Commentary: Creationists drop religion for intelligence
Jason Spaceman
------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Rikki Hall
Creationists welcomed their new leaders to Knoxville last weekend for
a convention held by the Discovery Institute, a Seattle non-profit
that acts as a publishing house and endowment for proponents of
intelligent design (ID). The institute supports a dozen senior fellows
and more than two dozen other scientists. Staff scientists are working
to develop an intelligent design curriculum, and advance copies of
Explore Evolution , a biology textbook soon to be released by the
organization, were available at the convention. Program Director
Stephen Meyer told the crowd it is "premature" to teach intelligent
design in public schools. Meyer said, "We encourage people not to push
this in schools right now."
Such honesty is a refreshing trait in the new generation of
Creationists. By abandoning traditional Creationist arguments,
intelligent design advocates gained breathing room. In his
best-selling 1996 book Darwin's Black Box , featured afternoon speaker
Michael Behe admits evolution by descent with variation is a powerful
and valid explanation for observable biological change, and convention
moderator Lee Strobel said of the panel of speakers, "We all admit
evolution exists." Strobel even said public schools should "teach more
evolution."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read it at
http://www.metropulse.com/articles/2007/17_13/thats_wild.shtml
J. Spaceman
George
"Jason Spaceman" <notr...@jspaceman.homelinux.org> wrote in message
news:nnkm03t0ruvbd4j0g...@4ax.com...
> From the article:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> by Rikki Hall
>
> evolution exists."
Except when they don't.
George
Mike Dworetsky
news:nnkm03t0ruvbd4j0g...@4ax.com...
This is the first I have heard of a new ID textbook called "Explore
Evolution". This sounds like an extraordinarily sneaky way to get
creationism into schools by disguising the subject with a completely
misleading title. I wonder where the "science" will actually be?
I thought the description of hired flacks as "staff scientists" was very
amusing. Where is the science?
Exactly which version of ID creationism will they be trying to get into the
school curriculum under this guise? Hovind? Behe? Meyers? Something else?
What will the book say about the age of the Earth, cosmology, etc?
--
Mike Dworetsky
(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)
Bodega
> From the article:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> by Rikki Hall
>
"Philosopher Jay Richards told the audience there are too many
universal constants set too precisely to have aligned perfectly by
chance, so there must be a purpose to our existence. He has discovered
that purpose. Earth is positioned not only within the solar system's
narrow life-friendly zone, but also within the galaxy's astronomer-
friendly zone. We are perfectly positioned to see what is around us,
so our purpose is to discover."
I guess I shouldnt't be surprised that somethng this silly shows up at
an ID road show. Geez, Mabel, look at all doze stars. God musta done
dis.
Hey, I can see what's around me. Da stove, da front door, da moon ,,,
get down on your knees, ye sinners.
richardal...@googlemail.com
wrote:
> From the article:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> by Rikki Hall
>
> Creationists welcomed their new leaders to Knoxville last weekend for
> a convention held by the Discovery Institute, a Seattle non-profit
> that acts as a publishing house and endowment for proponents of
> intelligent design (ID). The institute supports a dozen senior fellows
> and more than two dozen other scientists. Staff scientists are working
> to develop an intelligent design curriculum, and advance copies of
> Explore Evolution , a biology textbook soon to be released by the
> organization, were available at the convention. Program Director
> Stephen Meyer told the crowd it is "premature" to teach intelligent
> design in public schools. Meyer said, "We encourage people not to push
> this in schools right now."
>
> Such honesty is a refreshing trait in the new generation of
> Creationists.
Honesty, eh.
So when your assertion has been tested in the courts, and shown to be
religious conviction and not science, it's "honest" not to push it as
science in schools?
RF
Bobby Bryant
Probably created from _Pandas & People_ by replacing all references to
"intelligent design" with some other euphemism for creationism.
> I wonder where the "science" will actually be?
>
> I thought the description of hired flacks as "staff scientists" was very
> amusing. Where is the science?
>
> Exactly which version of ID creationism will they be trying to get
> into the school curriculum under this guise? Hovind? Behe?
> Meyers? Something else?
>
> What will the book say about the age of the Earth, cosmology, etc?
They're probably smart enough to be vague. If they admit reality, their
target audience won't buy the book.
--
Bobby Bryant
Reno, Nevada
Remove your hat to reply by e-mail.
Bobby Bryant
One can easily make vulgar observations about other perfect
arrangements, which by the same argument lead to other conclusions
about purpose that the typical creationist will not care to hear.
Ron O
<notrea...@jspaceman.homelinux.org> wrote:
> From the article:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> by Rikki Hall
>
> Creationists welcomed their new leaders to Knoxville last weekend for
> a convention held by the Discovery Institute, a Seattle non-profit
> that acts as a publishing house and endowment for proponents of
> intelligent design (ID). The institute supports a dozen senior fellows
> and more than two dozen other scientists. Staff scientists are working
> to develop an intelligent design curriculum, and advance copies of
> Explore Evolution , a biology textbook soon to be released by the
> organization, were available at the convention. Program Director
> Stephen Meyer told the crowd it is "premature" to teach intelligent
> design in public schools. Meyer said, "We encourage people not to push
> this in schools right now."
Why wasn't Meyer that honest in front of the Ohio board in 2002. He
didn't say anything about ID being premature, just that it was
science, but he had another scam that the creationist rubes could try
first. A replacement scam that he had been talking about since 1999,
but just never got around to telling the rubes that the ID scam was
dead as a door nail, and that the new scam didn't even mention that ID
had ever existed.
Meyer has been on the board of directors of ARN since it started, as
far as I know, and in all the years ARN has existed he as never deemed
it honest or relevant to tell the ARN rubes that teaching intelligent
design is "premature." I'm sure that he cashes his checks regularly.
>
> Such honesty is a refreshing trait in the new generation of
> Creationists. By abandoning traditional Creationist arguments,
> intelligent design advocates gained breathing room. In his
> best-selling 1996 book Darwin's Black Box , featured afternoon speaker
> Michael Behe admits evolution by descent with variation is a powerful
> and valid explanation for observable biological change, and convention
> moderator Lee Strobel said of the panel of speakers, "We all admit
> evolution exists." Strobel even said public schools should "teach more
> evolution."
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Read it athttp://www.metropulse.com/articles/2007/17_13/thats_wild.shtml
>
> J. Spaceman
It sounds like they are going with Dembski's replacement scam that he
was trying to come up with a name for when the Ohio rubes were blowing
the "teach the controversy" ID replacment scam. One of his scam names
was intelligent evolution. Does just changing the name change the
dishonest stench of ID?
Ron Okimoto
Robert Carnegie
wrote:
I have to pick up this:
"They say evolution is purposeless, but the theory implicitly endows
all life with the purpose of reproduction. That purpose might be too
sexual to sit comfortably with Christians, but evolution can be viewed
as an unbroken chain of motherly love stretching back through human
history into our mammalian, reptilian and more primitive forebears. We
are family back to the first cells, and before that, it was momma muck
that obeyed God's command to bring forth life.
"Perhaps the biggest secret ID proponents do not want to discuss is
that there is no conflict between Biblical creation and science.
Evolution is a love story just like the Bible."
As far as I recall, outside mammals, motherly love doesn't last long.
In some species the eggs are laid and abandoned, or momma naturally
drops dead. Isn't there a species where mother and offspring fight to
the death...
And the bible a love story? That's some dysfunctional relationship.
The part where God gets so mad at Israel that he says the Babylonians
can take them away and slap them around if they want. And all the
killing.
But, heck, everyone's dead at the end of _Wuthering Heights_. Or do I
mean _Hamlet_. Much the same thing, I guess.
I suppose you have to pay cash to score a copy of _Exploring
Evolution_. I wonder if it is real or just to raise funds. I guess
real. "Pandas" is. And while presuming by default that it's a load
of vicious dishonesty about natural history, I am slightly curious
about precisely where and how the dishonesty lies. (Pages 1, 2, 3, 5,
7, 9, 11-18 and 24-end?)
er...@swva.net
> In article <bIOdnVjLKeW4_pbbRVny...@bt.com>,
> "Mike Dworetsky" <platinum...@pants.btinternet.com> writes:
>
>
>
> > "Jason Spaceman" <notrea...@jspaceman.homelinux.org> wrote in message
The book will go nowhere; high school biology classes need general
biology textbooks, not books that are primarily about evolution.
Eric Root
er...@swva.net
> On Mar 28, 10:49 pm, <notrea...@jspaceman.homelinux.org> wrote:> From the article:
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > by Rikki Hall
>
> [snip]
>
> "Philosopher Jay Richards told the audience there are too many
> universal constants set too precisely to have aligned perfectly by
> chance, so there must be a purpose to our existence.
This from a philosopher, automatically assuming the constants are
"set", as opposed to arising by necessity from the natural
characteristics of the forces and substances involved?
> He has discovered
> that purpose. Earth is positioned not only within the solar system's
> narrow life-friendly zone, but also within the galaxy's astronomer-
> friendly zone. We are perfectly positioned to see what is around us,
> so our purpose is to discover."
This has all been rebutted to death for years.
>
> I guess I shouldnt't be surprised that somethng this silly shows up at
> an ID road show. Geez, Mabel, look at all doze stars. God musta done
> dis.
>
> Hey, I can see what's around me. Da stove, da front door, da moon ,,,
> get down on your knees, ye sinners.
Yep.
Eric Root
Perplexed in Peoria
"Bobby Bryant" <bdbr...@wherever.ur> wrote in message news:05KOh.10146$JZ3....@newssvr13.news.prodigy.net...
> In article <bIOdnVjLKeW...@bt.com>,
> "Mike Dworetsky" <plati...@pants.btinternet.com> writes:
> > "Jason Spaceman" <notr...@jspaceman.homelinux.org> wrote in message
> > news:nnkm03t0ruvbd4j0g...@4ax.com...
> >> From the article:
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> by Rikki Hall
> >>
> >> Creationists welcomed their new leaders to Knoxville last weekend for
> >> a convention held by the Discovery Institute, a Seattle non-profit
> >> that acts as a publishing house and endowment for proponents of
> >> intelligent design (ID). The institute supports a dozen senior fellows
> >> and more than two dozen other scientists. Staff scientists are working
> >> to develop an intelligent design curriculum, and advance copies of
> >> Explore Evolution , a biology textbook soon to be released by the
> >> organization, were available at the convention. Program Director
> >> Stephen Meyer told the crowd it is "premature" to teach intelligent
> >> design in public schools. Meyer said, "We encourage people not to push
> >> this in schools right now."
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> Read it at
> >> http://www.metropulse.com/articles/2007/17_13/thats_wild.shtml
> >
> >
> > This is the first I have heard of a new ID textbook called "Explore
> > Evolution". This sounds like an extraordinarily sneaky way to get
> > creationism into schools by disguising the subject with a completely
> > misleading title.
>
> Probably created from _Pandas & People_ by replacing all references to
> "intelligent design" with some other euphemism for creationism.
>
>
> > I wonder where the "science" will actually be?
> >
> > I thought the description of hired flacks as "staff scientists" was very
> > amusing. Where is the science?
> >
> > Exactly which version of ID creationism will they be trying to get
> > into the school curriculum under this guise? Hovind? Behe?
> > Meyers? Something else?
> >
> > What will the book say about the age of the Earth, cosmology, etc?
>
> They're probably smart enough to be vague. If they admit reality, their
> target audience won't buy the book.
My guess is that the target audience for now is secondary school libraries.
It may even be appropriate (as a contrarian viewpoint) for libraries big
enough to have a few dozen books on evolution, but of course they will try
to get it into libraries with only a couple books on the subject. Probably
with some success.
Then, five-ten years from now, with the second edition, a renewed push to
use it as a textbook. Just guessing here.
Harry K
>
> J. Spaceman
I want a copy! Anyone have a suggestion as to where to get one?. I
just _have_ to see this as I haven't had a good laugh in a long while.
Harry K
JohnN
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > by Rikki Hall
>
> [snip]
>
> "Philosopher Jay Richards told the audience there are too many
> universal constants set too precisely to have aligned perfectly by
> chance, so there must be a purpose to our existence. He has discovered
> that purpose. Earth is positioned not only within the solar system's
> narrow life-friendly zone, but also within the galaxy's astronomer-
> friendly zone. We are perfectly positioned to see what is around us,
> so our purpose is to discover."
How can these guys be proud that the Earth is in the unfashionable
western arm of the Milky Way?
> I guess I shouldnt't be surprised that somethng this silly shows up at
> an ID road show. Geez, Mabel, look at all doze stars. God musta done
> dis.
>
> Hey, I can see what's around me. Da stove, da front door, da moon ,,,
> get down on your knees, ye sinners.
Sgt. Schultz: "I see nothing, nothing." Must have been an atheist.
JohnN
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <1175169891.1...@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>):
> As far as I recall, outside mammals, motherly love doesn't last long.
<cough> birds (well, most of them, anyway) </cough>. And some reptiles,
including the American Alligator.
> In some species the eggs are laid and abandoned, or momma naturally
> drops dead. Isn't there a species where mother and offspring fight to
> the death...
Sounds like a certain species of African frog or toad or some such. And while
Mamma 'gator might be protective of her kiddies (for a while) other 'gators
consider 'em snacks.
--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.
Dr.GH
wrote:
That was actually a negative review of ID. How pleasant.
Robert Carnegie
> I want a copy! Anyone have a suggestion as to where to get one?. I
> just _have_ to see this as I haven't had a good laugh in a long while.
If you mean _Explore Evolution_, hold back - you're the kind of sucker
they're looking for.
Robert Carnegie
> On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:04:51 -0400, Robert Carnegie wrote
> (in article <1175169891.1...@b75g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>):
>
> > As far as I recall, outside mammals, motherly love doesn't last long.
>
> <cough> birds (well, most of them, anyway) </cough>. And some reptiles,
> including the American Alligator.
I dunno about the alligators, but doesn't maternal instinct in birds
finish when the offspring famously leave the nest? After a couple of
weeks?
J.J. O'Shea
(in article <1175207899.7...@y80g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>):
It doesn't last much beyond that in 'gators, too, and they spend _much_ less
time in the nest.
Desertphile
<michael...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
Humans are able to observe what is termed "natural evil" [*] that
exists in the world and indeed in the universe [*]. If Jay
Richards is correct, then the gods want us to know that the gods
are evil fiends, or know that the gods are criminally incompetent.
[*] that which harms life and brings suffering, and which is not
generally considered caused by human intervention
[**] assuming life exists on planets where stars go super-nova, or
exhaust their fuel, etc.
--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
Desertphile
> On Mar 29, 3:19 am, "Bodega" <michael.palm...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> > On Mar 28, 10:49 pm, <notrea...@jspaceman.homelinux.org> wrote:> From the article:
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > by Rikki Hall
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > "Philosopher Jay Richards told the audience there are too many
> > universal constants set too precisely to have aligned perfectly by
> > chance, so there must be a purpose to our existence.
>
> This from a philosopher, automatically assuming the constants are
> "set", as opposed to arising by necessity from the natural
> characteristics of the forces and substances involved?
>
> > He has discovered
> > that purpose. Earth is positioned not only within the solar system's
> > narrow life-friendly zone, but also within the galaxy's astronomer-
> > friendly zone. We are perfectly positioned to see what is around us,
> > so our purpose is to discover."
>
> This has all been rebutted to death for years.
It seems quite equal to arguing that a rock was strategically and
deliberately placed so that some one, some day, will trip over it.
Finally we see a body of humanity more arrogant, more drunk on
hubris, than Creationists: philosophers!
Harry K
Agreed that they would get my buck but I just GOTTA see the idiocy in
it.
Harry K