Bloggers are paying a lot of attention to the intelligent design trial in Dover, Pa. Slate offered this roundup of what they’re saying. It mentions the blog Red State Rabble, which is written by Kansan Paul Hayes. He writes, “The real issue in Dover is not suppression of voluntary classroom discussion, but whether a minority religious viewpoint will be given the special privilege of using tax-supported public schools as a tool to convert school children to their peculiar set of beliefs.”
Posted by Melissa Cooley
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- CapnAmerica on ACORN stole election?
- DavidB on Health care reform would save state money
- writerdog on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- CapnAmerica on Health care reform would save state money
- DavidB on Open thread 11/22
- writerdog on Health care reform would save state money
- CapnAmerica on Open thread 11/22
- george on Open thread 11/22
- DorisKing on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
26 Comments
Why is it that the people who are the most vociferous advocates of intelligent design are the ones who seem the least intelligently designed?
Got some mighty big words in there, Jed. It’s hard for me to read, and I’ve completed Hukt on Foniks, Inteligent Dezine Edishun.
Jed…Don’t forget… God created man in his image… in other words Adam would have been highly intelligent. “Vociferous advocates of intelligent design” did not come about until AFTER the fall, so don’t expect perfection…
I think the blogger’s name is Pat Hayes, not Paul, for http://redstaterabble.blogspot.com .
You to, Jed!
Typo. YOU GO, JED!
Flying Spaghetti Monster followers, Unite and DEMAND equal time!
Raaa-mennnnnn.
I wonder if they have called Connie Morris as a witness.
I’m doning my pirate regalia as we speak, Ray!
What the Hell designed Bush?
Connie testified this morning.
Jed,You might want to look over the qualifications of these people:
http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=research&action=index&page=research_physci
“What the Hell designed Bush?”Wasn’t he designed by Jimmy Carters homes for humanity
It would seem for the most part that I.D. is using that info-mercial expert testimony. The spokeperson is a Doctor, a PHD in marketing and is hawking a diet pill as safe and effective.
It has taken awhile, you can not depend on a supporter of I.D. (creation version) for the talking points of I.D.
It is funny how the two versions of I.D. are in bed together.The smaller group of supporters with their view that life is too complex so someone had to have started it. But as of yet have no explaination themselves.
And the larger group that say of course life was designed…Its in the bible!
It reminds me of when the militia groups were big. And the white supremacy groups join in that the government was the enemy.( I traded my mac90 for a bitch’n guitar!Lol) strange bedfellows!But in the end both have totally different ideas in mind.
NoJo,Pretty small list, when you consider all the scientists out there.But, if they really have something in the way of evidence, They need to submit it to the peer-reviewed journals and get it published. If not, then they should be spending their time in the field instead of the talk shows!Remember Shockley and his crap about racial superiority? Pauling and his cure for the common cold? The guys in Utah who invented cold fusion? Science has it’s share of kooks, but it also has a mechanism for dealing with them. Let your boys run their evidence through the journals and then we’ll talk.
Quoting Jed:”Why is it that the people who are the most vociferous advocates of intelligent design are the ones who seem the least intelligently designed?”
You lumped all of those people in to your statement there. That’s why I responded with the list. My suggestion: Avoid broad generalizations because they make you seem to be the least intelligently designed.
NoJo,Sorry, it’s ideas that impress me, not letters after a name. I’ve known too many idiots with PhD’s!So far, the ideas that have come out of the ID camp have been singularly unimpressive. If your guys want my respect they’ll have to do a lot better than what’s been presented so far.Again, let their ideas pass peer-review. Until then, they’re just so much speculation.
I may have mentioned this before, but I have access to the Science, Social Sciences, and Arts & Humanities Citation Indexes dating from 1989. When I typed in “intelligent design”, only 1 peer reviewed reference appeared that has anything to do with ID. However, when I typed in “evolution”, “common descent”, “natural selection”, I got back over 90,000 hits…the great majority of which appear in peer reviewed journals.
The fact that there was even one peer reviewed reference for ID surprised me. Oh well…
If ID advocates want ID in tghe classrooms, then let them do the theoretical and experimental work and convince their peers. There are still a few zealous “cold fusion” advocates around, but they have failed to make a convincing case. We don’t teach “cold fusion” as a possible solution to the energy shortage in schools. It hasn’t made the grade.
Neither has ID. Simply criticizing shortcomings of a current theory does not qualify your criticism as a viable alternative theory.
Brian,It’s rather obvious by now that the reason IDer’s haven’t been peer-reviewed is that they haven’t submitted anything for review. The reason they haven’t submitted is that they have no faith in their science, and can only try to convince people who are unfamiliar with the standards of science that they have any credibility. In other words, they don’t really believe it themselves!
Jed, of course they don’t believe it. As we all know, ID is just a smoke screen to get to the next step, Creationism in the class room.
ID wont matter if this comes to pass: A flu pandemic could happen at any time and kill between 5-150 million people, a UN health official has warned.Probably a zionist plot.
I think it will probably be a virus that kills humanity unless Yellowstone blows up first.If God really exists, He must be so sick of all of us (including the IDer’s).
Damoon,The world’s already thrown both of those at us, and it wasn’t much fun, but we survived. Most likely will next time too.
I would like to enter the Intelligent design debate.Forty years ago I was turned away from a Harvard course called ‘The Accelleration of the Rate of Change’ because I was not qualified.In order to qualify, the professor asked me to ‘come up with a unique philosophical concept’ which I did and I was accepted into the course.I have been working on the concept since that time and it is central to the book I am currently working on.Like most understandable ideas, this one is simple. Originally, I put it in the form of a one-act play with Cain (the farmer) arguing with Abel (the hunter), an argument resulting in Abel attacking Cain who kills Abel in self-defense.The argument is over what the stories Adam left them with meant and, as in all ‘proper’ debate they agee on the definitions of terms, but argue about where they lead to.Cain is working on a garden and Abel is trying to talk him into “coming out and having some fun” rather.Abel argues the conventional biblical set which is that after having been created and given dominion over the planet and then told not to eat of the tree of knowledge, Adam and Eve did and were kicked out of Eden, everything is therefore futile and we should accept something Abel calls Original Sin.Cain argues that any Intelligent Designer, who they both accept would have all the attributes of a God – omniscience, omnipotence and so on – could not possibly have created Eve without knowing that the curiosity He created within her would drive her to the temptation placed deliberately in front of her. “Knowledge is forbidding,” says Cain, “but not forbidden.”Cain further argues that in the light of the Designer being supremely intelligent His Design must have had another intention, now lost to Abel.Cain insists that the flaw in the oral tradiition held by Abel is a simple misunderstanding: “We were given dominion over this planet,” he argues, “and everything in, on and around it, all the resources necessary to BUILD a Garden for the Designer (or ourselves) without a need to debate whether an uncaused cause exists or not”.The unfortunate death of Abel results in overwhelming guilt inside Cain which turns him away from his truth and – he believes, forces him to abandon his mission.
Tom,An interesting metaphor, but I think it carries way too much ideological baggage to be very useful- much like the geneticists reference to the African woman of ca. 160,000 years ago, to which they’ve traced all extant mitochondrial DNA, as Eve. Trying to draw these parallels between science and religion confuses the two, and ends up being destructive to both.
Jed, I haven’t seen this guy blogging around here before, so i tried to email him and turn him on to a couple of blogsites specific to his interest (ID). The email came back undelivered.Tom, if you’re interested in the subject go to (1) Red State Rabble (2) Thoughts from Kansas.These two are class acts.