Federal Judge Rules Against IDFollow

Story

Been discussed time and again.. this is just an update.

Dover, as you may recall, had its school board replaced by an all Democratic slate this past election as a response to the previous board's ruling to mandate that ID be taught.

Edited, Tue Dec 20 11:21:56 2005 by Jophiel

Common sense wins, for once!

What amazes me, is that to find creationsism true, you need to DISPROVE a myriad of other scientific proof or simply ignore it (as they do). Geology, written records from ancient civilisations, fossil records.

I saw a TV programme where a creationist just blurted out "yes, all fossils come from the flood, no other time". When asked how they fit dinosaurs on Noas Ark if that really occured only a few thousand years ago (if dinosaurs were alive then - as creationists claim) he said that "well dinosaurs are small really, we would take the young ones only and let the big ones die". Hmmmm, well we call that a "load of ************** in the UK.

The one truth of science is that you NEVER change the facts to fit the theory. You are allowed to change the theory to suit the facts (as more facts and knowledge come to light) but never the other way around.

Seems to me that creationism is the art of proving a theory at any expense, ignoring facts and common sense.

Edited, Tue Dec 20 12:27:01 2005 by JennockFV

Oh rubbish.

The premise of creationism is that the earth is 6 thousand (or so) years old. All species have come and gone in that time. the great flood obliterated life and caused the fossil records, the grand canyon (hahahahah) and other ludricrous *facts* as they like to call them.

This theory ignores the fact that geology and fossil records which are proven put the earth at many millions of years old. That life on earth has been occuring since long before man.
This theory ignores scientific and proven dating techniques. It ignores sheer facts written at the time. There is NO RECORD of a flood in ancient Egypt. Nothing of the scale recorded in the bible. My theory for that is that there was a flood (many are dated near the time of the "great flood") and yes, it was devastating for the local populace. But that populace could not travel, they could not see the world as a whole, they only saw their world which was as far as they could see or travel by donkey/horse.
So for there to have been a GLOBAL flood we must ignore that no where else on the planet has this flood been recorded. Not in Egypt, North America. Europe or with the South American civilisations of the time.

I beleive in human beings. I beleive the bible to be a true interpretation of how human beings saw their world when it was written. But their world was small, and limited. As once the world was beleived flat and the centre of the universe, mankind grows and learns that sometimes what we held for fact, is not so.

Maybe, it is about time that we accept that the events of the bible occured for those that experienced and documented them (flood etc) but that in reality it is not an accurate document to record global development.
It was made by human beings, it has all our flaws.

Yes, I gotcha on that. But this is not creationism, though creationist will latch on to it because scientifically it's a lot closer to adhering to their beliefs than anything else out there.

Like I said, it seems to me that ID is an evolution of thought on a superior intelligence who directly or indirectly influenced our coming to be. Creationists and other "biblical" types have just picked up on it as the new "hip" religious thing...and consequently the importance of what it's attempting to advance is lost in the rhetoric.

Again, this is how I feel on the subject, because while it can't be proven that there is some "creator" type being out there, it can't be disproven either. Also let me restate that I am not a religious person, and I put 99% of my weight into solid things I see and experience. However, while the unexplained exists ID as a theory will be viable...it sucks but it's true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design

Edited, Tue Dec 20 13:30:40 2005 by xtremereign

However, science exists to prove things. If something is unprovable it doesn't really have a place in the realm of science.

I'm pretty sure this is why the word "theory" exists.

Also why God cannot be proven or disproved. There is not enough evidence, something the creationists seemed to forget when they made the bible absolute *truth*......

Who cares? Not that it's not a worthwhile debate for the mental exercise but it doesn't affect ID being taught at all. I'm not attempting to abolish religion. Hey, look at my sig! Just talking about teaching ID as biological science.

Edited, Tue Dec 20 14:54:01 2005 by Jophiel

Out of curiousity though, if organized religion as a whole were to completely dissappear, what "immoral" behaviors do you think would become acceptable on a large scale?

Absolutely none?

You don't seriously think that the people who fly airplanes into buildings to kill unbelievers, fu[b][/b]ck little boys, and bilk idiots out money they desperately need are somehow PREVENTING immoral behaviours do you?

Christ, can't we go back to feeding morons like you to lions or something?

Seconded.

Morons like me? Man you're an idiot. On one hand all I listen to from the elitist side of things is how "moronic" all of the bible belt is, because they bite so easily when presented with juicy tidbits like: "Just live this way, and Jesus will love you."

And now I have to listen to you say the exact oppossite, that all of these bible belt wackos (and they don't all live there) are completely independent in thought and are not the lemmings we believe them to be. Jesus man pick one or STFU.

Look, I *have* actually met people who take that sort of thing into account when deciding on courses of action on matters of morality. Not to mention the fact that religion has been a method of teaching morality to children for quite some time...they don't emphasize all those "sins" for nothing you know.

Organized religions around the world without a doubt have an effect on what is "right" and "wrong" in some (if not all) of our minds, be it directly or indirectly. How can you say otherwise?

Ed. Helps to put the cheapshotting, troll resembling, quote in first.

Edited, Tue Dec 20 15:49:27 2005 by xtremereign