Discovery Institute's rebuttal of PBS's Judgement Day: Intelligent Design

[Photonic]

Why not show the court case. And show how one can be active in fraud even though they aren't doing it for the money or out of deception (as in they aren't doing it for what the dictionary defines as fraud).

Deception, knowingly lying to obtain a result.

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[fallingblood]

Deception, knowingly lying to obtain a result.

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That is not even close to what I'm talking about. First, this has to do with school. That is different, as it is a public school, and there is separation of church and state. Not really fraud.

Not to mention, it did not mention, in any sense, anything about people, in private institutions, teaching something that they believe to be true.

 

[outhouse]

Deception, knowingly lying to obtain a result.

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I agree, they have proven themselves fraudulent

 

[David M]

So the Discovery Institute is a religious organization?

Last I checked, they tout themselves as a "non-religious, scientific" organization. So, which is it?

The Wedge Strategy, which was written by the DI, demonstrates that its purpose is the promotion of certain religious viewpoints. That makes it a religious organisation.

What they tout themselves as is just another example of the DI lying to people (especially as the people in charge have been caught saying that ID is based on religion).

 

[fallingblood]

I honestly think some people here have no idea what constitutes fraud.

Honestly, I think DI is a horrible organization that spreads false teachings. But that is not fraud, and they have a right to be able to hold their own ideas and speak about them. Keep them out of the class room, but we don't need to silence them.

 

[Photonic]

I honestly think some people here have no idea what constitutes fraud.

Honestly, I think DI is a horrible organization that spreads false teachings. But that is not fraud, and they have a right to be able to hold their own ideas and speak about them. Keep them out of the class room, but we don't need to silence them.

While defrauding people is commonly to gain valuables or money, in this case, it is for another purpose.


"In criminal law, a fraud is an intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual."

In this case, they are knowingly practicing deception to destroy an something that is generally considered fact, on the basis that it does not fit their world view.


So tell me, what do they stand to gain from this? Quite a lot as it turns out, as this would allow them to pretty much have power over education.

 

[outhouse]

I honestly think some people here have no idea what constitutes fraud.

Honestly, I think DI is a horrible organization that spreads false teachings. But that is not fraud, and they have a right to be able to hold their own ideas and speak about them. Keep them out of the class room, but we don't need to silence them.

fraud is defined as intentional deception.

and they are guilty


it would benifit society to stop fraud

 

[outhouse]

While defrauding people is commonly to gain valuables or money, in this case, it is for another purpose.

it is for both


they average 4 million + a year peddling lies, this is big buisiness

 

[fallingblood]

So, either of you have proof that they believe all of their information to be lies, yet still peddle it? So creationists are simply liars and don't believe what they are saying?

 

[Reptillian]

It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it, that mental lying has produced in society. When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind, as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime. - Thomas Paine

 

[Photonic]

So, either of you have proof that they believe all of their information to be lies, yet still peddle it? So creationists are simply liars and don't believe what they are saying?

I'm sure they believe what they are saying in the same way a man who believes someones valuables should be obtained in any way possible.

 

[outhouse]

So, either of you have proof that they believe all of their information to be lies, yet still peddle it? So creationists are simply liars and don't believe what they are saying?

there is plenty of proof from their wiki link


They have fraudulently created a debate and controversy about evolution vs creationism that does not nor never has existed in the scientific community.

Is only one example. AND if theu are capable of this dishonesty, they loose all credibility.

"all" of their information is a useless statement as im sure some is believed in ignorance.

 

[outhouse]

DI describes itself as a secular organization, yet is a known explicitly Christian conservative organization.

Discovery Institute - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Though the Discovery Institute describes itself as a think tank 'specializing in national and international affairs,' the group's real purpose is to undercut church-state separation and turn public schools into religious indoctrination centers."


not very honest there are they?


"CSRC expressly announces, in the Wedge Document, a program of Christian apologetics to promote ID. A careful review of the Wedge Document's goals and language throughout the document reveals cultural and religious goals, as opposed to scientific ones."

more dishonesty

Nina Shapiro in the Seattle Weekly article, The New Creationists, cites Bruce Chapman when she wrote that behind all Discovery Institute programs there is an underlying hidden religious agenda:

this is troubling

And here is your fraud

At the foundation of most criticism of the Discovery Institute is the charge that the institute and its Center for Science and Culture intentionally misrepresent or omit many important facts in promoting their agenda. Intellectual dishonesty

 

[fallingblood]

Wow, that logic is impeccable. So they are now like thieves or something? Great way to just drag people through the mud. And if they do believe what they are saying (which neither one of you have shown that they don't believe in creationism, at best, they may be shady on their tactics, but what business isn't. With the logic being perpetuated here, we might as well just call all businesses fraudulent and be done with it), it can't be fraud. It just means you don't agree with them, and want to silence all opposition for whatever reason. Really, no better then the institution you are criticizing.

Oh, and intellectual dishonesty is not lying. Unless you count it as lying to yourself. I don't think the concept of fraud really is actually even being understood here. But hey, who needs to really understand what is at stake, or the like, when you can just drag people through the mud and try to silence them and effectively impeding on their freedoms.

 

[Photonic]

Wow, that logic is impeccable. So they are now like thieves or something? Great way to just drag people through the mud. And if they do believe what they are saying (which neither one of you have shown that they don't believe in creationism, at best, they may be shady on their tactics, but what business isn't. With the logic being perpetuated here, we might as well just call all businesses fraudulent and be done with it), it can't be fraud. It just means you don't agree with them, and want to silence all opposition for whatever reason. Really, no better then the institution you are criticizing.

Oh, and intellectual dishonesty is not lying. Unless you count it as lying to yourself. I don't think the concept of fraud really is actually even being understood here. But hey, who needs to really understand what is at stake, or the like, when you can just drag people through the mud and try to silence them and effectively impeding on their freedoms.

Did I say they don't believe what they are saying? No, I did not.

But if you will indulge me for a moment, please. They are probably one of the largest organisations to push creationism, but creationism is barred by the establishment clause from being taught using government funding. So what happens? They re-brand it with a shiny new exterior to people, painting over the excessive rust and covering up the broken bits. They called it intelligent design, and once inspected, thankfully the court realized it was the same thing. Since that didn't work, they instead try to create a rift between the scientific community and the regular populace by outright lying, and attacks on science as a whole.

Fraud? It could be considered as such in a court of law, and it was.

Intellectual dishonesty though? It is such to the highest possible order. To say otherwise would show incredible cognitive dissonance. Fallingblood, I know you are a reasonable person, but with all seriousness, stop defending these gangsters.

 

[fallingblood]

Did I say they don't believe what they are saying? No, I did not.

But if you will indulge me for a moment, please. They are probably one of the largest organisations to push creationism, but creationism is barred by the establishment clause from being taught using government funding. So what happens? They re-brand it with a shiny new exterior to people, painting over the excessive rust and covering up the broken bits. They called it intelligent design, and once inspected, thankfully the court realized it was the same thing. Since that didn't work, they instead try to create a rift between the scientific community and the regular populace by outright lying, and attacks on science as a whole.

Fraud? It could be considered as such in a court of law, and it was.

Intellectual dishonesty though? It is such to the highest possible order. To say otherwise would show incredible cognitive dissonance. Fallingblood, I know you are a reasonable person, but with all seriousness, stop defending these gangsters.

Not really fraud if they believe it is a scientific argument. And really, that is all besides the point as they can't be charged with fraud in regards to something that has already went to court, and is now done.

Just because they may or may not have created fraud in the past, does not mean that now, in a different situation, in a different context, they are still committing fraud.



Now, I agree with you in part. I don't like these guys. However, I think because of that, there rights need to be protected even more. Sure, we need to keep them out of our public education systems (private education is different). We need to regulate what they are saying. We can't give them a free pass. But we can't just silence them and outlaw what they are peddling because we don't agree. They deserve to have the right to freedom of speech. And sure, what they say is probably going to upset me, but they have the right to do such.

 

[Photonic]

Not really fraud if they believe it is a scientific argument. And really, that is all besides the point as they can't be charged with fraud in regards to something that has already went to court, and is now done.

Just because they may or may not have created fraud in the past, does not mean that now, in a different situation, in a different context, they are still committing fraud.



Now, I agree with you in part. I don't like these guys. However, I think because of that, there rights need to be protected even more. Sure, we need to keep them out of our public education systems (private education is different). We need to regulate what they are saying. We can't give them a free pass. But we can't just silence them and outlaw what they are peddling because we don't agree. They deserve to have the right to freedom of speech. And sure, what they say is probably going to upset me, but they have the right to do such.

I concur. I don't believe their right to free speech should be revoked on the basis of the content of that speech. But their right to infringe upon the constitution does not exist, and should not be allowed.