Hooray for the Methodists

Yazata said:
That sounds like intellectual intolerance and closed-mindedness to me. I can't support or even respect that kind of attitude.

I'm for freedom of thought and inquiry, for ideas standing or falling on their merits. I don't like the enforced exclusion of ideas that disagree with the beliefs of those in power. We see for too much of that already in the contemporary intellectual world.
Click to expand...

That's a worthy but in my opinion rather naive view of this issue. The ID movement has a long history of slippery misrepresentation. It seems to me the organisers of the official conference of a serious religious group are quite right not to host the the promotion of ideas it thinks are false.
 
Spellbound said:
Exchemist:



It was a pleasure to see that you are not quite of the false belief that ID subverts science! :biggrin: While of the one that ID is unscientific!

From article:

The movement is fundamentally a version of the teleological argument for the existence of God. While it encompasses a range of views about evolution, with some proponents saying God simply guided the process, others are keen to argue that some life-forms demonstrate an "irreducible complexity" that means they have to have been specially created by an intelligent directing force. It critiques evolutionary explanations of life, saying that they are inadequate accounts of origins. It usually avoids saying that the intelligent designer is God, but the implication is clear.

EDIT: On second thought, I just noticed you've agreed with spidergoat. You've lost my respect. :(
Click to expand...

Tant pis.
 
timojin said:
Tell about other things beside shooting . and rocketry is shooting
Click to expand...
They made the first drone, landed it on the moon. And going into space is more than just shooting, it requires advances in almost every field.
 
exchemist said:
That's a worthy but in my opinion rather naive view of this issue. The ID movement has a long history of slippery misrepresentation. It seems to me the organisers of the official conference of a serious religious group are quite right not to host the the promotion of ideas it thinks are false.
Click to expand...

I'd be willing to bet that if a fundamentalist evangelical denomination excluded a group that had a display arguing that Christianity is consistent with biological evolution, the same people who applaud the methodists would condemn them for doing it.

So what would justify the exclusion of dissenting opinion in the one case and not the other?
 
timojin said:
You have to remember on thing . Science is not creating NATURE. SCIENCE IS STUDYING NATURE . meaning was have been done .

I don't believe ID scientists are masquerading. The problem is there are two camps . Atheist trying to negate the Existence of God with out knowing all the facts , and pretend to know the fact.
About the design : Would you rather have your balls hanging were your ears are and your dick on your arm ?
Click to expand...
And you think combining waste removal with reproduction is an intelligent design?

Two of the problems with ID is that it doesn't explain anything & there's no way to objectively recognize "design".
 
Yazata said:
Isn't forbidding the expression of perceived unorthodox opinion one of the things that more authoritarian belief systems are justifiably criticized for?

Unfortunately, we are seeing more and more of it in contemporary intellectual life.
Click to expand...
You can spout off all you want, it's just not science, that's the problem.
 
gmilam said:
And you think combining waste removal with reproduction is an intelligent design?

Two of the problems with ID is that it doesn't explain anything & there's no way to objectively recognize "design".
Click to expand...

I suppose you know a woman have two separated orifices , if not please che ck wiki
If you are a male you would know there is a valve by the prostate, and you balls are hanging so the sperm will not die from body temperature
 
timojin said:
I suppose you know a woman have two separated orifices , if not please che ck wiki
If you are a male you would know there is a valve by the prostate, and you balls are hanging so the sperm will not die from body temperature
Click to expand...
The giraffe has a nerve that loops from the neck around the heart and back up the neck. For no other reason than it evolved before the giraffe evolved long neck, and it had no way of unlooping itself. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Laryngeal_nerve
 
spidergoat said:
The giraffe has a nerve that loops from the neck around the heart and back up the neck. For no other reason than it evolved before the giraffe evolved long neck, and it had no way of unlooping itself. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Laryngeal_nerve
Click to expand...

Ok guy . we don't know the purpose of this on . that mean we don't know , so let study it perhaps there is a good reason. So what is the reason for a giraffe to have a long neck ?
 
timojin said:
Ok guy . we don't know the purpose of this on . that mean we don't know , so let study it perhaps there is a good reason. So what is the reason for a giraffe to have a long neck ?
Click to expand...
To reach food. But one of it's nerves has 15 feet of unnecessary length! Intelligent design indeed!
 
timojin said:
... so let study it perhaps there is a good reason.
Click to expand...
The reason is simple enough: It was never designed; it was tacked on.

We see this happening in real life all the time. You move a lamp and the cord won't reach so you use an extension cord. Nobody would wonder why the lamp was "designed" with a two-piece cord. They'd conclude that it was adapted.
 
spidergoat said:
To reach food. But one of it's nerves has 15 feet of unnecessary length! Intelligent design indeed!
Click to expand...

Do we know how many sensors are attached to the cord ? Since you apparently are more familiar with the giraffe. . Does the spinal cord runs the same way from cerebrum to the tail ? and so does the mentioned 15 feet cord runs from the spinal cord ?
 
Yazata said:
I'd be willing to bet that if a fundamentalist evangelical denomination excluded a group that had a display arguing that Christianity is consistent with biological evolution, the same people who applaud the methodists would condemn them for doing it.

So what would justify the exclusion of dissenting opinion in the one case and not the other?
Click to expand...

First, I'm quite sure we'd all expect the fundamentalists to exclude such a group. The "same people" (=me, right?) would not waste energy condemning something so unsurprising.

Second, ID is dishonest. The Wedge Document and the Kitzmiller trial show that clearly. Would you expect the UMC to welcome a stand at their annual conference promoting Scientology? Or a Ponzi financial scheme?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top