which gives them an opening to drive a truck through. (goddidit)

As long as they can redefine words, they can squeeze their god into the vague areas that their definition creates.

Complexity does not necessarily equate to design in the intelligent sense.

Even if we allow them to redefine words to suit them, how would this lead to the YHWH of the bible and Jesus?

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheInquisition's post
07-01-2015, 08:28 AM
RE: The Theory of Intelligent Design
(06-01-2015 08:36 PM)Stevil Wrote:  But ID is supposedly different to creationism.

I.D. was created by creationists. Read the book Creationism's Trojan Horse (2007).
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2015, 09:00 AM
RE: The Theory of Intelligent Design
Creationism + fake science = ID

Yep, and as had been pointed out, this at best gets you to deism. The "broken compass" fallacy, that you can conclude any religion as good as any other, if that's your intention. All you have shown (or in fact not shown) is that some douche made a reality. Who cares?

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2015, 11:21 AM
RE: The Theory of Intelligent Design
(06-01-2015 07:53 PM)Stevil Wrote:  Aztec science = Ra did it

Psst. Ra is the Egyptian Sun God.

孤独 - The Out Crowd
Life is a flash of light between two eternities of darkness.
[Image: Schermata%202014-10-24%20alle%2012.39.01.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like The Polyglot Atheist's post
07-01-2015, 01:11 PM
RE: The Theory of Intelligent Design
(06-01-2015 10:22 PM)Stevil Wrote:  
(06-01-2015 09:54 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  Excuse me but they testified in court that it was.
At no point in that quote did it state that they testified that the argument of ID qualifies as a scientific theory, but yes, great to see that the courts acknowledged that it wasn't science.
The judge by the way was hand picked by the Bush.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_E._Jones_III
Quote:Jones was assigned to the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District bench trial, the first direct challenge brought in the federal courts against a school district that mandated the teaching of intelligent design. He was praised by Tom Ridge, former Pennsylvania Governor and former head of the Department of Homeland Security, who said that "I can't imagine a better judge presiding over such an emotionally charged issue... he has an inquisitive mind, a penetrating intellect and an incredible sense of humor."[1]

On December 20, 2005, Jones ruled that the mandate was unconstitutional in a 139-page decision.[2]

After the ruling was handed down, some pundits immediately attacked it, notably Bill O'Reilly on Fox News accusing Jones of being a fascist and an activist judge. Casey Luskin and Jonathan Witt of the Discovery Institute, and activist Phyllis Schlafly, have leveled similar charges.[3] Jones also received death threats as a result of which he and his family were given around-the-clock federal protection.[4]

In a speech to the Anti-Defamation League on February 10, 2006 he responded to critics who claimed that he had "stabbed the evangelicals who got him onto the federal bench right in the back"[3] by noting that his duty was to the Constitution and not to special interest groups

It's not possible to quote the entire trial transcript but the judge got the point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Beh..._testimony

Quote:In Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, the first direct challenge brought in United States federal courts to an attempt to mandate the teaching of intelligent design on First Amendment grounds, Behe was called as a primary witness for the defense and asked to support the idea that intelligent design was legitimate science. Some of the most crucial exchanges in the trial occurred during Behe's cross-examination, where his testimony would prove devastating to the defense. Behe was forced to concede that "there are no peer reviewed articles by anyone advocating for intelligent design supported by pertinent experiments or calculations which provide detailed rigorous accounts of how intelligent design of any biological system occurred"[42] and that his definition of 'theory' as applied to intelligent design was so loose that astrology would also qualify

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-01-2015, 01:21 PM
RE: The Theory of Intelligent Design
(07-01-2015 01:11 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  
Quote:In Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, the first direct challenge brought in United States federal courts to an attempt to mandate the teaching of intelligent design on First Amendment grounds, Behe was called as a primary witness for the defense and asked to support the idea that intelligent design was legitimate science. Some of the most crucial exchanges in the trial occurred during Behe's cross-examination, where his testimony would prove devastating to the defense. Behe was forced to concede that "there are no peer reviewed articles by anyone advocating for intelligent design supported by pertinent experiments or calculations which provide detailed rigorous accounts of how intelligent design of any biological system occurred"[42] and that his definition of 'theory' as applied to intelligent design was so loose that astrology would also qualify
Yeah but,

They weren't suggesting that ID is a Scientific theory.
They admitted that the scientific definition would need to be adjusted to allow for ID
Quote: and lead defense expert Professor Behe admitted that his broadened definition of science, which encompasses ID, would also embrace astrology. Moreover, defense expert Professor Minnich acknowledged that for ID to be considered science, the ground rules of science have to be broadened to allow consideration of supernatural forces.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Stevil's post
07-01-2015, 01:34 PM
RE: The Theory of Intelligent Design
(07-01-2015 01:21 PM)Stevil Wrote:  They weren't suggesting that ID is a Scientific theory.
They admitted that the scientific definition would need to be adjusted to allow for ID
Quote: and lead defense expert Professor Behe admitted that his broadened definition of science, which encompasses ID, would also embrace astrology. Moreover, defense expert Professor Minnich acknowledged that for ID to be considered science, the ground rules of science have to be broadened to allow consideration of supernatural forces.

Right, it isn't a theory with regard to science, it is a theory with regard to science+.

The + is short "plus any idea that sounds good when dealing with difficult questions".

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: