Export thread

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...cies-darwin-150-intelligent-design/index.html

Really, National Geographic? Really? I can understand the desire to educate people about the attempted obstruction of Intelligent Design, but, if that was this article's point, it does a piss-poor job of it--it looks more like they're giving equal weight to the arguments of each. The little blurb of science at the end does almost nothing to answer the questions posed (at least for those with little knowledge of both ID and science, which are the likely targets for ID).

Just...GAH!

Wait, so you don't want it to give each argument equal weight in an analysis?

Twitch said:

Wait, so you don't want it to give each argument equal weight in an analysis?

Click to expand...

Well, I would...except that these six points have been raised as criticisms of evolution by Intelligent Design over, and over, and over, and over, and OVER again. Each time they've been thoroughly debunked, and Intelligent Design has no empirical evidence to back it up.

I'm more angry that National Geographic, largely seen as an educational magazine, has presented this as a, "Here's what both sides say, take what you will from it" discussion when one side has had its arguments soundly and thoroughly thrashed. Even more apparent in that ID wishes to have itself recognized as 'science' when there is no empirical evidence to support any of its claims--either disingenuous ideas, or a "god of the gaps" approach that has been proven false, time and time again.

intelligent design is not an argument, it is not a theory, it is not science.

It is, however, retarded.

I'm usually a very tolerant guy, anyone is entitled to believe in stupid shit if it makes them feel better and it's not my place to judge them. Except today, because today is a shitty day and i need to vent.

Enresshou;305650][quote=Twitch said:

Wait, so you don't want it to give each argument equal weight in an analysis?

Click to expand...

Well, I would...except that these six points have been raised as criticisms of evolution by Intelligent Design over, and over, and over, and over, and OVER again. Each time they've been thoroughly debunked, and Intelligent Design has no empirical evidence to back it up.

I'm more angry that National Geographic, largely seen as an educational magazine, has presented this as a, "Here's what both sides say, take what you will from it" discussion when one side has had its arguments soundly and thoroughly thrashed. Even more apparent in that ID wishes to have itself recognized as 'science' when there is no empirical evidence to support any of its claims--either disingenuous ideas, or a "god of the gaps" approach that has been proven false, time and time again.[/QUOTE]

uh, the national geographic article does a pretty good job itself of thrashing the ID arguments. are you angry because you want them to be more inflammatory about being right?

EDIT: wait, you don't think that they are being persuasive enough?

"here is what creationists say.

here is a simple reason why they are wrong."

i don't really agree with your standpoint, but i appreciate that you are very incensed about stupid people, which i guess is a good thing? anyway, thanks for the article.

Next month, leeches vs. modern medicine. [/snarky]

North_Ranger said:

Next month, leeches vs. modern medicine. [/snarky]

Click to expand...

Leeches are used in modern medicine. They even have an applicable use for maggots.

BlackCrossCrusader;306076][quote=North_Ranger said:

Next month, leeches vs. modern medicine. [/snarky]

Click to expand...

Leeches are used in modern medicine. They even have an applicable use for maggots.[/QUOTE]

Not to mention Bee-stings.

I'm just waiting for when "Puncturing a hole in your skull to release the evil spirits" makes a comeback. Oh, and drinking Mercury to gain immortality as well.

Cheesy1 said:

I'm just waiting for when "Puncturing a hole in your skull to release the evil spirits" makes a comeback. Oh, and drinking Mercury to gain immortality as well.

Click to expand...

(puts down drill).

Quid?

Cheesy1 said:

I'm just waiting for when "Puncturing a hole in your skull to release the evil spirits" makes a comeback. Oh, and drinking Mercury to gain immortality as well.

Click to expand...

Trepanation is still used to allieviate pressure from the brain. Although, it's more of a last resort for infections like Meningitis or Encephalitis.

BlackCrossCrusader;306104][quote=Cheesy1 said:

I'm just waiting for when "Puncturing a hole in your skull to release the evil spirits" makes a comeback. Oh, and drinking Mercury to gain immortality as well.

Click to expand...

Trepanation is still used to allieviate pressure from the brain. Although, it's more of a last resort for infections like Meningitis or Encephalitis.[/QUOTE]

Why can't those old witchcraft medice remain in the past?

Green_Lantern;306344][quote=BlackCrossCrusader;306104][quote=Cheesy1 said:

I'm just waiting for when "Puncturing a hole in your skull to release the evil spirits" makes a comeback. Oh, and drinking Mercury to gain immortality as well.

Click to expand...

Trepanation is still used to allieviate pressure from the brain. Although, it's more of a last resort for infections like Meningitis or Encephalitis.[/QUOTE]

Why can't those old witchcraft medice remain in the past?[/QUOTE]

The intent behind each procedure I've mentioned is different than the intent the "doctors" had in the past, because we have a more thorough understanding of the biological functions our bodies perform.

This isn't really emphasized much today, but the rudimentary knowledge of modern medical science is based on the 'trial and error' efforts of shamans, medicine men, witch doctors, and surgeons of the past.

I always wondered what the ID people would do if you taught creation.... from saaaayyy... the Australian Aboriginal view?

Laurelai said:

I always wondered what the ID people would do if you taught creation.... from saaaayyy... the Australian Aboriginal view?

Click to expand...

I actually really wanted a devoted mythology class in grade/mid/high school, but they aren't standard in Cali at least. It gets touched on in lit/history classes, but nothing serious. It'd give the idiots a chance to get their stuff into schools, and it'd help to educate kids about other forms of spirituality as well.

Of course, watch as they gnash their teeth and wail over it being called 'mythology' rather than 'the gospel truth' class.

RealBigNuke;306446][quote=Laurelai said:

I always wondered what the ID people would do if you taught creation.... from saaaayyy... the Australian Aboriginal view?

Click to expand...

I actually really wanted a devoted mythology class in grade/mid/high school, but they aren't standard in Cali at least. It gets touched on in lit/history classes, but nothing serious. It'd give the idiots a chance to get their stuff into schools, and it'd help to educate kids about other forms of spirituality as well.

Of course, watch as they gnash their teeth and wail over it being called 'mythology' rather than 'the gospel truth' class.[/QUOTE]

Totally agreed, RBN. I exhausted our school's (relatively sizable) supply of Greek and Norse mythology books when I was in middle school, and would have loved to see an in-depth class of all the world's religious mythology. Unfortunately, as you said, there would be a huge backlash from parents seeing equal weight and scrutiny given to religions other than their own.

And Laurelai, Intelligent Design isn't (supposedly, at least) about teaching creation from any one ideology. It's being peddled as a "scientific alternative" to Darwinian evolution--far more dangerous than Creationism because it's designed to appeal to the average person who has little to no knowledge of evolutionary processes. If you tried teaching creation myths from Aborigine tribes, though, you'd probably get the same backlash of, "That's WRONG!" considering that many of the same people in the ID movement now were part of the Creationism movement in the past.

Enresshou;306503][quote=RealBigNuke;306446][quote=Laurelai said:

I always wondered what the ID people would do if you taught creation.... from saaaayyy... the Australian Aboriginal view?

Click to expand...

I actually really wanted a devoted mythology class in grade/mid/high school, but they aren't standard in Cali at least. It gets touched on in lit/history classes, but nothing serious. It'd give the idiots a chance to get their stuff into schools, and it'd help to educate kids about other forms of spirituality as well.

Of course, watch as they gnash their teeth and wail over it being called 'mythology' rather than 'the gospel truth' class.[/QUOTE]

Totally agreed, RBN. I exhausted our school's (relatively sizable) supply of Greek and Norse mythology books when I was in middle school, and would have loved to see an in-depth class of all the world's religious mythology. Unfortunately, as you said, there would be a huge backlash from parents seeing equal weight and scrutiny given to religions other than their own.

And Laurelai, Intelligent Design isn't (supposedly, at least) about teaching creation from any one ideology. It's being peddled as a "scientific alternative" to Darwinian evolution--far more dangerous than Creationism because it's designed to appeal to the average person who has little to no knowledge of evolutionary processes. If you tried teaching creation myths from Aborigine tribes, though, you'd probably get the same backlash of, "That's WRONG!" considering that many of the same people in the ID movement now were part of the Creationism movement in the past.[/QUOTE]

Oh I know that.... That's why I would love to see someone teaching creation... from another perspective and calling it How the World Was Made.

btw- I am a creationist of a sort- I do believe in God and believe he created the Earth, however, I think science is our way of understanding the process.... and I hate Hate HATE the ID movement for trying to call faith science. Your faith is your faith and that is that. I think it sullies one's faith to try to justify it as science. Faith needs no proof.