Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by firstpusk

  1. Rooster, Both of those websites are run by lawyers not scientists. I am familiar with both organizations. IDN has been involved in the state science standards debate in my state and a couple of school board situations. The IDEA Center is mainly trying to get IDEA clubs started on college campuses and promote speakers and conferences. Neither does any research. There are a lot of grandiose claims, but no empirical scientific evidence for ID on either webpage. The Kitzmiller v. Dover trial gave an opportunity for ID to present their best and brightest. ID had its day in court. T
  2. BrentAllen, that is an interesting list of questions. First off, why do you assume that evolution violates the religious beliefs of Christian students. I went to a Christian elementary school and a Christian university both taught evolution. I think that there are specific churches and denominations that assert this, but it is certainly not universally held in Christianity. Evolution does raise some issues for students that are raised to believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis. I know a number of biology teachers. Their approach is express understanding of this problem and a
  3. Scoutndad, I am talking about ID as a public relations/political strategy to force religion into the schools. You are right. Folks on my side are fighting a hydra. The ID folks already are arguing for "sudden appearance" or "teach the controversy" instead of Intelligent Design. The Discovery Institute has tried to convince creationists of all stripes conform to their non-biblical strategy. They have promised much but have only delivered big legal bills for the folks in Dover. About the start of life, that is not part of the theory of evolution and it never has been. Evolution expla
  4. "How do new permutations of a species develop? What innate mechanism recognizes the need to change? And how does it transpire and initiate the change?" There is variation within the population. Natural selection acts on the variation. The random part of evolution is the variation of genes within a population. There is no recognition of "the need to change". Those individuals without the advantageous adaptation fail to survive, reproduce and pass their genes on to the next generation. I believe among the links you were given today was one on observed speciation. I know that I have g
  5. Rooster, You and I have been down this road before - this question of putting God in a box. You claim I can't comprehend a God creating everything in seven days. I can comprehend the idea. The problem is, this doesn't fit any of the observations. As for me easily imagining "a fish crawling out of a pond and growing legs." I can't. That is because you don't understand how evolution is supposed to work. Evolution does not act on individuals but populations. The individuals that are best suited to their environment are more likely to survive and reproduce. We have living examp
  6. I will agree with you that the board and their counsel were particularly inept. However, ID doesn't give them much with which to work. The foundation for the poor work of the ID crowd in court was built on nearly two decades of poor (I am being charitible) science. I was not looking to draw you into anything. I simply share the good judge's distaste for hypocracy dressed in religious robes. If you are asking me how I work with scouts and my duty to God, I have no problem. I don't see a conflict between accepting evolution and seeing the gifts that God has given us. My faith is
  7. "And finally, my $.02 worth on this thread... One poorly run proceeding that causes a judge to rule unfavorably, does not mean that the issue is dead. This was a bad case from the start with very poor testimony. This is not dead by a long shot - anyone hear of Roe v Wade (rhetorical)? Politcal careers are won and lost based on this case as I imagine other careers will be determined on their religious value stance. Faith certainly is not decided in the courtroom..." ID was scientifically DOA when it got to court. I am not sure why you characterize the trial as poorly run. Perhaps y
  8. Harriet Miers is the best choice the president could make for a lifetime appointment to the highest court. This is from the Washington Post. "Meanwhile, several constitutional law scholars said they were surprised and puzzled by Miers's response to the committee's request for information on cases she has handled dealing with constitutional issues. In describing one matter on the Dallas City Council, Miers referred to 'the proportional representation requirement of the Equal Protection Clause' as it relates to the Voting Rights Act. 'There is no proportional representation requiremen
  9. ...and how many on that list had their license to practice law suspended twice for non-payment of dues? Yes, she is the most competent person Bush could find to fill this seat. Tells you alot about the president and a bit more about his apologists.
  10. The SCOTUS decided not to decide this question last year by declaring that Dr. Newdow lacked standing on the basis of non-custody of his daughter. He has since found other plaintiffs. It will be interesting if the Supremes find another way to dodge the question. Where I grew up, we recited the 1924 version of the Pledge until well into elementary school. There are two things worth noting. One, we continued to leave "under God" out of the pledge for well more than a decade after Congress mandated it. Two, this was the same for both the Catholic and public schools in my town. A
  11. "if, (the largest word in the English vocabulary) we start and stay with one simple point in the creationism/evolution debate, -"What existed before the big bang and if anything where did it come from?". Perhaps the answers to these questions will the help answer Merlyn's original post for itself. Nothing about dinosaurs, humans, fruit flies or anything else-let step one be step one. I find absolute randomness contains the idea that something has to be "doing" the random. What is it and where did it come from to be random?" First, the Theory of Evolution has nothing to do with the Big Ban
  12. I am pretty willing to bet that she has experienced a tolerant smile or two and probably given a few - even to conservatives.
  13. vicki, I think that her article should be taken as a warning to scouters taking groups of scouts out in public. The behavior she witnessed is inexcusable. I have seen scouts behave admirably and I have seen them behave in the manner she witnessed. Charity has nothing to do with it. Like it or not, this example is a reflection on every single one of us. She caught some of our own setting a rather poor example. I think we should be thankful for her warning and try to make sure our own units aren't doing the same.
  14. acco40, here is where we part company. In my church angels are only allowed on the head of a pin.
  15. Pack, good post. The heart of the matter for guys like Ham is to insist that you must agree with his version if you want to be a Christian. It is an effort to manipulate people by the use of scare tactics. I wanted to add one thing about the last paragraph of your post. Ham does indeed try to question the reliability of radiometric dating techniques. This is a common tactic of all YEC's. Ham applies the "Were you there?" argument to the question of rates of radioactive decay. The problem with this approach is that these dating methods are not used alone. In order to date any partic
  16. bbng, I hate to break this to you, but there is little science to be found at the Answers in Genesis website. It is not the worst in creationist deception, but it might be one of the most popular. Their production values may be high, but their content in terms of truth or science is extremely low. Don't waste you time on them. When I looked at the link you offered, I was not surprised by the fact that Ken Ham was up to his usual rhetorical tricks (to put it far to nicely). Ham always pulls out a number of these tricks in order to deny the reality of evidence for ideas like an anc
  17. "I stated earlier that creationists are not necessarily (Bibical)literalists, but that literalists are creationists. And it is not evolution = natural selection. Your comingling comes at the big bang and that which you call evolution is not natural selection." Natural selection is the key concept of the theory of evolution. It is not the only cause of evolution but it is central to the theory. Evolution does not begin until after there is life - around 11 billion years after the big bang. "So the science which you seem to deny-physcis, chemistry, math-can not and do not have theori
  18. Pack, I agree that creationists have to deny science in general. However, I don't think that they often understand just how much science they are denying to hold to there beliefs.
  19. stlscouter, Let's start by not comingling theories. The big bang is the standard theory to explain the current condition and history of the universe. Evolution is the theory that explains the development and diversity of life. It is of utmost importance to keep clear what each theory addresses. The big bang can explain what happened after the bang but not tell you what was there before. Evolution can tell you about what happened after life began, but it does not address the origin of life. I don't believe that faith is required at all to accept either theory. I view creatio
  20. Science addresses the questions that it can answer. The matter that was compressed into a singularity was there. Much like the answer God gave to Moses it may not satisfy our human couriousity but it is what it is. One can believe that God created the universe and accept science but in order to be a creationist one must reject science.
  21. "step one; start with nothing and cause light. or; start with something compressing into such dense mass that its mass is infinate and its dimensions are finite and there results a big bang. Prove either." Science is a tentative venture. Observations are made. Hypotheses are formed and tested. Eventually theories are developed to explain the observations. Nothing is ever "proven". However, at a certain point it becomes perverse to deny the reality of facts that line up in favor of a theory. Both the big bang and evolution have reached such status. There is p
  22. "so then evolution theory is so small in scope that there is no room for a larger context?" Evolution is the theory which explains the development and diversity of life on earth. One can not use evolution to explain erosion or beach formation. One can not say that an individual in a population evolves. However, our understanding that the earth is ancient and evidence that life has been around for most of that period allows for a context large enough. Geological methods are critical to informing evolutionary theory. The obvious great age of the earth was one of the critical probl
  23. "My old live body doesn't do what it once did is it evolving or eroding?" Neither. Evolution occurs at the level of populations and natural selection acts upon the differences in the population. "so there's a design difference between the stuff my body is made of and the stuff he rock is made of? How do they know which one they are? By random occurance or by some other process?" Same stuff, just organized differently. "It is possible to work the scientific method to explain the process of rock eroding into sand or as evidence that "someone" wanted a beach for an ocean.
  24. The article points to the obvious fact that Prof. Johnson does not understand the ideals of the scouting movement. "...the Scouts have to be concerned about youths who are being taught a way of thinking that undermines biblical theism at a fundamental level..." The job of a scoutmaster is to train boy leaders not to teach biblical theism. Beyond that, the majority of Christians do not accept his view of the Bible. For that matter, he fails to understand that scouting is not a Christian movement. Johnson and his ilk throw the stumbling block in front of the boys. It is all o
  25. Pack, I love the way you think. OGE is in the middle of it already and that is where the ref should be. Cow pies would be a wonderful addition. However, I think we will need to reinforce our balistas to handle the additional weight. This is going to be fun!
  • Create New...