In the News: Evolution vs. Creation: Old debate heating up againwith new ideas, arguments
Jason Spaceman
---------------------------------------
By Melanie B. Smith
DAILY Religion Writer
Debate over human origins dominated the intersection of science and
religion for years.
Then, other news edged it out in talk about science going amok or making
progress, depending on one's viewpoint. The birth of Dolly the cloned
sheep and research using stem cells from aborted fetuses, for instance,
grabbed attention.
The quandaries raised in these issues remain unsettled, but the old
evolution debate has ebbed back, too. Some new streams of thought are
adding to the deluge of arguments.
Proponents of intelligent design, the concept that highly complex organs
and organisms require the work of an intelligent designer, are getting
hearings and selling books. One book by law school professor Phillip
Johnson, "Darwin on Trial," was a bestseller in Christian markets.
Christianity Today said in its latest issue that Johnson and other
intelligent design supporters challenged "the Darwinian establishment head
on" and stirred up issues anew.
--------------------------------------
Read it at
http://www.decaturdaily.com/decaturdaily/religion/040828/creation.shtml or
http://tinyurl.com/3p87p
J. Spaceman
Bobby D. Bryant
> From the article:
>
> Proponents of intelligent design, the concept that highly complex organs
> and organisms require the work of an intelligent designer, are getting
> hearings and selling books. One book by law school professor Phillip
> Johnson, "Darwin on Trial," was a bestseller in Christian markets.
> Christianity Today said in its latest issue that Johnson and other
> intelligent design supporters challenged "the Darwinian establishment
> head on" and stirred up issues anew.
Astrology books sell pretty well too, if their density on bookstore
shelves is any indication.
--
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
Uncle Dollar Bill
There's an interesting comparison. Why don't some people try to have
astrology taught in science class? It would be every bit ax relevant as
creationism. Even more so, because astrology actually involves
calculations and predictions, and has beau coup testable theories.
Creationism involves hand waving and waffling and wishful thinking, and
about the only "theory" it ever produces is "Because I said so!" or
"Goddidit!".
Might be an interesting exercise to have creationism debators dogged by
astrology debaters right on their tails. The astrology debators would
sound so much more compelling and scientific which, given how un-seriously
astrology is taken, should drive the point home quite nicely.
--
L8r,
Uncle Dollar Bill
VoiceOfReason
> From the article:
> ---------------------------------------
> By Melanie B. Smith
> DAILY Religion Writer
<...>
> One book by law school professor Phillip
> Johnson, "Darwin on Trial," was a bestseller in Christian markets.
Bestseller in Christian markets? That's akin to being the best ballerina in Wyoming.
<...>
Frank J
Excerpt:
Steve Harris, a Decatur pharmacist and the parent of three teens, said
he was glad his children could hear more about creationism. "It's
something I believe as fact, but is scoffed at in a lot of science
books," he said.
My comment:
I wonder if Harris knows that the "it" that he believes as "fact" is
not an "it" but many mutually contradictory "its," with
misrepresenting evolution as the only thing in common.
Excerpt:
Another recent book from a different religious perspective is "Finding
Darwin's God" by Brown University biologist Ken Miller. Miller grew up
Roman Catholic and is an apologist for evolutionary biology.
My comment:
The "recent" FDG has been around 5 years. Miller is anything but an
"apologist" for evolutionary biology. Speaking of mudslinging…
Excerpt:
All sides have both been guilty of mudslinging, said Christianity
Today.
My comment:
I didn't see any mudslinging in Miller's book. Christianity Today had
better admit that the "evolutionist" mudslingers nevertheless have the
only theory that works, because they know that any omission of that
fact will cause many if not most people to conclude otherwise. It's
not nice for a Christian publication to risk bearing false witness.
Christopher A. Lee
(VoiceOfReason) wrote:
>Jason Spaceman <notr...@jspaceman.homelinux.org> wrote in message news:<Pine.LNX.4.61.04...@computerroom.pr.phub.net.cable.rogers.com>...
>> From the article:
>> ---------------------------------------
>> By Melanie B. Smith
>> DAILY Religion Writer
>
><...>
>
>> One book by law school professor Phillip
>> Johnson, "Darwin on Trial," was a bestseller in Christian markets.
>
>Bestseller in Christian markets? That's akin to being the best ballerina in Wyoming.
Round about the time Johnson wrote it, he was on talk.origins for a
while. Behaving like a sleazy courtroom lawyer, twisting responses to
fit and generally ignoring correction.
AnotherObserver哦serv3.gc.dca.giganews.com
First, you'd need head count of devout tarot readers out there.
--
Davidwd
~~~~~~~~~
irreligionist
Double Felix
Take a look for y'allself...
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=author:phil...@uclink.berkeley.edu
- Felix
John Baker
<notr...@jspaceman.homelinux.org> wrote:
>From the article:
>---------------------------------------
>By Melanie B. Smith
>DAILY Religion Writer
>
>Debate over human origins dominated the intersection of science and
>religion for years.
>
>Then, other news edged it out in talk about science going amok or making
>progress, depending on one's viewpoint. The birth of Dolly the cloned
>sheep and research using stem cells from aborted fetuses, for instance,
>grabbed attention.
>
>The quandaries raised in these issues remain unsettled, but the old
>evolution debate has ebbed back, too. Some new streams of thought are
>adding to the deluge of arguments.
>
>Proponents of intelligent design, the concept that highly complex organs
>and organisms require the work of an intelligent designer, are getting
>hearings and selling books. One book by law school professor Phillip
>Johnson, "Darwin on Trial," was a bestseller in Christian markets.
That's sort of like being the smartest guy on the short bus, isn't it?
John Wilkins
My assessment is that there are *more* readers of astrology than
religious believers in the Protestant Bible. In Australia, at any rate.
I think it might be higher in California.
--
John S. Wilkins jo...@wilkins.id.au
web: www.wilkins.id.au blog: evolvethought.blogspot.com
God cheats
AnotherObserver哦staff.texas.net
Okay, count one more in North Carolina, as of yesterday, I've become
increasingly interested :+)
--
Davidwd
~~~~~~~~~
irreligionist
Severian
<jba...@neo.rr.com> wrote:
>On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:38:48 +0000 (UTC), Jason Spaceman
><notr...@jspaceman.homelinux.org> wrote:
>
>>From the article:
>>---------------------------------------
>>Proponents of intelligent design, the concept that highly complex organs
>>and organisms require the work of an intelligent designer, are getting
>>hearings and selling books. One book by law school professor Phillip
>>Johnson, "Darwin on Trial," was a bestseller in Christian markets.
>
>That's sort of like being the smartest guy on the short bus, isn't it?
--
Sev
Matt Silberstein
Wilkins) wrote:
><AnotherObserver讖serv3.gc.dca.giganews.com> wrote:
>
>> Uncle Dollar Bill <UncleDo...@SpamMeNot.com> wrote:
[snip]
>> >Might be an interesting exercise to have creationism debators dogged by
>> >astrology debaters right on their tails. The astrology debators would
>> >sound so much more compelling and scientific which, given how un-seriously
>> >astrology is taken, should drive the point home quite nicely.
>> >
>> First, you'd need head count of devout tarot readers out there.
>
>My assessment is that there are *more* readers of astrology than
>religious believers in the Protestant Bible. In Australia, at any rate.
>I think it might be higher in California.
I certainly read the horoscopes every week. I doubt it has anything to
do with my growing up in CA.
http://www.theonion.com/horoscopes/index.php?issue=4034
http://www.theonion.com/horoscopes/index.php?issue=4033, Cancer was
particularly interesting.
--
Matt Silberstein
Do in order to understand.
wbarwell
> On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 00:40:55 +0000 (UTC), john...@wilkins.id.au (John
> Wilkins) wrote:
>
>><AnotherObserver讖serv3.gc.dca.giganews.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Uncle Dollar Bill <UncleDo...@SpamMeNot.com> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>> >Might be an interesting exercise to have creationism debators dogged by
>>> >astrology debaters right on their tails. The astrology debators would
>>> >sound so much more compelling and scientific which, given how
>>> >un-seriously astrology is taken, should drive the point home quite
>>> >nicely.
>>> >
(Piggybacking).
Back when the IRC started having seminars and meetings,
a bunch of bibloical geocentrists started attending. The
creationists were unhappy as they though the geocentrists went too
far and made them look bad.
What can you say but Bwhahahahahahahahah!
Cheerful Charlie
>>> First, you'd need head count of devout tarot readers out there.
>>
>>My assessment is that there are *more* readers of astrology than
>>religious believers in the Protestant Bible. In Australia, at any rate.
>>I think it might be higher in California.
>
> I certainly read the horoscopes every week. I doubt it has anything to
> do with my growing up in CA.
>
> http://www.theonion.com/horoscopes/index.php?issue=4034
>
> http://www.theonion.com/horoscopes/index.php?issue=4033, Cancer was
> particularly interesting.
>
--
Senator Waxman's searchable database of iraq war lies.
www.house.gov/reform/min/features/iraq_on_the_record/
A good portal to more lies and Bush stupidity is to be found at
www.failureisimpossible.com - Go to the index and go to
"L" for lies. All you need to know about Bush when you
step into the voting booth. Bush is a liar and surrounds
himself with fellow liars.
Cheerful Charlie
Frank J
> On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 11:02:05 +0000 (UTC), Bobby D. Bryant wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 10:38:48 +0000, Jason Spaceman wrote:
> >
> >> From the article:
> >>
> >> Proponents of intelligent design, the concept that highly complex organs
> >> and organisms require the work of an intelligent designer, are getting
> >> hearings and selling books. One book by law school professor Phillip
> >> Johnson, "Darwin on Trial," was a bestseller in Christian markets.
> >> Christianity Today said in its latest issue that Johnson and other
> >> intelligent design supporters challenged "the Darwinian establishment
> >> head on" and stirred up issues anew.
> >
> > Astrology books sell pretty well too, if their density on bookstore
> > shelves is any indication.
>
> There's an interesting comparison. Why don't some people try to have
> astrology taught in science class? It would be every bit ax relevant as
> creationism.
Every time I write to a politician or columnist who regurgitates some
"equal time" defense I point this out. While some are genuinely
clueless and might go on to learn something (assuming they even read
my letter), I suspect, sadly, that most have been indoctrinated into
the "pseudoscience code of silence," that is, never challenge, and if
possible, don't even acknowledge, that other pseudosciences exist."
> Even more so, because astrology actually involves
> calculations and predictions, and has beau coup testable theories.
> Creationism involves hand waving and waffling and wishful thinking, and
> about the only "theory" it ever produces is "Because I said so!" or
> "Goddidit!".
Actually the mutually contradictory classic creationisms do make
testable statements, but they have all failed the tests. The new
"Goddidit" strategy (Intelligent Design), which lets the audience
infer "how" (if not by evolution), is a virtual admission that all the
creationist "theories" failed.
>
> Might be an interesting exercise to have creationism debators dogged by
> astrology debaters right on their tails. The astrology debators would
> sound so much more compelling and scientific which, given how un-seriously
> astrology is taken, should drive the point home quite nicely.
Big problem: About 1/2 of the population swears by astrology, just as
1/2 of the population swears by some anti-evolution position, and no
amount of evidence will convince most members either group. It's not
the same 1/2 of course, but there's plenty of overlap. Nevertheless, I
think that astrology and other pseudosciences should be juxtaposed
with creationism whenever possible. The biggest fault of evolution
defenders IMO is getting trapped into the creationist/IDer's false
dichotomy, whereby the latter's alternative - stated or implied, is
the only alternative in question.