The Real 'Expelled'

[e lansing]

Is it just me or are the responses to Lurker's posts all scrambled and signed 'Lurker'?

Edited: I see that problem has been fixed. Okay....never mind.

I'm still trying to get it right I'm new! got any commits about this endless battle?

[e lansing]

When we're talking about scientific theories "probabilities" are essentially consistent explanations of observations. For example, heliocentric solar system models explain the movement of the earth, sun, planets, and stars in a mathematically consistent manner that coincides with the laws of physics such as gravity, hence this model is overwhelmingly held up as an accurate description of how the solar system works. Philosophies of science deal with the foundational assumptions and implications science makes.

Can evolution be proven mathematically?

is the gradual change of environment and the subsequent adaptation of life part of the design?

This i would agree with!

And we know intelligence must come from intelligence directly because. . .why? Would God designing a universe in which intelligent life was an inevitable result any less an "intelligence" than God designing a universe that looks old but has only been around for 6,000 years populated by living things that look like they have evolved but, in fact, were all made at the same time? In either scenario God is still doing the "designing".

In Genesis 1:20-23 after He created them He said let them produce after their kind. In Genesis 2:8,9 it says that God caused every plant, tree to grow. My point is that God created it all and put it all together and His creation reflects his intelligence. Intelligent things happen to reproduce after them selves. If you want to believe that over a billion years the inevitable happened, fine, there is still a lot of theory in that and it requires more faith then i can produce. I also happen to believe that the earth could be 6 10 thousand years old.

You are moving your goal posts, natural selection is a component of evolution, not a "proof" of it. Though I would enjoy hearing your reasoning on how it "proves" intelligence.

The ability to adapt requires intelligence.

If you want to play the poor disrespected victim I have an excellent brand of lemonade to recommend here. I get called an idiot, compared to Satan, and have my faith openly denied on a regular basis here. I'm sure you'll manage.

uhhh.....thanks.... Lurker your all right, i dont care what others say about you

It is taught as the best explanation for the diversity of life, not as the perfect explanation for the diversity of life. If you want something else taught you'll need to demonstrate another theories ability to explain more observations than evolution currently does.

BA BA BIBLE!!! AND THE HELP OF MY INFINITLY AWESOME GOD/JESUS!!

e lansing

[MorningGlory]

Is it just me or are the responses to Lurker's posts all scrambled and signed 'Lurker'?

Edited: I see that problem has been fixed. Okay....never mind.

I'm still trying to get it right I'm new! got any commits about this endless battle?

You're doing fine. I've made many, many comments on this thread and the other evolution threads. My take? God made everything, He built microevolutionary capabilities into His creations to allow for adaptation to climate, food sources, etc., but no 'kind' created by Him has ever become another.

[e lansing]

You're doing fine. I've made many, many comments on this thread and the other evolution threads. My take? God made everything, He built microevolutionary capabilities into His creations to allow for adaptation to climate, food sources, etc., but no 'kind' created by Him has ever become another.

I agree!

[e lansing]

No. . .neither can heliocentric solar system models or any other scientific theory.

So you chose to put your faith in mans theory, i chose to put my faith in Gods Word and believe the obvious

How exactly are you defining "intelligence"? Virus' reproduce, are they "intelligent"?

Incredulity is not an argument, if the overwhelming majority of those who are highly educated on these issue and who actually understand the process' involved do not share you're incredulity why should anyone else?

From intelligence comes inteligence and all living things reflect design that came from intelligence. Dead things, at any level, are unintelligent.

What evidence is evolution offering that has disprove I.D? Because it has not i will remain incredulous of evolution. I believe that skepticism stems from bias and preconceived ideas. Where you a Christian before you understood evolution? Or where a evolutionist first? If you were a christian first you seem to a skeptic of creation. If you becames a christian later, i can see why, for the same reasons why i am incredulous of evolution! NO REAL ANSWERS

BA BA BIBLE!!! AND THE HELP OF MY INFINITLY AWESOME GOD/JESUS!!

Let me get this straight. . .you want YEC taught as science because your interpretation of the Bible demands it? You can't be serious.

My interpretation!! The Bible does not demand to be taught as science! However, it could be, but not by man made standards. These man made standards prohibit the truth of the Bible to fit in to such small parameters. At any rate, its truths need to be taught! I think that evolution should not be taught as fact! Its funny that evolutionist gripe at YEC for not providing proof and yet they fall short of there own standard. Therefore, both should be taught as theories.

Edited January 12, 2010 by e lansing

[artsylady]

But an academy of higher learning supposedly dedicated to brining real science to the world should be open to both sides, not just one.

What's not stated publicly is that higher learning institutions are dedicated to the religion of evolution. There may not be a statement of faith that is signed, but those who divert from Darwinisim are penalized.

[artsylady]

Then let them teach all the controversies, let people examine the evidence for themselves and look at all sides and see where they think they should believe in, not just show your evidence, say everyone else is wrong and put a communist style lock out on all other ideas because you don't agree with it.

They can't do that. If both sides were presented equally or fairly, more would see a designer is involved.

[artsylady]

Why on earth would any respectable college allow the teaching of something that over 99% of professionals in the relevant fields disagree with? If proponents of ID want their ideas taught in science classes they need to present a testable hypothesis and then test it.

Test it? Are you saying experimentation should be part of the process that proves a theory is correct? I will bump up a thread "Evolution is not science for you"

Seriously guys, you've got less than 1% of professional biologists, are you willing to include ALL other biological theories with similar levels of support? What about other fields? The ancient astronaut folks probably have less than 1% of professional archeologists in their corner, should we include their ideas into archeology courses? When you say "Teach the Controversy" remember that you are opening the door to all controversies, not just yours.

Who are the ancient astronaut folk and what do they believe? Would a brief mention of their theory be absolutely wrong?

[artsylady]

The Discovery Institute has been actively trying to get scientists to sign their "Dissent from Darwinism" list for nine years now, so far only about 150 biologists have signed on to it even though it is a relatively mild statement against some aspects of evolution

How many would be fired or persecuted if they signed it?

How many have actually given serious consideration to the alternative in order to make a decision on what they believe? My guess is most have not and will not.

[e lansing]

[qoute] I don't think we suffered too greatly by coming to see that both man's theory and God's word are true.