RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

    
  Topic: SMU school paper, Could use your comments< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 18 2007,11:17   

Read this garbage from yet another law student/IDiot who's lying her arse off.  It's pretty hilarious.  Feel free to leave comments.

But read the article at least twice before you do, there is so much to respond to.

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
Jasper



Posts: 76
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 18 2007,11:35   

"Anika Smith" is listed as one of the authors of this opinion piece.

Hmmm...could this be the same Anika Smith who is listed as a contributor on the DI blog?

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 18 2007,11:46   

Also check this page
http://www.smu.edu/chaplain/ministries/CLS.asp
Quote
The Christian Legal Society is an interdenominational, student-led group with the main goal of being a place where Christian law students can meet and fellowship together.

And the author of the piece in question is the contact for the above!
In the piece she says
Quote
ID starts with the science, not with any religious basis.

It's just coincidence that they are all Christians or similar. What are the chances of that? If the odds are against it, does that mean its got 500 bits of CSI or whatever it is?

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Stephen Elliott



Posts: 1754
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 18 2007,12:26   

I have tried to reply with this...
Quote
Hi,
I really do not know where best to start in forming a response.

ID is not scientific. It never was and never will be. Have you heard of the "wedge document"? If not then google it.

If ID is a scientific theory, could you tell me what that theory is? How is it testable and what predictions does it make?

Take any ID claim that you like and then go to a site called talkorigins and you will see a scientific answer to it. Then look at the dates that they got written. The experience is a tad humiliating. I know as I was once an ID suporter.

ID was just a ruse to get religious P'sOV into science classes as a precurser to societal change (and a bit of a money spinner).

The red herring of choosing between religion and science is more generally used by ID proponents. Don't believe me? Then check it out. Do what they say and actually follow the evidence no matter where it leads.

BTW. Darwins theory is not about life evolving but about species evolving. It is an important distinction. You are mixing evolution with origin of life.

How many scientists do you think actually disagree with evolution as a scientific theory? If you think it is about 600 then you are in for a surprise as that list is a bit of a bluff. Then check the professor steve project and the clergy letter.

Good luck with your progress.

Best wishes,
Steve E.

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: April 18 2007,12:43   

The authors of this letter have made two serious errors regarding intelligent design creationism.  The first is the claim, "ID starts with the science, not with any religious basis."  

William Dembski, in his 1999 Touchstone article “Signs of Intelligence,” confirmed ID's religious foundation assuring readers, "Indeed, intelligent design is just the Logos theology of John’s Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory."  Later (March 7, 2004) he stated that, “Ultimately I want to see God get the credit for what he’s done — and he’s not getting it.”

IDC intellectual Jonathan Wells admitted that he was directed to study biology by, "... Father's (self-proclaimed Messiah, Rev. Sun Moon) words, my studies, and my prayers convinced me that I should devote my life to destroying Darwinism, ..."  Then he studied biology!

The godfather of IDC, lawyer Phillip Johnson following his late life conversion experience decided to reject science.  Michael Behe has admitted that his creationism, and promotion of IDC follows his religious beliefs.  While under oath in the Dover PA Federal Court creationism trial, Behe admitted that unlike evolution, there is no scientific research supporting ID.  ID's religious foundation in creationism is fully exposed in Barbara Carroll Forrest, and Paul R. Gross (2004) "Creationism's Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design" Oxford University Press.

The next significant error was their claim, "Intelligent Design, like any scientific theory, uses the scientific method (observation, hypothesis, experiment, and conclusion)."

Again Dr. William Dembski clearly states the IDC position;

"ID is not a mechanistic theory, and it’s not ID’s task to match your (science gh) pathetic level of detail in telling mechanistic stories. If ID is correct and an intelligence is responsible and indispensable for certain structures, then it makes no sense to try to ape your method of connecting the dots. (ISCID, 2002)"  In the 2005 Dover Pa. "Pandas" trial (Kitzmiller v. Dover) intelligent design creationist Michael Behe was forced to admit under oath that under any definition of science that would include IDC would also include astrology.

These are not all the errors made by Levy and Smith, but I'll leave some meat on the bone for others to chew.

Gary Hurd

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 18 2007,13:00   

Red State Rabble had a link to this article about SMU students attending this conference... and getting thrown out by the DI Thugs...

So, maybe after UD closes down, DaveScot can still pick up a little money!

http://media.www.smudailycampus.com/media....4.shtml

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: April 18 2007,13:33   

The SMU student paper ran an anti-ID editorial today

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 19 2007,09:18   

You guys rock, they finally posted all the responses.

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
  7 replies since April 18 2007,11:17 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

    


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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