Katrina, Rita, and "Intelligent Design."

[Cyrano]

These nightmare hurricanes could and should be a death blow to the teaching of "Intelligent Design" in schools.

Millions and millions of children have been watching those meteorologists out there, many of them in very dangerous places, reporting on these disasters. And I'd be willing to bet that many, many of these kids admire them, and want to be just like them when they grow up.

Those meteorologists are science majors. Regardless of their personal beliefs, their degrees are in science, not religion.

If the "Intelligent Design" insanity ever destroys our education system, you'll have "meteorologists" predicting upcoming events with advice like "build an ark."

[SHRED]

1. Follwing "intelligent design" logic...

would bring you to the fact that the "intelligent" designer is responsible for these hurricanes.
Such a kind and loving designer. So full of compassion.:sarcasm:

And then they pray to the "designer" on behalf of the victims...go figure.:shrug:

[YDogg]

3. An intelligent designer would not have brought us bush

period

[SHRED]

5. perfect

[madeline_con]

6. But it is written, the Antichrist comes...

of course HE'd send him! ;)

[Bernardo de La Paz]

9. The Road Less Travelled

[BlueJazz]

16. Yeah...I never got that whole thing of...

"Praying to the Sky Fairy that did nothing to stop the disaster in the first place"

I mean, talk about extreme illogical thought!

[Ian David]

2. There's a high homosexuality zone to the west of the storm...

so we expect it to alter course to smite them by early morning tomorrow.

To the north is a heavily Jewish region, which means the storm will probably stall there, and drop about 20 inches of rain before dissipating in time for Easter.

Faith-based meteorology!

[atommom]

4. Once again, God has chosen to smite Tornado Alley!

Do not take cover, or you will really piss him off.

[MindPilot]

7. Clearly all the passengers on that Jet Blue flight

were all good xian white people or gawd would smote them too.

It had nothing to do with the the technical skill and SCIENTIFIC knowledge of the pilots, engineers and controllers.

[KittyWampus]

8. Intelligent Design Simply Posits That Nature Has An Inherent Capacity

for Intelligence.

Nothing more or less.

While SOME may mischaracterize ID as being something more than that... they are MISCHARACTERIZING a perfectly valid theory.

The adherence to Materialism is killing humanity and contributes greatly to the mindset that sees Nature as nothing more than physical stuff to be used and disposed of carelessly and without consideration.

YOUR Materialism is the problem here.

The Western world needs to grow up and get over it.

Materialism was useful for a while but it has become a sickness.

[tjdee]

10. Thank you....

It's kind of irritating when people take any subject and try to twist it around to a certain way (Fundamentalists and non-Fundamentalists both).

[Cyrano]

11. ID, "a perfectly valid theory?"

Believe what you'd like. As long as it's kept out of our public education system.

Teach it in your home, your church, or wherever, but it has no place in public schools, or any other government institution. Try reading the first amendment to the Constitution. It's there to protect all of us and it's being systematically destroyed by the thugs who are currently in power.

And anyone who buys into the crap these thugs are selling is either a knave or a fool.

[Ripley]

12. The Flying Spaghetti Monster is also a perfectly valid theory, no?

There will never be enough scientific proof to allow ID, or any other religious or metaphysical "theory" to be taught in biology class. Period.

Teach them where they belong: religion, philosophy, sociology classes.

[MindPilot]

13. The Kool-aid must be nice and fresh this morning

Nature is intelligent!? :eyes:

Um, no. Nature just is. ID doesn't rise to anywhere near the level of theory; it's just another dumbass fairy tale dreamed up by the neurologically impaired.

[kestrel91316]

30. I dunno about the dumbass fairy tale bit...................

Let me preface this by saying I believe ABSOLUTELY in evolution via genetic variation and natural selection, and am a scientific objectivist. I believe in the scientific method.

However, inside my head, in my private philosophical thoughts, I like to think of all of nature having been designed by some great something somewhere that is too great for anyone to ever comprehend. Call it the ID, or God, or whatever. I sort of like the idea of the clockmaker who designed all the parts and then started it running, and it ticks on. Maybe with an occasional tap to the case, or adjustment to the minute hand. But I don't let that private philosophy interfere with my day-to-day life in the real world of atoms and physics and biology, etc.

I don't understand why people think they have to FORCE ID on anyone. It's philosophy.

[TahitiNut]

15. Science is the faith that Nature has INTEGRITY and behaves according ...

... its principles. Gee, wouldn't it be nice if 'intelligence' could say the same thing?
:evilgrin:

(Think about that. It's not trivial.)

[TahitiNut]

19. (Lord help me if I say anything deeper than a light dew.) (sheesh)

:eyes:

[progressoid]

17. Okey dokey then.

It it true that it is a theory. But it is NOT a SCIENTIFIC theory (nor is it perfect or valid for that matter). There is also a theory that mental illness is caused by Thetans http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenu infesting our bodies. I bet if our schools started teaching this, you would be appalled that a science class was teaching this "theory".

And, of course, your rhetoric about materialism has nothing to do with scientific theory.

I think you are looking for either religion, philosophy or sociology instead of science.

[NickB79]

21. It's not even a theory, it's merely a hypothesis

A scientific theory is backed up by empirical data, repeatable scientific experimentation that correlates to the predicted outcome of the original hypothesis. ID "might" be considered a hypothesis, if that.

[progressoid]

25. Right you are!

Thanks for the clarification

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

18. It's a wedge the Creationists have been trying to use for a long time...

to get "God did it" taught in public schools. When Creationism teaching met the barrier called the 1st Amendment, they switched to "Intelligent Design". To claim anything else is dishonest to science. Saying some higher power designed everything, even though that higher power cannot be identified nor can it be studied is not science, even if you tag the word "theory" behind it and scream "But...but Evolution is a theory, too!!!"

"perfectly valid theory"? :eyes:

[BiggJawn]

20. Perhaps if we were to pray to Winnie-The-Pooh and Piglet?

Piglet! (Sing HO!)

Why not? Are not ALL theories valid here?

Wonder what the DU "God Squad" thinks about you aligning their "Intelligent Design" with your Gaiaism?

"The Western World"... Funny, considering that the "People of The Book" got their start in the East.

Sorry, I don't believe New-Age, Eastern Mysticism, Plastic Medicine Man, what-EVAH is the answer either.

[muriel_volestrangler]

24. Please show us anyone, apart from you, who means that

by "Intelligent Design". For instance, Dembski says

Rather than trying to infer God’s existence or character from the natural world, it simply claims "that intelligent causes are necessary to explain the complex, information-rich structures of biology and that these causes are empirically detectable."

http://www.arn.org/idfaq/What%20is%20intelligent%20design.htm

That is far more than you claim for its meaning.

[FM Arouet666]

26. Interesting philosophical point, but irrelevant to science.

Perfectly valid theory? Materialism is no longer useful?

I am astonished at posts like yours. The colloquial term "theory" is often mistaken for the rigorously defined term used within a scientific discussion. Scientifically, ID fails immediately by suggesting a supernatural explanation.

Sorry, if that bothers you, reject science, adopt religion or philosophy. But, do not expect scientists to reject the core pinnings of the scientific method to accommodate you.

As for materialism, it depends on what you mean. Unrestrained greed, corporatism, global hegemony etc. I would agree with you completely. However, if you mean materialism in the scientific sense, meaning that we should accept supernatural explanations, I couldn't disagree with you more.

Oh, and ID does not simply posit that nature has an inherent capacity for intelligence. It posits that the natural world is so complex, as evidenced by irreducible complexity, that evolution is an insufficient explanation. Nature was designed, the designer is unnamed but is certainly a super natural god, given the origins of the ID controversy.

[Igel]

14. ID would encourage all the same science we have now.

It wouldn't alter making predictions or models, or looking for physical reasons, at least among the more science-oriented of IDers. And among the less science-oriented, it doesn't matter, because whether by IDer or dem, untenable or unproven causes are already posited in great abundance. With the same kind of fervent belief.

[Zhade]

22. The fact that ID IS NOT SCIENCE should be the death blow!

It's one thing to believe hokum like "god created the earth in six days" to be literally true. Hey, believe whatever you want. I happen to believe things others might heartily disagree with.

But when people who can't even use scientific terms correctly insist that an unproven myth (and let's be clear, ID - "creationism in a cheap tuxedo" - has as much evidence backing it up as the Great Turtle creation story) is scientifically proven, when it doesn't even approach the level of a theory, that's the height of arrogant ignorance.

[Zynx]

23. I'm convinced that the ID debate has become quite useless.

Even Catholic schools teach evolution as the church maintains that evolution is the mechanism God used to create life. They may disagree on details in terms of time periods and all of that good stuff, but the fact is that we keep readjusting time lines for evolution anyway and new facts keep arising that require other adjustments.

I think the best solution to this quandary is to just simply ignore the debate in school altogether. The fact is that whether kids understand evolution or believe in it or not is not particularly relevant. I think we could reduce their general resistance to science in general(there is much more to science than just evolution) if you remove the evolutionary "debate" from the schools and focus on more practical things such as the function of the human body, chemistry, phsyics, microbiology, etc.

[DanCa]

27. Well if the red god does that sort of thing and is angry at jeb and geo

his aim sure been going bad in his old age. On a side note my god Jesus Christ would never take a human's life because he is a neutreal healler.

[FM Arouet666]

28. If ID does make it into the schools

I vote that they have to name the designer. That is the next logical question, if you believe all the ID business.

God? What about space aliens seeding the planet at critical times in history. Dump some biological material in the primordial oceans, knock off the dinosaurs when it is clear they are not a good candidate for top species, and plant one of your own in a human suit, say, as president of the United States. That way the aliens can slowly allow the truth to be known, so that, at some future date, we can all get together and have a group celestial hug.

Just yummy..... :grouphug:

[sphincter]

29. Gotta love The Onion....

Sure it's been posted before, but it's worth posting again:

"Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity With New 'Intelligent Falling' Theory"

Full story:

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/39512