RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

    
  Topic: Darwin Strikes Back, Chuck Colson, again< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Jason Spaceman



Posts: 163
Joined: Nov. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 08 2007,02:36   

Quote
By Chuck Colson
Christian Post Guest Columnist
Wed, Feb. 07 2007 11:51 AM ET

A couple of years ago on this program, I had this to say of the book Doubts about Darwin by my friend Thomas Woodward: “The motivation for [the] . . . founders of the [intelligent] design movement to instigate this ‘reformation within science’ is a passion for intellectual truth-telling.”

Woodward displays this passion for truth-telling yet again in his marvelous new book, Darwin Strikes Back: Defending the Science of Intelligent Design. What Woodward wrote about just a few years ago is even truer today. Amid a firestorm of criticism and abuse from committed Darwinists, the intelligent design movement continues to press forward, gaining scientific credibility and even grudging respect from some evolutionists. But as Woodward shows, there’s still a long way to go.

Because the more respect intelligent design gains, the more alarmed the Darwinists become. Their thinking goes something like this: It’s one thing for those religious people to talk about a creator God—that’s religion; but now they are talking about science—so, they figure, “Let’s label it religion.” Woodward writes, “These sentiments were echoed in public declarations, verbally and in print, by Darwinian defenders, warning . . . that Intelligent Design is religion, not science . . . This statement,” Woodward continues, “emerged as the number-one talking point for Intelligent Design opponents [over the last few years].”


Read it here.

   
JohnW



Posts: 2767
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 08 2007,10:39   

Excellent.  I've been looking forward to a book like this.  It must have been quite a challenge to distil all the science done in ID laboratories all over the world into a one-volume summary.  Now we have a concise explanation of all the ground-breaking basic research which underlies...

What?  Oh.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers

There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

  
ofro



Posts: 19
Joined: Jan. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 08 2007,11:54   

Quote
… the intelligent design movement continues to press forward, gaining scientific credibility…


Is that a admission that at least at one point the intelligent design movement didn’t have scientific credibility?

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 08 2007,12:23   

Quote (Jason Spaceman @ Feb. 08 2007,02:36)
Quote
By Chuck Colson
Christian Post Guest Columnist
Wed, Feb. 07 2007 11:51 AM ET

A couple of years ago on this program, I had this to say of the book Doubts about Darwin by my friend Thomas Woodward: “The motivation for [the] . . . founders of the [intelligent] design movement to instigate this ‘reformation within science’ is a passion for intellectual truth-telling.”

Woodward displays this passion for truth-telling yet again in his marvelous new book, Darwin Strikes Back: Defending the Science of Intelligent Design. What Woodward wrote about just a few years ago is even truer today. Amid a firestorm of criticism and abuse from committed Darwinists, the intelligent design movement continues to press forward, gaining scientific credibility and even grudging respect from some evolutionists. But as Woodward shows, there’s still a long way to go.

Because the more respect intelligent design gains, the more alarmed the Darwinists become. Their thinking goes something like this: It’s one thing for those religious people to talk about a creator God—that’s religion; but now they are talking about science—so, they figure, “Let’s label it religion.” Woodward writes, “These sentiments were echoed in public declarations, verbally and in print, by Darwinian defenders, warning . . . that Intelligent Design is religion, not science . . . This statement,” Woodward continues, “emerged as the number-one talking point for Intelligent Design opponents [over the last few years].”


Read it here.

Let me guess: this is all based on 'research' Colson did when he broke into Richard Dawkins' office late at night, right?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
millipj



Posts: 10
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 08 2007,16:20   

Hey, there might even be a definition of what the Theory of Intelligent Design actually is.

  
improvius



Posts: 807
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 08 2007,16:38   

Quote (millipj @ Feb. 08 2007,17:20)
Hey, there might even be a definition of what the Theory of Intelligent Design actually is.

Yep, it's described in the article:
Quote
What they have in common is what Woodward calls a “scientific paradigm” that allows for design in any natural mechanism that can’t be explained simply by chance or purely natural causes. His meticulously researched book clearly explains the scientific reasoning behind this paradigm.

So if we can't explain it, then it might have been designed.  I'll bet you can't argue with that!

--------------
Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37)
Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late.
Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

  
Henry J



Posts: 4565
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 08 2007,19:51   

The proper question is not "what is designed" - the proper question is "was it engineered". (Imnsho.)

Besides, we do know who/what built any given living cell - its parent cell, that's who/what, and that should be apparent to anybody. (pun fully intended.)

Henry

  
Kristine



Posts: 3061
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 09 2007,15:00   

Quote
Woodward displays this passion for truth-telling yet again in his marvelous new book, Darwin Strikes Back: Defending the Science of Intelligent Design. What Woodward wrote about just a few years ago is even truer today. Amid a firestorm of criticism and abuse from committed Darwinists, the intelligent design movement continues to press forward, gaining scientific credibility and even grudging respect from some evolutionists. But as Woodward shows, there’s still a long way to go.
Oh. Stupid me, I thought he was talking about Intelligent Resign.  ;)

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
  7 replies since Feb. 08 2007,02:36 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

    


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]