Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Principia · 09-02-2002, 05:49 PM

<a href="http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/0830_IDM.asp" target="_blank">Read the report.</a>

pz · 09-02-2002, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Scientiae:
<a href="http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/0830_IDM.asp" target="_blank">Read the report.</a>

AiG and the DI have been uneasy with each other at least since Ham agreed to appear on PBS's Evolution series.

I suspect that it's another sign that Intelligent Design is in trouble -- the fractures are widening and the factions are distancing themselves from one another.

Dr.GH · 09-02-2002, 06:49 PM

Or, the paranoid theory is that the YECs publicly disavow support for ID. This improves the DI's bogus argument that ID isn't creationism in a labcoat. ID gets by a court challenge, and we got the bastards in the classrooms.

Sometimes even paranoids got enemies.

[ September 02, 2002: Message edited by: Dr.GH ]

hezekiah jones · 09-02-2002, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dr.GH:
Or, the paranoid theory is that the YECs publicly disavow support for ID. This improves the DI's bogus argument that ID isn't creationism in a labcoat. ID gets by a court challenge, and we got the bastards in the classrooms.

You beat me to it. I agree 100%. The potential constitutional challenge to ID will depend in large part on establishing an evidentiary continuum between the YECs and the IDers.

This makes it that much more difficult.

Albion · 09-02-2002, 08:57 PM

I think it's actually less hostile to ID than the earlier version:

<a href="http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/1399.asp" target="_blank">http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/1399.asp</a>

That one pretty much said that ID was unbiblical but was a useful weapon against the forces of atheism. I thought the newer one was trying to be a bit more measured while still reserving to YECs the exclusive label of True Christians.

WinAce · 09-02-2002, 11:04 PM

Quote:

What about the common objection, ‘Why not then teach e.g. Australian Aboriginal creation stories in science lessons?’ One could ask such objectors whether they are aware of any origins teaching outside of the Abrahamic stream which:

Claims to be absolute revelational truth from the Creator in documentary form

Has been held and believed consistently for many centuries in essentially its modern form.

Has been held to offer a serious historical explanation for all of reality and the origins of man and the universe.

Is supported by a significant group of qualified scientists and other intellectuals who are convinced that it does indeed explain the data at least as well as evolution/long ages.

<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

Their myth is better and more widely accepted than other myths!

Albion · 09-03-2002, 12:06 AM

Quote:

Claims to be absolute revelational truth from the Creator in documentary form

Yeah, that sounds like science...

tgamble · 09-03-2002, 03:17 AM

AIG has always been narrow minded and stubborn when it comes to their own dogma. They aren't going to be satisfied with "an unnamed creator being involve somehow".

They'll use some of the arguments (IC) but the conclusions will never change. The DI uses a lot of the arguments YECs have been useing for years anyway. (ie. the fossil record).

pz · 09-03-2002, 05:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dr.GH:
Or, the paranoid theory is that the YECs publicly disavow support for ID. This improves the DI's bogus argument that ID isn't creationism in a labcoat. ID gets by a court challenge, and we got the bastards in the classrooms.

You're right. That's the <a href="http://www.arn.org/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=14;t=000149" target="_blank">position</a> Mike Gene has taken over on ARN: it's ammo to defend his claim that ID is not creationism.

Steven Carr · 09-03-2002, 05:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by pz:


You're right. That's the <a href="http://www.arn.org/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=14;t=000149" target="_blank">position</a> Mike Gene has taken over on ARN: it's ammo to defend his claim that ID is not creationism.

Of course.

ID is creationism without any creator or creation events.

It is even more vacuous than creationism.

09-02-2002, 05:49 PM	#1
Principia Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: anywhere Posts: 1,976	AiG takes a stance on ID <a href="http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/0830_IDM.asp" target="_blank">Read the report.</a>

09-02-2002, 06:49 PM	#3
Dr.GH Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Dana Point, Ca, USA Posts: 2,115	Or, the paranoid theory is that the YECs publicly disavow support for ID. This improves the DI's bogus argument that ID isn't creationism in a labcoat. ID gets by a court challenge, and we got the bastards in the classrooms. Sometimes even paranoids got enemies. [ September 02, 2002: Message edited by: Dr.GH ]</p>

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

09-02-2002, 08:57 PM	#5
Albion Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: US east coast. And www.theroyalforums.com Posts: 2,829	I think it's actually less hostile to ID than the earlier version: <a href="http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/1399.asp" target="_blank">http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/1399.asp</a> That one pretty much said that ID was unbiblical but was a useful weapon against the forces of atheism. I thought the newer one was trying to be a bit more measured while still reserving to YECs the exclusive label of True Christians.

09-03-2002, 03:17 AM	#8
tgamble Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: St. John's, Nfld. Canada Posts: 1,652	AIG has always been narrow minded and stubborn when it comes to their own dogma. They aren't going to be satisfied with "an unnamed creator being involve somehow". They'll use some of the arguments (IC) but the conclusions will never change. The DI uses a lot of the arguments YECs have been useing for years anyway. (ie. the fossil record).

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.