Intelligent design to be taught in Queensland schools

Cabal

Well-Known Member
Jul 22, 2007
11,592
476
38
London
✟30,012.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
So?

You mean I have to do some traveling around on the information highway to find out I'm wrong?

Well, yes, seeing as you're making a universal absolute claim, that "Inquistors" (whatever they are) aren't going after TEs (that's it, no quantifiers, as usual), and this board is not necessarily representative of the wider debate - but hey, like I said, this attitude no doubt helps your views of your brothers and sisters in Christ stay blinkered. Your behaviour is only proving the point.

Why does that occur on some other website and not here, especially if the topic is a universal one?

Why should this site be special? This board sees a lot of activity but it hardly contains that large a regular contributor base. Statistics, AV - always need more statistics.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,851,188
51,516
Guam
✟4,910,915.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Why should this site be special?
That's my point.

You're using another website to try and make this site special?

If you are right, that TEs get challenged universally, then yes, this site is an exception for some reason*.

If I'm right, that TEs don't get challenged here, and BioLogos is an exception, then this site is the norm.

* And I'll ask again, why is that?
 
Upvote 0

Cabal

Well-Known Member
Jul 22, 2007
11,592
476
38
London
✟30,012.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
That's my point.

You're using another website to try and make this site special?

Not in the slightest.

YOU are by your own admission looking at ONLY this site and yet you claimed a universal absolute, not something limited to this board.

As usual AV, you fail to grasp the obvious - if you make a universal absolute statement, then only one counterexample need be found to show your statement to be flat out WRONG.

I found one.

So you're wrong.

If you are right, that TEs get challenged universally, then yes, this site is an exception for some reason

Nope, I never said they got challenged universally - I said they got challenged and presented an occasion where they did. Because that is all that was needed to refute your statement.

If I'm right, that TEs don't get challenged here, and BioLogos is an exception, then this site is the norm.

This is the most spectacular usage of weasel words I've seen all day.

You did NOT make any reference to TE's not being challenged HERE at any point. You made a UNIVERSAL statement:

I'm not going to comment on my brothers and sisters in Christ who are theistic evolutionists, other than to say this, the Inquisition doesn't go after them like they do the YECs, Embedded Agers, Gaps, and so on.

There was no reference to this only occurring here. The back-tracking is strong with this one.....

And I'll ask again: Why is that?

Why should I know? Go ask the "Inquistors" - and try not to make it any more melodramatic than it already is.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Tomatoman

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2010
1,338
51
✟1,829.00
Faith
Anglican
Originally Posted by AV1611VET
I'm not going to comment on my brothers and sisters in Christ who are theistic evolutionists, other than to say this, the Inquisition doesn't go after them like they do the YECs, Embedded Agers, Gaps, and so on.

I can only answer this for myself. I leave theistic evolutionists alone because their faith doesn't completely and utterly ignore science. Their faith doesn't try and rewrite what we know to be true and insist we replace reality with fantasy. The gospel story can be accepted in a number of ways that doesn't include outright rejection of scientific knowledge. Young earth creationists, embedded agers and the like don't have this option. To me, they are just patently, perversely, obviously wrong and believe absurdities. Therefore I 'go after them'. (Although I'm only a minor 'inquisitor'.) That's my reason. Other people may have different reasons.
 
Upvote 0

Split Rock

Conflation of Blathers
Nov 3, 2003
17,607
730
North Dakota
✟22,466.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
That's my point.

You're using another website to try and make this site special?

If you are right, that TEs get challenged universally, then yes, this site is an exception for some reason*.

If I'm right, that TEs don't get challenged here, and BioLogos is an exception, then this site is the norm.

* And I'll ask again, why is that?
I disagree that TEs don't ever get challenged here. Just recently, Hespera went after Lucaspa in more than one thread because he supports and has posted on behalf of TE. I suspect the reason it is infrequent here is two-fold.
1. Because you guys represent a larger "target" than TEs do for those who are anti-religion.
2. Because many of us who are not theistic but support evolution do not have a problem with religion.
 
Upvote 0

Darkness27

Junior Member
May 11, 2009
211
7
33
USA-VA
✟7,876.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Not on this board, perhaps, but then again, I'm sure that helps you keep your views of topics blinkered. There's a theistic evolutionist group called BioLogos who are getting hit pretty hard by atheists right now.

I might have to side with AV on this. I've been on multiple forums and there really is no atheistic attacks on TEs for the most part, at least under the creo-evo debate parts. No non-Christian has ever given me a hard time from being a TE except one, it was mutally friendly though, and I sort of started it too.

That doesn't mean it never happens (although I don't think that is what AV was saying), just that it isn't the norm.
 
Upvote 0

Cabal

Well-Known Member
Jul 22, 2007
11,592
476
38
London
✟30,012.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
just that it isn't the norm.

I agree.

The point is, that wasn't what AV said to begin with and he couched his words in general terms; and now he's backtracking like it's going out of fashion.
 
Upvote 0

Frumious Bandersnatch

Contributor
Mar 4, 2003
6,390
334
78
Visit site
✟23,431.00
Faith
Unitarian
They're my brothers and sisters in Christ.

Note how much I chime in when the Science Inquisition is after the YECs?

Same thing.
Most scientist I know, and I know many, don't think much about YEC, in fact many are astonished to find out that anyone still believes in a Young Earth and Global Flood. If creationists had never tried to get creationism taught in schools even fewer would know about it. I first became aware of YEC when the science director of our local public schools left to join ICR and wrote an editorial about his beliefs in the local paper so I knew about it before Aguillard vs Edward in Louisana. In those days I had trouble even convincing some of the scientists I knew that YECs even existed.

I have been around this debate long enough to remember when most YECs denied any evolution beyond the species level and denied continental drift. Now some try to put both in overdrive either during or after the flood. Creationism has Evolved!
 
Upvote 0

Taq

Newbie
Jul 6, 2010
32
2
✟262.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
How does finding human artifacts provide evidence of the Holocaust?

I wasn't asking about the Holocaust. I was asking about ID. How does finding human artifacts indicate that all life on Earth was intelligently designed?

How come archaea hasn't changed in 3.6 billion years?
Show me a 3.6 billion year old genome and compare it to current archaebacteria and then tell me that they are the same.

How come cyanobacteria hasn't changed in 2.8 billion years?

How come the fig wasp hasn't changed in 34 million years?
Please show that they haven't changed.

ID theorists do that too. The only difference is ID makes accurate observations.
Making accurate observations has nothing to do with theory. Theories make predictions, not observations. What testable predictions does ID make?

In other words Darwinism can't be tested. ID can.
Here is a test for you. There are 4 features found in animals: fur, feathers, a middle ear with a single bone, and a middle ear with three bones. What predictions does ID make about the relationship between these features, and why? The theory of evolution does make a testable prediction about these relationships. What about ID?

Every prediction evolution has ever made has been falsified. For example, evolution predicted that man evolved 50,000 years ago. LOL.[/QUTOE]

Evolution predicts that man is evolving in every generation.

Evolution cannot predict protein function. Only ID successfully predicts protein function.
What? I already linked you to a paper where the theory of evolution was used to predict protein function. Here is the abstract:

1. PLoS Comput Biol. 2005 Oct;1(5):e45. Epub 2005 Oct 7.

Protein molecular function prediction by Bayesian phylogenomics.

Engelhardt BE, Jordan MI, Muratore KE, Brenner SE.

Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences, University of
California, Berkeley, California, United States of America.

We present a statistical graphical model to infer specific molecular function for
unannotated protein sequences using homology. Based on phylogenomic principles,
SIFTER (Statistical Inference of Function Through Evolutionary Relationships)
accurately predicts molecular function for members of a protein family given a
reconciled phylogeny and available function annotations, even when the data are
sparse or noisy. Our method produced specific and consistent molecular function
predictions across 100 Pfam families in comparison to the Gene Ontology
annotation database, BLAST, GOtcha, and Orthostrapper. We performed a more
detailed exploration of functional predictions on the
adenosine-5'-monophosphate/adenosine deaminase family and the lactate/malate
dehydrogenase family, in the former case comparing the predictions against a gold
standard set of published functional characterizations. Given function
annotations for 3% of the proteins in the deaminase family, SIFTER achieves 96%
accuracy in predicting molecular function for experimentally characterized
proteins as reported in the literature
. The accuracy of SIFTER on this dataset is
a significant improvement over other currently available methods such as BLAST
(75%), GeneQuiz (64%), GOtcha (89%), and Orthostrapper (11%). We also
experimentally characterized the adenosine deaminase from Plasmodium falciparum,
confirming SIFTER's prediction. The results illustrate the predictive power of
exploiting a statistical model of function evolution in phylogenomic problems. A
software implementation of SIFTER is available from the authors.

Perhaps you missed this the first 3 times I referred to it?
 
Upvote 0

Taq

Newbie
Jul 6, 2010
32
2
✟262.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
You know that's not true.

"Intelligent design and evolutionary theory are either both testable or both untestable. Parity of reasoning requires that the testability of one entails the testability of the other. Evolutionary theory claims that certain material mechanisms are able to propel the evolutionary process, gradually transforming organisms with one set of characteristics into another (for instance, transforming bacteria without a flagellum into bacteria with one). Intelligent design, by contrast, claims that intelligence needs to supplement material mechanisms if they are to bring about organisms with certain complex features. Accordingly, testing the adequacy or inadequacy of evolutionary mechanisms constitutes a joint test of both evolutionary theory and intelligent design." -- William A. Dembski, philosopher, August 25th 2005

Where is the ID prediction? Mind putting it in bold? Discrediting evolution only discredits evolution. It does not evidence ID. ID has to stand on its own.

"Well, it [Intelligent Design] could come about in the folowing way, it could be that at some earlier time somewhere in the universe a civilisation ... [came] to a very high level of technology and designed a form of life that they seeded onto perhaps this planet. Now that is a possibility, an intriguing possibility, and I suppose it's possible that you might find evidence for that if you look at the details of biochemistry and molecular biology you might find a signature of some sort of designer. And that designer could well be a higher intelligence from elsewhere in the universe." -- Richard Dawkins, atheist preacher, 2008

So how does one test for this signature? What are the predictions?


"Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical research programme." -- Karl Popper, philosopher, 1976

Which Popper later retracted:

"I still believe that natural selection works in this way as a research programme. Nevertheless, I have changed my mind about the testability and the logical status of the theory of natural selection; and I am glad to have an opportunity to make a recantation. My recantation may, I hope, contribute a little to the understanding of the status of natural selection. "--Karl Popper in (Miller, David. 1985. Popper Selections.)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Taq

Newbie
Jul 6, 2010
32
2
✟262.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Whose problem?

Those who are trying to ramrod ID into science class.

Scientists are the ones who set the industry standard they call the Scientific Method.
If you aren't using the scientific method then you aren't a scientist.

If something doesn't fit the mold, that's just too bad.
Yes, too bad for those who don't follow the scientific method.
 
Upvote 0

Agonaces of Susa

Evolution is not science: legalize creationism.
Nov 18, 2009
3,605
50
San Diego
Visit site
✟11,653.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Constitution
I wasn't asking about the Holocaust.
I was. It's called an analogy.

I was asking about ID.
Um...I know?

How does finding human artifacts indicate that all life on Earth was intelligently designed?
How does finding human artifacts indicate there was a Holocaust?

Show me a 3.6 billion year old genome and compare it to current archaebacteria and then tell me that they are the same.
They are 100% identical. The phenotypes are 100% identical. Show me how they are different. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Since no evidence has ever been found that supports evolution no one believes in it. Which makes baby Darwin cry...:cry:

Please show that they haven't changed.
Please show me how they have.

YouTube - Millions of Fossils prove evolution wrong part 1 [YOU MUST WATCH THIS!!!!!!]

Making accurate observations has nothing to do with theory.
No wonder you believe in evolution.

Theories make predictions, not observations.
Evolution makes grossly inaccurate predictions.

What testable predictions does ID make?
ID says morphological changes to phenotype cannot happen slow and gradually.

Here is a test for you. There are 4 features found in animals: fur, feathers, a middle ear with a single bone, and a middle ear with three bones. What predictions does ID make about the relationship between these features, and why? The theory of evolution does make a testable prediction about these relationships. What about ID?
Evolution has never made an accurate prediction.

Evolution predicts that man is evolving in every generation.
Yet another erroneous and grossly inaccurate prediction of evolution. Clearly not the case.

"It is somewhat disquieting to speculate on the fact that even 50,000 years ago, in the early Stone Age, the human family contained individuals with innate capacities for reasoning and self-expression approaching those of a Shakespeare, a Beethoven or an Einstein." -- Frederick Seitz, physicist, President of the National Academy of Sciences, The Scientist, 1962

"A popular misconception exists that the builders of the pyramids or the cave painters of prehistory were somehow less intelligent than we are. This simply isn't true -- there is no evidence that the human brain has evolved at all in the last fifty thousand years at least. Modern people are simply benefiting from thousands of years of accumulated knowledge and experiment, not from increased intellect." -- Peter James, historian, and Nick Thorpe, archaeologist, July 1994

Our generation has devolved.

http://www.humandevolution.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3PrtKFoJlU
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
May 20, 2010
120
1
✟7,869.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
I might have to side with AV on this. I've been on multiple forums and there really is no atheistic attacks on TEs for the most part, at least under the creo-evo debate parts. No non-Christian has ever given me a hard time from being a TE except one, it was mutally friendly though, and I sort of started it too.

That doesn't mean it never happens (although I don't think that is what AV was saying), just that it isn't the norm.

We don't "attack" TEs because their views don't clash with our collective understanding of reality (To clarify this statement I acknowledge that this collective understanding could be completely wrong). Science can't disprove God so I will not argue for or against the existence of God, therefore I have no disagreement with you, except for maybe why you chose your particular God out of the many that are proposed to be the one true God. That argument is for an entirely different thread though.

But since this is a "Creation vs. Evolution" forum the only people the evolution side is here to debate are those who are in denial of evolution.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,851,188
51,516
Guam
✟4,910,915.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
But since this is a "Creation vs. Evolution" forum the only people the evolution side is here to debate are those who are in denial of evolution.
I disagree.

I acknowledge evolution to a point -- but I still take flak.

The fact that I don't 'go all the way' and accept it on faith (since I'm techochallenged) makes me a magnet for ridicule.

This all-or-nothing mentality from you guys is pahtetic.
 
Upvote 0
May 20, 2010
120
1
✟7,869.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
I disagree.

I acknowledge evolution to a point -- but I still take flak.

The fact that I don't 'go all the way' and accept it on faith (since I'm techochallenged) makes me a magnet for ridicule.

This all-or-nothing mentality from you guys is pahtetic.

AV, most people on here really don't care what you believe. While I may find it odd that you hold beliefs that are so contrary to the collective efforts of mankind, I personally will never ridicule you. They are your beliefs and this is your life and you are free to do what you wish with it.

However we (I say "we" loosely as I do not wish to speak for everyone) will utilize you as a tool to educate people who may have misunderstandings about what evolution is. You have already made up your mind and that is very evident. However, people who come to these forums unsure may learn something by your steadfast dismissal of science.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SithDoughnut

The Agnostic, Ignostic, Apatheistic Atheist
Jan 2, 2010
9,118
306
The Death Starbucks
✟18,474.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I disagree.

I acknowledge evolution to a point -- but I still take flak.

The fact that I don't 'go all the way' and accept it on faith (since I'm techochallenged) makes me a magnet for ridicule.

This all-or-nothing mentality from you guys is pahtetic.

I accept Christianity to a point (Some of the Bible may be correct, and it is quite possible that Jesus, or a figure that became Jesus, existed), so why do I get flak too?

Christianity says I have to accept Jesus as the son of God, among all sorts of other things. The all or nothing mentality is pathetic, wouldn't you agree?

Seriously, the persecution complex doesn't do anything to help your case. You're in a debate forum, so people are going to disagree with you, but I doubt anyone actually cares.
 
Upvote 0
May 20, 2010
120
1
✟7,869.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Join Date: 20th May 2010

Now you've really lost my respect, sir.

And how long have I been coming to these forums unregistered?

Your eagerness to place value on when I registered is truly odd. And that you ignored the entirety of my post even more odd.

To comment further, I did not mean my statement in a derogatory manner. More so that you have already made up your mind and I gather many have given up convincing you of anything for a long time.
 
Upvote 0

Hespera

Junior Member
Dec 16, 2008
7,237
200
usa
✟8,850.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
Private
AV, most people on here really don't care what you believe. While I may find it odd that you hold beliefs that are so contrary to the collective efforts of mankind, I personally will never ridicule you. They are your beliefs and this is your life and you are free to do what you wish with it.

However we (I say "we" loosely as I do not wish to speak for everyone) will utilize you as a tool to educate people who may have misunderstandings about what evolution is. You have already made up your mind and that is very evident. However, people who come to these forums unsure may learn something by your steadfast dismissal of science.


I have used a number of quotes from this source in telling people back home about what religion does to people here in the USA.

He is welcome to continue to provide this sort of material to be utilized in the steadfast fight against the spread of such beliefs among the uneducated and vulnerable.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hespera

Junior Member
Dec 16, 2008
7,237
200
usa
✟8,850.00
Faith
Buddhist
Marital Status
Private
I accept Christianity to a point (Some of the Bible may be correct, and it is quite possible that Jesus, or a figure that became Jesus, existed), so why do I get flak too?

Christianity says I have to accept Jesus as the son of God, among all sorts of other things. The all or nothing mentality is pathetic, wouldn't you agree?

Seriously, the persecution complex doesn't do anything to help your case. You're in a debate forum, so people are going to disagree with you, but I doubt anyone actually cares.


oh dont you suppose that rather than a persecution complex, its just a wish to identify with and be like those martyrs of old who so heroically died for their faith? As for pathetic, it probably is a bit pathetic to look for, strive for some "persecution' that one may feel righteous.
 
Upvote 0