RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (121) < ... 27 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 37 ... >   
  Topic: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed., Sternberg, Gonzalez, Crocker - A film< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,11:49   

Quote (Quidam @ April 01 2008,16:44)
At the risk of blowing his cover, Behe actually IS on our side. And he doesn't hide it. Whenever he's pushed, he affirms that evolution is an accurate statement of reality and that he agrees with an ancient earth, common ancestry and evolution. In the meantime he milks the creationists every decade with another book that recycles tired old arguments. When he gets pulled in front of a judge, he make a token effort and either takes a dive or carefully points out the flaws in his own arguments.

His faint support is brilliant. He manages to make a career and good money from creationists while subtly castrating them. If he didn't show up someone else might.

A major problem with your hypothesis is that Behe has nine kids.  Nine.  If he had adopted nine children, that would be wonderful-- but humans have 'children'.  They dont have 'litters'.  I doubt Behe is willing to take the 'Im just playing the role of religious wacko' to the degree he mimics their breeding habits.  Hes just a religious wacko.

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,12:22   

Quote (ERV @ April 02 2008,11:49)
I doubt Behe is willing to take the 'Im just playing the role of religious wacko' to the degree he mimics their breeding habits.  Hes just a religious wacko.

I think you are 100% correct, and I see that Kristine also thinks Behe is an asshole.

Question For The Class:  

Who is the biggest jerk-wad / creep - Dembski or Behe?

Teach the controversy!@

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10762
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,12:47   

Quote (J-Dog @ April 02 2008,12:22)
Quote (ERV @ April 02 2008,11:49)
I doubt Behe is willing to take the 'Im just playing the role of religious wacko' to the degree he mimics their breeding habits. †Hes just a religious wacko.

I think you are 100% correct, and I see that Kristine also thinks Behe is an asshole.

Question For The Class: †

Who is the biggest jerk-wad / creep - Dembski or Behe?

Teach the controversy!@

At least Behe has the stones to testify.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,13:14   

Quote
I have this one, but I think it's a bit wordy.


So where is the original image without the Expelled or parody add-ons?

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,13:15   

Quote (Richardthughes @ April 02 2008,12:47)
At least Behe has the stones to testify.

Is it 'bravery'... or stupidity... or psychosis?

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,13:29   

I have assumed for some time that the Discovery Institute is operating as a mole in the creationist camp. Every court case they have participated in has sealed the door tighter against religion in the science classroom.

They are mostly lawyers. They couldn't be achieving this outcome except by design, could they?

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4902
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,15:01   

The Livonia, Michigan pre-screening of "Expelled" has been cancelled entirely.

Does anybody know if they actually held any pre-screenings after the announced mass re-schedule last week?

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1046
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,15:33   

I thought it was interesting that Expelled thinks that 30% of the audience at Boston was opposed to ID. †Cross-post from Talkorigins:

Quote
It's a truly hideous piece:

Atheists Infiltrate Events for Intelligent Design Film


On to some specifics:


Quote
Instead of entertaining a debate on the merits of competing theories,
the scientific establishment has moved to suppress the ID movement in
a "systematic and ruthless" way at odds with America's founding
principles, the film asserts.



This from a bunch who complains that dissenters came to the
discussions (which were held after the movie) when they were trying to
keep them out.


And if pointing out the dishonesty and lack of evidence of the IDiots
is "systematic and ruthless" suppression, then that's the duty of
science. †Or to put it in the honest terms that Mathis would never
understand (he seems quite stupid, from his output), science has the
responsibility to keep lies like his from being portrayed as science.


Quote
A computer glitch, however, made it possible for certain individuals
to RSVP to some screenings when they in fact had not been invited,
Mathis said. The same glitch also occurred on March 19 in Boston where
at least 30 percent of the audience members were antagonistic toward
the film's message, he said.



I hadn't heard about the Boston event having a lot of dissenters, who
they're trying to keep out, of course. †I had noticed that it was
labeled "full" a day or two before, so I was hoping that the educated
segment around there had representatives signed up for the film. †30%
sounds quite good.


And they're acting as if somehow people took advantage of their
inability to control their computer system, when the fact is that
there were sites out there inviting anybody who clicked on them to
RSVP and come to the movie. †Mathis is scum.


Obvious question, Mathis, what are you trying to hide? †The stupidity,
dishonesty, and sheer viciousness of your movie? †Thought so.


Quote
Although the filmmakers noticed that Dawkins had arrived at the
Minneapolis screening uninvited, they decided to let him in anyway
after he signed in as "Clinton Dawkins," Mathis said.



Unlikely story, especially since Myers claims that Dawkins wasn't
signed in at all, but was simply an unnamed guest.


Quote
Although Myers and dozens of blogs have seized on the idea that the
"Expelled" filmmakers, who complain about scientists being expelled
from academia are now doing the same thing, Mathis said that the real
irony is being missed.


"Myers is free to see the film once it is officially released," said
Mathis. "But those individuals who have devoted their lives to
scientific study might not ever regain their posts after exploring new
avenues of inquiry simply because they do not concur with the
Darwinian view."



Lying for Jesus isn't a matter of having "devoted their lives to
scientific study," prevaricating fool. †It's really all lies from
Mathis, from beginning to end.


Quote
They contend the film is edited and crafted in a duplicitous and
misleading manner that misrepresents their views, but Mathis denied
that and said the interviews were not set up under false pretenses."



The difference is, Mark, that Dawkins has the evidence (he saw the
movie) to back up his claims. †Repeating your lies adds not a whit of
truth to their mendacity.


And that's a good note to end on. †They're ramping up the volume of
their dishonest accusations, but they have nothing worthwhile in their
claims, and nothing worthwhile in their movie. †They're only angry
that they have had their lies exposed before they were able to take
money off from the curious and the naive, so their audience is likely
to be those as dishonest as the "Expelled" bunch, plus a few who come
to laugh and/or to document the lies put out by Mathis.




Glen D

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

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

   
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,15:43   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ April 02 2008,15:01)
The Livonia, Michigan pre-screening of "Expelled" has been cancelled entirely.

Does anybody know if they actually held any pre-screenings after the announced mass re-schedule last week?

I do not think so, but do not know for sure, but they canceled the one that John Lynch signed up for in AZ.

They did NOT send me a notice of cancellation for the one I had signed up to wait-list for in another state however.

I do know that they now have a link to the Theater Near You.  Nothing in downtown Chicago, and @ 3 in smaller suburbs of Chicago.  (@ 100 seat - 150 seats?)

http://www.expelledthemovie.com/theaterap.php

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
Quidam



Posts: 229
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,15:43   


Benna the Stein

"This evolutionist is my kind of scum..."
"You mean carbonate isn't the same as carbonite?"
"No sneaking into OUR movie"
"You weak-minded fool, he's using an old evolutionist mind trick! "

Captions please :)

May the 4th be with you.

--------------
The organized fossils ... and their localities also, may be understood by all, even the most illiterate. William Smith, Strata. 1816

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,15:48   

Presented in Tard-AO. Screen so wide it's gaping.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,15:55   

Quote (Quidam @ April 02 2008,15:43)

Benna the Stein

"This evolutionist is my kind of scum..."
"You mean carbonate isn't the same as carbonite?"
"No sneaking into OUR movie"
"You weak-minded fool, he's using an old evolutionist mind trick! "

Captions please :)

May the 4th be with you.

"I have no use for his nasal tones."

"Yes, I am known as a Biggus Dickus".

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10762
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,16:15   

Quote (ERV @ April 02 2008,13:15)
Quote (Richardthughes @ April 02 2008,12:47)
At least Behe has the stones to testify.

Is it 'bravery'... or stupidity... or psychosis?

Yes.

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Kristine



Posts: 3061
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,16:49   

Quote (Quidam @ April 02 2008,14:43)

Benna the Stein

"This evolutionist is my kind of scum..."
"You mean carbonate isn't the same as carbonite?"
"No sneaking into OUR movie"
"You weak-minded fool, he's using an old evolutionist mind trick! "

Captions please :)

May the 4th be with you.

"There will be no bargain, young JediDarwinist. I shall enjoy watching your theory die."

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
Quidam



Posts: 229
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,17:16   

Quote
"There will be no bargain, young JediDarwinist. I shall enjoy watching your theory die."
I LIKE that one :)

--------------
The organized fossils ... and their localities also, may be understood by all, even the most illiterate. William Smith, Strata. 1816

  
khan



Posts: 1528
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,18:19   

Quote
A computer glitch, however, made it possible for certain individuals to RSVP to some screenings when they in fact had not been invited, Mathis said. The same glitch also occurred on March 19 in Boston where at least 30 percent of the audience members were antagonistic toward the film's message, he said.


I thought blaming the computer for your own incompetence went out in the '80s.

--------------
"It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall

That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad

Frequency is just the plural of wavelength...
-JoeG

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,20:52   

Not having ever met the man in person, I have to say I've always gotten the "True Believer" vibe from Behe, as opposed to the "Lying Scam Artist" vibe I get from Dembski et. al.

I guess that's a point in his favor, if you want to call it that.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Texas Teach



Posts: 1505
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,21:28   

Quote (Lou FCD @ April 02 2008,20:52)
Not having ever met the man in person, I have to say I've always gotten the "True Believer" vibe from Behe, as opposed to the "Lying Scam Artist" vibe I get from Dembski et. al.

I guess that's a point in his favor, if you want to call it that.

I get the feeling with Behe that he would be perfectly happy as a theistic evolutionist if he hadn't gotten the idea somewhere along the way (his parents? his church?) that evolution says something ugly about his god. †I've had teaching colleagues like that, who just can't let go of their fear it will hurt their faith in some way to just accept the science as it is.  You sort of get teased that you could get through to them because you don't comprehend how tightly they have to cling to that last thread of creationism.

--------------
"Creationists think everything Genesis says is true. I don't even think Phil Collins is a good drummer." --J. Carr

"I suspect that the English grammar books where you live are outdated" --G. Gaulin

  
Henry J



Posts: 4792
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2008,22:00   

Quote
"There will be no bargain, young JediDarwinist. I shall enjoy watching your theory die."


Use the farce!

Henry

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 03 2008,07:46   

heeeeeeeehehehehehehehehehe!

  
Kristine



Posts: 3061
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 03 2008,09:02   

Dum, dum, de dum.
Quote
Kevin wrote: You'll find that a lot of Christian don't believe in a literal ark anymore, Rich.

So, for the third time, what's Ben Stein doing with Ken Ham on the Answers in Genesis website, then? Endorsing his museum, which features Adam and Eve with dinosaurs? ("A Meeting of Minds, Ein Stein + one Ham = a dynamic duo of Darwin-debunkers") Ken Ham believes in a literal ark, his museum portrays the Flood story as literally true, and the website shows Stein exulting in the museum's attendance numbers.

"A meeting of minds"? Is Ken Ham a thinking or a nonthinking biblical literalist, and what is Ben Stein doing with him?

*checks watch*

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
Doc Bill



Posts: 1039
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 03 2008,10:19   

Kristine, Kristine, you're so bad!

Yes, it's ironic that "Expelled" describes what creationists do to themselves but no need to rub it in.

Let's see, do we know another favorite creationist who has never answered a straight answer in her entire Kansas farm wife life?

So, you ask "What's up with Stein and Ham?"

FtKevin says:  You'll have to ask Ben.  (Not likely.  The answer is "pandering.")

You ask "From what was Sternberg expelled?"

FtKevin says:  You'll have to see the film.  (Not explained in the film.  The answer is "nothing.")

You ask "What's the age of the earth?"

FtKevin says:  Read this article on polonium halos.  (Which explains nothing.  Answer:  4.54 Gy +/- 1%)

But, you see, Kristine, if they give a straight answer they risk getting Expelled by their own people, just like Ted Haggard.  Darwinists didn't disgrace Haggard and kick him out of his church, rather, he disgraced himself and his own church kicked him out.

It's fun to watch, though, because it's so predictable!

  
kevinmillerxi



Posts: 92
Joined: Feb. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: April 03 2008,10:33   

re: post 1582

Sorry Kristene, your question kind of got lost in the shuffle. It's pretty easy to answer though, especially if you read the article that accompanied the photo. Have you ever heard the saying, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend?" That's what you're seeing in that picture of Ben Stein and Ken Ham. As Ken makes pretty clear in his review of the film, his group has some serious reservations about Intelligent Design. But he recognizes that both ID and Creation Science (which he sees as two distinct movements, something few people on the other side of this debate have been able to do) face a common enemy in academic suppression. So he has decided to endorse Expelled on that basis.

  
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 03 2008,10:44   

Quote (J-Dog @ April 02 2008,15:43)
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ April 02 2008,15:01)
The Livonia, Michigan pre-screening of "Expelled" has been cancelled entirely.

Does anybody know if they actually held any pre-screenings after the announced mass re-schedule last week?

I do not think so, but do not know for sure, but they canceled the one that John Lynch signed up for in AZ.

They did NOT send me a notice of cancellation for the one I had signed up to wait-list for in another state however.

I do know that they now have a link to the Theater Near You.  Nothing in downtown Chicago, and @ 3 in smaller suburbs of Chicago.  (@ 100 seat - 150 seats?)

http://www.expelledthemovie.com/theaterap.php

I love that list.  For a movie that is supposed to take the world by storm, it sure is going about it slowly.

It's going to open in 40 theaters?  That's 40 theaters, not 40 states, not 40 cities, 40 friggin' theaters?

And nation wide?  Please.  Kansas, Iowa, Missouri, Arizona, and Oklahoma do not a nation make (and I live in Missouri).

Thank goodness Kansas City will be able to see this masterpiece--just about every AMC multiplex is going to show it.

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 03 2008,10:47   

Quote (kevinmillerxi @ April 03 2008,10:33)
re: post 1582

Sorry Kristene, your question kind of got lost in the shuffle. It's pretty easy to answer though, especially if you read the article that accompanied the photo. Have you ever heard the saying, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend?" That's what you're seeing in that picture of Ben Stein and Ken Ham. As Ken makes pretty clear in his review of the film, his group has some serious reservations about Intelligent Design. But he recognizes that both ID and Creation Science (which he sees as two distinct movements, something few people on the other side of this debate have been able to do) face a common enemy in academic suppression. So he has decided to endorse Expelled on that basis.

So, ID & Creationism have nothing in common except that they're *not* taught in colleges, but Ham declares that's enough. Otherwise, no similarities? Sure.

I won't bother you with the 'cdesignproponentsists' debacle, where all it took to change a creationist text to an ID text was a couple global search and replaces. I know you'll ignore it. We're used to that.

Out of curiosity, how old do you think the earth is, and do you believe common descent?

And do you think it's a bad thing that creationism is not taught in (real) colleges?

[ADDED IN EDIT: Kevin Miller runs away when asked direct questions, big surprise.]

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
kevinmillerxi



Posts: 92
Joined: Feb. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: April 03 2008,11:16   

Arden: Have you been to my blog lately? There's no running away there. Just because I don't have time to hang around here and debate things ad nauseum does not mean I'm unwilling or afraid to answer direct questions. Just to prove my point, I'll answer a few of yours.

Out of curiosity, how old do you think the earth is, and do you believe common descent?

I don't think the age of the earth is a matter of belief. I think it's a matter of examining the evidence and then coming to a conclusion based on those facts. And to the best of my knowledge, the evidence points to the earth being approximately four billion years old. So I'm going with that until people who know more about such things begin to suspect otherwise. I realize people like Ken Hamm dispute such a position, but to be honest, I haven't really taken a good look at the evidence he presents in support of his argument. Probably because I've just assumed that belief in a young earth is untenable in light of all we know about geology, cosmology, etc. But perhaps that merely reveals a blind spot in my own thinking. I've concluded that they're wrong before I've really listened to their arguments or their evidence.

I'm pretty much in the same boat for common descent. Right now, the evidence seems to point in that direction. And I think common descent is consistent with both Intelligent Design and Neo-Darwinism. However, I realize more and more people are proposing multiple common ancestors rather than a single common ancestor. So I'm interested to learn more about that.

And do you think it's a bad thing that creationism is not taught in (real) colleges?

I'm not sure if you actually want me to answer this question, seeing as it seems completely facetious. (It's also framed poorly, in a double negative.) But as I've stated elsewhere, I am not in favor of teaching Creationism or Intelligent Design in science class. That's not what this is about for me. It's about allowing scientists to follow the evidence wherever it leads.

  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 03 2008,11:19   

What evidence is not being allowed to be pursued, Kevin?  

Tell us about the evidence.

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 03 2008,11:25   

Quote

I'm pretty much in the same boat for common descent. Right now, the evidence seems to point in that direction. And I think common descent is consistent with both Intelligent Design and Neo-Darwinism.


What's your take on why so many IDers (and all creationists) reject common descent?

And why do you think ID and Creationism are so different when it's possible to change a text for one into a text for the other with only a few terminology switches?

Quote
Probably because I've just assumed that belief in a young earth is untenable in light of all we know about geology, cosmology, etc. But perhaps that merely reveals a blind spot in my own thinking. I've concluded that they're wrong before I've really listened to their arguments or their evidence.


You really assume that 99.9999% of all geologists and astronomers might be wrong because Creationists say so? You really think that rejecting a young earth might be a 'blind spot' on your part?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 03 2008,11:26   

Quote (kevinmillerxi @ April 03 2008,11:16)
It's about allowing scientists to follow the evidence wherever it leads.

Who's stopping them? I understand there to be some very wealthy backers involved in the ID movement. They could fund this research. If they really believed.

Or what about the Biologic company? Formed specifically to research ID related matters. Who's stopping them following the evidence wherever it leads?

Simple question: What is the most important single bit of evidence that you believe has not been investigated as much as it deserves to be?

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gaugerís work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: April 03 2008,11:29   

Quote (kevinmillerxi @ April 03 2008,10:33)
re: post 1582

Sorry Kristene, your question kind of got lost in the shuffle. It's pretty easy to answer though, especially if you read the article that accompanied the photo. Have you ever heard the saying, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend?" That's what you're seeing in that picture of Ben Stein and Ken Ham. As Ken makes pretty clear in his review of the film, his group has some serious reservations about Intelligent Design. But he recognizes that both ID and Creation Science (which he sees as two distinct movements, something few people on the other side of this debate have been able to do) face a common enemy in academic suppression. So he has decided to endorse Expelled on that basis.

Sort of like Bill Dembski, in the preface to Mere Creation, saying, What's a few billion years among friends?

Six thousand, 4.5 billion, they're equal in the eyes of those who oppose naturalism.

Quote
One advocate of creation thinks it is essential that God intervene in the causal structure of the world. Another thinks it is essential that God not upset the causal structure of the world. One advocate of creation thinks it is essential to read Genesis literally and accept a young earth. Another thinks it does not matter how old the earth is.


Quote
There is, however, an alternate approach to unifying the Christian world about creation. Rather than look for common ground on which all Christians can agree, propose a theory of creation that puts Christians in the strongest possible position to defeat the common enemy of creation, to wit, naturalism. Throughout history common enemies have been invaluable for suspending in-house squabbles and uniting people who should otherwise be friends. Although approaching creation through its common enemy may seem opportunistic, it is quite illuminating. We learn a great deal about something by learning what it is not. Creation is not naturalism. By developing a theory of creation in opposition to naturalism, we learn a great deal about creation. Mere creation, then, is a theory of creation aimed specifically at defeating naturalism and its consequences.


--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
  3612 replies since Aug. 12 2007,07:23 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (121) < ... 27 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 37 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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