RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

    
  Topic: Philip Johnson Has a Tiny Moment of Claritah< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
stevestory



Posts: 8838
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 25 2006,06:26   

Quote
Philip Johnson:

I also donít think that there is really a theory of intelligent design at the present time to propose as a comparable alternative to the Darwinian theory, which is, whatever errors it might contain, a fully worked out scheme. There is no intelligent design theory thatís comparable. Working out a positive theory is the job of the scientific people that we have affiliated with the movement. Some of them are quite convinced that itís doable, but thatís for them to proveÖNo product is ready for competition in the educational world.


Good Article in Berkeley Science Review.

hat tip to Ron Okimoto

LOL Johnson again:
Quote
There were specific things in the record...that convinced me that it was a loser and that made it quite easy for him to give judgment for the plaintiffs. Iím not at all complaining that he did that. When you have members of the school board saying things like we ought to stand up for Jesus because he died for us, thatís really asking for it.

   
sparc



Posts: 1676
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 18 2011,23:45   

Quote
Philip Johnson Has a Tiny Moment of Claritah
but still the IDiots thaught it was a good idea to celebrate the 20th anniversary of "Darwin on Trial" with an special webpage

--------------
"[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God."

- William Dembski -

   
Glen Davidson



Posts: 752
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 19 2011,21:12   

Quote (stevestory @ June 25 2006,06:26)
Quote
Philip Johnson:

I also donít think that there is really a theory of intelligent design at the present time to propose as a comparable alternative to the Darwinian theory, which is, whatever errors it might contain, a fully worked out scheme. There is no intelligent design theory thatís comparable. Working out a positive theory is the job of the scientific people that we have affiliated with the movement. Some of them are quite convinced that itís doable, but thatís for them to proveÖNo product is ready for competition in the educational world.


Good Article in Berkeley Science Review.

hat tip to Ron Okimoto

LOL Johnson again:
 
Quote
There were specific things in the record...that convinced me that it was a loser and that made it quite easy for him to give judgment for the plaintiffs. Iím not at all complaining that he did that. When you have members of the school board saying things like we ought to stand up for Jesus because he died for us, thatís really asking for it.

ID really needn't be much concerned with Johnson's brief lapse into clarity. †The danger is past, he's clearly not much, at least, concerned that ID has no theory and can only do any sort of science using evolutionary theory. †Johnson recently:

Quote
At the conference, after the session about Darwin on Trial and my own influence, I was pleased to hear from Stephen Meyer? about all the people and research projects and books that are advancing the ID movement. It was encouraging and exciting to learn how each aspect of the Darwinist argument is being worked on and addressed.

Read more: http://www.touchstonemag.com/archive....DADQwzB


See, no problem. †"Darwinism" can allow them to do science, and they're not the slightest bit interested in doing ID science, since that's only about religion anyway.

So sure, clarity threatens ID at times. †Rarely, however, do IDiots actually succumb to its dangers.

How's HIV denialism treating you and Bethell, Phillip?

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
Quack



Posts: 1748
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 20 2011,06:03   

The link doesn't work well, I get redirected but canít find the article at †http://sciencereview.berkeley.edu/articles.php?issue=10&article=evolution

I have located http://sciencereview.berkeley.edu/read....ng-2006
That is issue 10, with subjects like Berkeley vs. Intelligent Design, and The Dawn of Multicellularity, but no 'evolution' article.

--------------
YEC creationists denigrate science without an inkling of what their lives would be without it. YEC creationism is an enrageous, abominable insult to the the human intellect.
                                                         Me.

  
rossum



Posts: 174
Joined: Dec. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 20 2011,06:17   

Quote (Quack @ Nov. 20 2011,06:03)
The link doesn't work well, I get redirected but canít find the article at †http://sciencereview.berkeley.edu/articles.php?issue=10&article=evolution

I have located http://sciencereview.berkeley.edu/read.......ng-2006
That is issue 10, with subjects like Berkeley vs. Intelligent Design, and The Dawn of Multicellularity, but no 'evolution' article.

The Johnson quote is on page 33.

rossum

--------------
The ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth.

  
  4 replies since June 25 2006,06:26 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

    


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]