Joined: Jan. 2011
|Quote (Dale_Husband @ Jan. 24 2011,00:30)|
Look, all I'm trying to say about ID or creation is that they are possible, at some level or in some form, by some sort of intelligent entity, until and unless it's proven otherwise.
That is totally backwards. Just because something is possible doesn't mean it is credible. It is also possible that Jupiter harbors life, but until we find actual life forms there, we can't teach about life on Jupiter in science classes as anything other than hypothetical speculation. At least we know Jupiter exists and what it is made of, including organic molecules. ID is not even at that level, since without identifying the Designer or the process he used to design life, ID is unscientific.
I am not saying that any religious beliefs are true or scientific or provable. I realize that at least some of the ID or creation proponents are religious zealots who want to push their beliefs into schools and every other aspect of life. I also realize that at least some of them are dishonest about their agenda.
Right, so you could stop right there.
I am not saying that a possible creator or designer is or has to be supernatural. For all I know there could be a creator/designer of our universe, or any other universe if there are any, that is totally natural. Yeah, I know, that might bring up the question, 'Where did that creator/designer come from?' And to that I would answer, I don't know.
Yet you seem so sure we must be on the wrong track for dismissing ID.
It's interesting to think that some scientists are trying to find the how, what, when, and why of the universe(s), life, and what makes everything tick, but at the same time some scientists and science supporters hate the idea that it could be an intelligent entity of some sort. I don't know about all of you but I like our universe just as much whether it was created by an intelligent entity or not. It doesn't make me mad to think that there could be a creator/designer. What makes me mad is when someone says they know exactly who the creator/designer is or that it's impossible for there to be a creator/designer.
Again, you sound reasonable, but your slamming us for attacking Creationism and ID when we have found no reason to conclude there must be a Designer of any kind is profoundly unreasonable. Piss off!
To me, virtually all religious beliefs are fairy tales and bullshit, and to me there's a difference between religious beliefs and keeping an open mind about the possibility of a creator and/or designer, in some form, and at some level. The Gods people have invented are laughable but they sometimes make for entertaining movies, like Clash Of The Titans or Bruce Almighty.
If you are so open minded, why are you so sure that people investigating the possibility of a species of woodpecker not yet being extinct must be frauds?
I would think that every person who has ever lived past the age of a pre-schooler has wondered how everything came about. When we humans look at the night sky we wonder what's out there and whether we will ever know. We now have tools that allow us to see and understand a lot more than we used to but there are still countless mysteries. We can't even get our shit together here on Earth, let alone figure out and understand what (or who?) made everything come to be.
I do not condone the teaching of religion, ID, or creation in schools, but I also do not condone science or teachers saying that any sort of creation and/or ID are impossible. Unfortunately, ID and creation are usually mixed into religious beliefs, so it makes it very hard to think of or speak about ID or creation without thinking of and speaking about religion.
Something I've always found interesting, and often irritating, is when people say they're "spiritual but not religious". When asked exactly what they mean they often give a variety of answers. Mainly though, it boils down to them believing there's a God of some sort (a creator and/or designer) but they don't like the "trappings" of "organized religion". Maybe they just don't like singing hymns and giving money to proselytizing blowhards who already own a Rolls Royce, a mansion, and several Rolex watches.
Whatever the case, they seem to be separating 'God' (or whatever deity, entity, or spirit they believe exists) from religion. If nothing else that shows that some people don't like the bullshit and fairy tales in typical religions but they still fell better by believing there's a God or creator or designer of some sort. People like that are likely to accept the claims that science makes about the age of the universe and the Earth and maybe evolution too. They're probably also more likely to accept a lot of other scientific claims than religious zealots are but they obviously aren't convinced that science knows everything, and especially everything about how the universe and life came to be, and what makes it all tick, and what's going to happen to it all eventually.
It would be nice if religions were a thing of the past, and the concept of ID or creation were simply kept (by whoever wants to) as a question or thought that doesn't cause people to argue and fight over something that will likely never be provable, falsifiable, or settled.
When it comes to dealing with the religious wackos who want to cram their beliefs into everyone's life, I think there must be better ways to promote science and to shut them up than to simply bitch about them on a website. Even if sites like this were to remain, there are other things that could and should be done too, to make science more popular (which would help to dispel the myths in religions). The more people there are who like, accept, and trust science, the fewer people there will be who want to support the religious zealots in any quest to force their religion into schools, government, or anywhere else.
WTF is wrong with you??? Your inconsistency just keeps getting more outlandish at every turn! The ONLY way to deal with the religious wackos and defend science is to fight them the way we've been doing it! That's what we have learned from decades of experience, and we don't need a loon from out of nowhere telling us otherwise. You haven't been there when we fought Creationists and ID promoters, investigated them, exposed their lies and fallacies, and defeated them in court and in testing their claims. You know NOTHING about what it take to attract people to science, because you make no effort yourself!
Carl Sagan was one of the greatest popularizers of science in the 20th Century, as well as Isaac Asimov and Stephen Jay Gould. All non-theists, all staunch evolutionists. And none of them as wacked out as YOU!
Are you off your meds again Dale? You're foaming at the mouth.
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions. Plato