Freethought & Rationalism Archive

phlebas · 02-13-2002, 10:38 AM

Not a bad article:

<a href="http://slate.msn.com/?id=2062009" target="_blank">http://slate.msn.com/?id=2062009</a>

Nice and critical of ID. This guy's gonna get angry, badly spelled emails.

James AD · 02-13-2002, 12:36 PM

Excellent editorial! Get it on the Newswire.

theyeti · 02-13-2002, 01:25 PM

I do wish that the author had not made comparisons to the Taliban. That's the sort of thing that they do.

I especially liked this part;

Quote:

Behind these pleas for diversity is the kind of educational relativism conservatives normally despise. "Biological evolution, like creationism and design, cannot be proved to be either true or false," writes one ID enthusiast in Ohio. Since evolution is an "unproven theory," says another, "belief in it is just as much an act of faith as is belief in creationism or in the theory of intelligent design."

It's always struck my as ironic, of not downright hypocritical, that they talk about "diversity" and such when these are the same people that normally rail against the concept. And of course, the part about using the word "faith" in a derogatory way is pure hilarity.

theyeti

scombrid · 02-13-2002, 01:42 PM

Quote:

That, in a nutshell, is ID. It offers no predictions, scope modifiers, or experimental methods of its own. It's a default answer, a shrug, consisting entirely of problems in Darwinism. Those problems should be taught in school, but there's no reason to call them intelligent design. Intelligent design, as defined by its advocates, means nothing. This is the way creationism ends. Not with a bang, but with a whimper.

This summation by itself is one of the best criticisms of ID that I've read.

simian · 02-13-2002, 02:03 PM

I read through the article quickly. I couldn't disagree with the author more on where ID is going. He states that ID claims nothing, it will end quickly.

My experience with the ID crowd and how they relate to the general public is more favorable. They seem to accept the fact the universe is very old, they seem to accept that evolution occurs, they seem open to the idea that it could be "any" intelligent designer.

I have had the misfortune of hearing Phil Johnson speak 2 times (of the 3 he gave in Fargo in 1999). He is a slick presenter, I have no doubt he is a YEC (Young Earth Creationist) or some variation there of, and I have no doubt he is working hard to keep the ID movement from saying anything meaningful. I think you would be hard pressed to find anything from him on the age of the universe or earth. His whole point (the "wedge stragegy") is to get all the creationists together in one tent (ignoring the differences) and work at splitting apart the public's perception of the sciences.

This makes it more dangerous than YEC. Johnson uses the same false examples I have seen many YECs use, the difference is that he will NEVER, EVER give any concrete statement of what ID believes. I think the US public is ready to swallow it hook, line, and sinker. If ID is not taken seriously as the next version christian creationism, I think it will end up in many classrooms.

I perhaps take this a little more seriously because I am originally from Kansas - I would have never believed that the sciences would have been gutted there prior to Aug. 11, 1999, or that gutting them was the "compromise" position - 1 member would not vote for a YEC set of standards - he knew it would get thrown out by the courts immediately.

Corwin · 02-13-2002, 02:16 PM

ID must be stomped out everywhere it rears its ugly head and strangled out like the weed it is.

I strongly disagree with the author's take on Intelligent Design, having had any number of debates, arguments, and discussions with this heresy's proponents.

Heresy is exactly the word I'm looking for. The Catholic church went after heretics for a specific reason... and a very valid one. We should do the same. Heresy is rewriting or altering established doctrine to meet your own ends. The Catholics went after heretics because they were a competing world view that reflected badly on the Church. By comparison... nonchristians were more or less safe from the Inquisition. (Early in its history, the Inquisition formally delcared that witchcraft was a delusion and refused to prosecute people for it. The witch burnings in europe? Weren't done by the Inquisition. They were done by the main body of the church and by church supported monarchies.)

Intelligent Design is heresy. It dilutes, disrupts and attempts to discredit proven scientific fact through use of obfuscation, manipulation, misquoting, quoting people out of text, and occasional bald-faced lying. They take real science, skim it for a few points that seem to back up their argument, and present their version as scientific fact. Under real scientific analysis their 'theory' falls apart, but most people aren't able to subject it to this sort of analysis. ID'ers are well aware of this.

I know these people. I talk to them. I debate with them. (When they're able to actually debate.) I argue with them. (Much more common, since most of them can't form an actual coherent thought...) These are NOT the nice safe 'alternative' types the author suggests they are. They are mean, dangerous religious fanatics grasping desperately at ANYTHING that might keep their delusional fantasy alive.... given half a chance they WILL gut every science program in our country and establish some form of biblical creationism. This may sound alarmist.... but look at everyplace they've tried it. They've done it before, they'll do it again.

The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance. Likewise with the enlightenment that comes with scientific inquiry. We must guard against this manipulation of real science.

02-13-2002, 10:38 AM	#1
phlebas Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Metropolis Posts: 916	Slate article on ID being pushed in Ohio Not a bad article: <a href="http://slate.msn.com/?id=2062009" target="_blank">http://slate.msn.com/?id=2062009</a> Nice and critical of ID. This guy's gonna get angry, badly spelled emails.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-13-2002, 12:36 PM	#2
James AD Regular Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Tabuco Canyon (Orange County), CA, USA Posts: 106	Excellent editorial! Get it on the Newswire.

02-13-2002, 02:03 PM	#5
simian Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: St. Louis, MO area Posts: 1,924	I read through the article quickly. I couldn't disagree with the author more on where ID is going. He states that ID claims nothing, it will end quickly. My experience with the ID crowd and how they relate to the general public is more favorable. They seem to accept the fact the universe is very old, they seem to accept that evolution occurs, they seem open to the idea that it could be "any" intelligent designer. I have had the misfortune of hearing Phil Johnson speak 2 times (of the 3 he gave in Fargo in 1999). He is a slick presenter, I have no doubt he is a YEC (Young Earth Creationist) or some variation there of, and I have no doubt he is working hard to keep the ID movement from saying anything meaningful. I think you would be hard pressed to find anything from him on the age of the universe or earth. His whole point (the "wedge stragegy") is to get all the creationists together in one tent (ignoring the differences) and work at splitting apart the public's perception of the sciences. This makes it more dangerous than YEC. Johnson uses the same false examples I have seen many YECs use, the difference is that he will NEVER, EVER give any concrete statement of what ID believes. I think the US public is ready to swallow it hook, line, and sinker. If ID is not taken seriously as the next version christian creationism, I think it will end up in many classrooms. I perhaps take this a little more seriously because I am originally from Kansas - I would have never believed that the sciences would have been gutted there prior to Aug. 11, 1999, or that gutting them was the "compromise" position - 1 member would not vote for a YEC set of standards - he knew it would get thrown out by the courts immediately.

02-13-2002, 02:16 PM	#6
Corwin Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 4,369	ID must be stomped out everywhere it rears its ugly head and strangled out like the weed it is. I strongly disagree with the author's take on Intelligent Design, having had any number of debates, arguments, and discussions with this heresy's proponents. Heresy is exactly the word I'm looking for. The Catholic church went after heretics for a specific reason... and a very valid one. We should do the same. Heresy is rewriting or altering established doctrine to meet your own ends. The Catholics went after heretics because they were a competing world view that reflected badly on the Church. By comparison... nonchristians were more or less safe from the Inquisition. (Early in its history, the Inquisition formally delcared that witchcraft was a delusion and refused to prosecute people for it. The witch burnings in europe? Weren't done by the Inquisition. They were done by the main body of the church and by church supported monarchies.) Intelligent Design is heresy. It dilutes, disrupts and attempts to discredit proven scientific fact through use of obfuscation, manipulation, misquoting, quoting people out of text, and occasional bald-faced lying. They take real science, skim it for a few points that seem to back up their argument, and present their version as scientific fact. Under real scientific analysis their 'theory' falls apart, but most people aren't able to subject it to this sort of analysis. ID'ers are well aware of this. I know these people. I talk to them. I debate with them. (When they're able to actually debate.) I argue with them. (Much more common, since most of them can't form an actual coherent thought...) These are NOT the nice safe 'alternative' types the author suggests they are. They are mean, dangerous religious fanatics grasping desperately at ANYTHING that might keep their delusional fantasy alive.... given half a chance they WILL gut every science program in our country and establish some form of biblical creationism. This may sound alarmist.... but look at everyplace they've tried it. They've done it before, they'll do it again. The price of Liberty is eternal vigilance. Likewise with the enlightenment that comes with scientific inquiry. We must guard against this manipulation of real science.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.