Why are ID Proponents/Creationists such dishonest ********?

[Hawklaw]

How can anyone deny the awesome that is evolution? Its like denying Bruce Campbell pwns all.

[VoijaRisa]

Hawklaw

How can anyone deny the awesome that is evolution? Its like denying Bruce Campbell pwns all.

At least you didn't say Chuck Norris. I'd have to disagree with you if you did.

[Daumier]

The good news in this whole mess is that I found The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design (incorrect indeed) in the humor section of an airport bookstore a while back, which I had actually found quite unfortunate at the time since I was hoping it was going to be a biting satire or something (utter dismay), and several months ago I found Of Pandas and People in the science fiction section of a Barnes and Noble. It warms my heart to see that some people out there know how to recognize garbage when they see it.

[VoijaRisa]

There is hope for America yet!

[mitoguard]

I came across an interesting article on this very subject a while back (while working on an update for my own thread with a monster-sized-OP) that argues that it's not evolution itself that they object to, but that the religious fundamentalists posit a vast secular conspiracy of which evolution is a symptom.


I came across an interesting piece of IDer work a while ago, and want to put it up to scrutiny. Problem is, it's all based on a computer model, one I don't know the language for. (FORTRAN...if you know it, PM me.)[/SHAMELESS PLUG]

[The Evolved Men]

A wiki on ID and creationism: http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/List_of_creationist_arguments
More for ya biggrin

[VoijaRisa]

mitoguard

I came across an interesting article on this very subject a while back (while working on an update for my own thread with a monster-sized-OP) that argues that it's not evolution itself that they object to, but that the religious fundamentalists posit a vast secular conspiracy of which evolution is a symptom.

I came across an interesting piece of IDer work a while ago, and want to put it up to scrutiny. Problem is, it's all based on a computer model, one I don't know the language for. (FORTRAN...if you know it, PM me.)[/SHAMELESS PLUG]

They also object to the fact that Evolution has been frequently abused (ie, social darwinism) to justify all sorts of nonsense. So instead of dealing with the problem that has existed long before Darwin was alive, they shoot the messenger. It's like blaming a spoon for making Rosie O'Donell fat.

And I don't know FORTRAN. I'm only familiar with C++.

[mitoguard]

VoijaRisa

mitoguard

I came across an interesting article on this very subject a while back (while working on an update for my own thread with a monster-sized-OP) that argues that it's not evolution itself that they object to, but that the religious fundamentalists posit a vast secular conspiracy of which evolution is a symptom.

I came across an interesting piece of IDer work a while ago, and want to put it up to scrutiny. Problem is, it's all based on a computer model, one I don't know the language for. (FORTRAN...if you know it, PM me.)[/SHAMELESS PLUG]

They also object to the fact that Evolution has been frequently abused (ie, social darwinism) to justify all sorts of nonsense. So instead of dealing with the problem that has existed long before Darwin was alive, they shoot the messenger. It's like blaming a spoon for making Rosie O'Donell fat.

And I don't know FORTRAN. I'm only familiar with C++.

Yeah, that's the problem, FORTRAN is made for old crotchety physicists who grew up in the 70s and used slide rules....dinosaurs.

But it's curious because there are almost no comments in the several thousand lines of code I'm sifting through. My old Comp. Sci. teacher would have killed me if I turned something like this program in. That itself means one of three things:
1) The programmers didn't think they needed comments because they were just that good (and left themselves open to coding mistakes while developing)
2) They figured comments were unimportant because no one else would ever look at their code or
3) They wanted the code to be hard to understand and look over.

My money is on two or three.

The article I mentioned by the way is Toumey, C. P. (1993), Evolution and secular humanism. Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 61(2), 275-301.

Just in case anyone got curious.

[midara the happy banshee]

Blackhorn- the Legend

On a second note, my mother-dear works at Sinclair Community College here in Ohio as the biology/ ecology/ A&P (and other classes) prof. Recently, she was approached by the Head of the the Bio department and informed that the Dean of the College would be coming to her to inquire about starting a new biology class- a class based on Creationism and/or ID.... Why? Because of a student letter to the Dean claiming religious persecution. Now, my mother will refuse to make this class, as she's already stated, and explain her reasons. Whether that satisfies the IDers or not we will find out, and I will let you know if she is 'asked to resign' because of her refusal.

Really? And I had such a high opinion of Sinclair. crying Was this covered in the local media? Do you know if there is any way for students to weigh in on this issue? I'm sure my fiance, who both works and goes to school there, will want to get involved.

[vipr230]

Once again, Voija, I adore you! *hugs... again*

Anyway I'd really like to get a hard core ID believer to try to pick apart your arguments. It's funny, whenever someone makes a long post supporting anything like ID, we can systematically pick it apart line by line, but ID proponents have a problem doing that with actual valid points all presented at once. Guess it's hard to selectively quote when the information is right there in front of you.

[VoijaRisa]

I've noticed the same thing vipr. If ID/Creationists come here at all, it's typically a pathetic one line response which blatantly ignores anything I said. Again, it just shows how pathetically weak their side in this "debate" is and, relating to my opening post, how very non-existent the science they claim to have really is.

[VoijaRisa]

Looks like Dembski is also so pathetic that he's trying to sic his lawyers on people that dare disagree with him and write him about it when he has no actionable position.

[Amumu QQ]

I, personally, don't care when someone who believes in Evolution believes that maybe their God pushed it along. They are entitled to believe in whatever silly thing they want to, however, when they start trying to enforce these beliefs in education, thus trying to make their beliefs facts, that I get huffy.

In 9th grade, my biology teacher had to tell us he was going to teach Evolution and to not sue him over it. Really, he shouldn't even have to put up a disclaimer in the first place.

The only thing I truly dislike about the Abrahamic Religions, aside from them trying to instate their morality as laws, is that they halt scientific process and education. Don't they realize many "evolutionists" are also Christian/etc? Heck, I've read that for some people, science reaffirms their belief in god.

People are just so silly.

[Frothy Crema]

I really hope this topic doesn't die either. I've got a dipping in-and-out fascination for this subject, and I'll go and read your other threads another time. c:

I'm just dying to point out the irony in the bit about aligning evolution with atheist materialism - what materialism? Buddhists are "technically" atheistic, and isn't it part of their belief system to detach yourself from material goods? And I'm certainly a lot less materialistic than many of the Christian girls in my year; materialism, like so many things but maybe spurned on by a belief system, really depends on the individual. And what's wrong with being materialistic anyway, on the grandest scale of things? Though I would object on the relative scale in terms of pollution and filling up landfill sites! But this is a huge aside... - and getting further away from God when there are televangelists lining their pockets every day. And how much is Expelled going to bring rolling in? How many Christians these days turn out their homes and pockets to the poor? It's big business these days... (Where did they get the funding for the Creationist Museum, for that matter, but from an indulgence that could have been better spent donated towards efforts against global warming, or lowering poverty.)

[ChaoticConsonance]

Frothy Crema

I really hope this topic doesn't die either. I've got a dipping in-and-out fascination for this subject, and I'll go and read your other threads another time. c:

I'm just dying to point out the irony in the bit about aligning evolution with atheist materialism - what materialism? Buddhists are "technically" atheistic, and isn't it part of their belief system to detach yourself from material goods? And I'm certainly a lot less materialistic than many of the Christian girls in my year; materialism, like so many things but maybe spurned on by a belief system, really depends on the individual. And what's wrong with being materialistic anyway, on the grandest scale of things? Though I would object on the relative scale in terms of pollution and filling up landfill sites! But this is a huge aside... - and getting further away from God when there are televangelists lining their pockets every day. And how much is Expelled going to bring rolling in? How many Christians these days turn out their homes and pockets to the poor? It's big business these days... (Where did they get the funding for the Creationist Museum, for that matter, but from an indulgence that could have been better spent donated towards efforts against global warming, or lowering poverty.)

I think you misunderstand the usage of "materialism". Here it refers to a philosophical position that the world and all that is in it is physical, that there is no spiritual. Conciousness, emotion, etc. can all be explained by physical laws, even if we don't have the science for it yet.