Dover Judge Rules Against Intelligent Design

[angellous_evangellous]

That statement is categorically incorrect.
Fact? Whose facts? Your facts? Or my Facts?

Keep the Children's Tales out of the classroom, period.

I applaud the folks of Dover.

No one with the intelligence of a three day old cucumber is fooled by Not-So-Intelligent Design. The concepts outlined in Intelligent Design are without scientific merit and so falls into the realm of opinion or heresay. The validity of a theory lies in its proofs. Intelligent Designers, don't tell me it is all tru:162: e. Proove it is all true. Then I will be silent.

Fact: A whole lot of people in India are Hindu. A general outline of religions of the world belong, say, in a geography class. Religion also affects economics, can be the cause of wars (history class), and customs of regions. These kind of facts belong in the classroom, but not the issue of whether or not the myths of the religion are actually true, which is what ID folks are trying to do.

 

[Quiddity]

We know from scientific observation that apes exist and heat exists, and therefore such elements can be considered when one is trying to provide explanations for occurances in nature. However, no one can prove that God or an Intelligent Designer exists, so neither belong in scientific discussion. It would be a far greater leap in scientific discussion to add God or an Intelligent Designer to the conversation because science cannot even know if either exist.

Ok, I'm trying to figure out what exactly you added that would cause me to disagree..

 

[Quiddity]

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1221/p01s01-ussc.html


This is one of the greatest stumbling blocks of ID. It allows for any kind of supernatural explanation to be considered valid science. Astrology, pixies, the Invisiable Pink Unicorn, etc. In what sense can such things be considered science?

I would say it's not.

~Victor

 

[nutshell]

I'm OK with this ruling.

I say let the schools teach science, let churchs teach spirituality, and let the homes teach their own kids.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Ok, I'm trying to figure out what exactly you added that would cause me to disagree..

Then we can agree with eachother ROFL!!

 

[YmirGF]

Sorry folks, Less-Than-Intelligent Design is not the real issue. The real issue is the erosion of scientific thought in the spirit of "reasoned" debate. It is also a thinly veiled attempt to backdoor religion into our classrooms, thereby polluting the minds of the youth with their savior of the day.

Talking to someone about Intelligent design is like feeding a troll.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

... Religion can be taught in schools as factual knowledge, but not as scientific truth or fact.

That statement is categorically incorrect.

Get over yourself. You might wish to start here.

 

[john63]

I'm OK with this ruling.

I say let the schools teach science, let churchs teach spirituality, and let the homes teach their own kids.

This is the most intelligent statement I've seen all day. Furballs Nutshell!:bounce

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Get over yourself. You might wish to start here.

Could you be a bit more precise?

 

[YmirGF]

Get over yourself. You might wish to start here.

Face it Jayhawker Soule, you don't like people who do not fit your little mold of reality.
You don't like people who will not buckle under, do you. Fact is, you don't know how to deal with a loose cannon like me, do you?

And so you attempt to brush me off. Trust me budd, I am that nasty piece of lint that sticks. One perculiar aspect of me is that if I think someone is right, I say so. I have no problem eating crow. One developes a taste for it after awhile.

The fact remains, on this topic, I believe without a shadow of a doubt that I am right and the forces behind Intelligent Design are wrong. (Take that any way you like. Any way at all.)

 

[Sunstone]

I wonder what impact, if any, this will have on the Kansas State School Board's decision to redefine science to include supernatural explanations of natural phenomena? Not to mention it's decision to allow ID to be taught in the classroom.

 

[Mathematician]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/12/20/intelligent.design/index.html

HARRISBURG, Pennsylvania (CNN) -- A Pennsylvania school district cannot teach in science classes a concept that says some aspects of science were created by a supernatural being, a federal judge has ruled...

Jones -- an appointee of President Bush, who backs the teaching of intelligent design -- defended his decision in personal terms.

"Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist court," Jones writes.

"Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on intelligent design, who in combination drove the board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy," he said.

Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said, "Children in public schools deserve top quality science education and freedom from religious indoctrination and today they were granted both."

Happy days! :bounce

 

[pballfreek20]

It's just another step that's going to bring the end of the United States of America.

 

[Sunstone]

It's just another step that's going to bring the end of the United States of America.

Welcome to the Forum!

By the way, isn't it rather obviously and completely absurd to believe that prohibiting the teaching of ID in public schools will bring about the end of the US?

 

[Sunstone]

Judge Jone's decision in this case is unlikely to be appealed because the new school board has already said they will not appeal the case if the case is lost.

 

[Sunstone]

It hardly seems activist to me for the judge to reject the pack of lies presented to him in court by the proponents of ID.

It certainly didn't help the proponents of ID that many of the school board lied in court to cover up the role of religion in their decision to require a reference to ID in the classroom.

 

[YmirGF]

I rather liked that the judged rule that Infantile Design was in fact Creationism. Call me silly, but I felt that was important.

Further to this, I thought the judge saying that he felt it was a subject that people should discuss and explore was a polite rebuff that was really saying, "Nice try guys. Now go do your homework."

:biglaugh:

 

[Jaymes]

What I feel is interesting is that this judge was appointed by Bush. Do you guys think that he's less likely to get heckled by the conservative community because of this?

 

[Green Gaia]

It's just another step that's going to bring the end of the United States of America.

I thought that was same sex marriage? Those anti-IDists better not take away my chance to bring about the end of the USA, that was promised to us gays! :149:

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It's those gay opponents of ID that I worry about.