Dover Penn ID trial - Page 13

delphi_ote · 10th November 2005, 01:30 PM

Yes, but he's not exactly doing his job as a researcher anymore, is he? His profession changed when he abandoned science and reason. The man who made those statements on a witness stand is a clown, not a scientist.

Melendwyr · 10th November 2005, 01:32 PM

Originally Posted by delphi_ote

Yes, but he's not exactly doing his job as a researcher anymore, is he? His profession changed when he abandoned science and reason. The man who made those statements on a witness stand is a clown, not a scientist.

Ah, the joy of tenure!

Behe is a perfect example of why tenure should be removed. University faculty are still vulnerable to retaliation from the administration in a thousand other ways, so tenure doesn't make academics immune to persecution, and it makes it virtually impossible to get rid of utter fools.

Mercutio · 10th November 2005, 02:59 PM

In related news. NPR just ran a story on "Intelligent Design and Academic Freedom". Mostly centered around Sternberg publication of an intelligent design article...http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=5007508

Quote:

Sternberg was the editor of an obscure scientific journal loosely affiliated with the Smithsonian Institution, where he is also a research associate. Last year, he published in the journal a peer-reviewed article by Stephen Meyer, a proponent of intelligent design, an idea which Sternberg himself believes is fatally flawed.

"Why publish it?" Sternberg says. "Because evolutionary biologists are thinking about this. So I thought that by putting this on the table, there could be some reasoned discourse. That's what I thought, and I was dead wrong."

At first he heard rumblings of discontent but thought it would blow over. Sternberg says his colleagues and supervisors at the Smithsonian were furious. He says -- and an independent report backs him up -- that colleagues accused him of fraud, saying they did not believe the Meyer article was really peer reviewed. It was.

delphi_ote · 10th November 2005, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Because evolutionary biologists are thinking about this.

No, they aren't.

catbasket · 10th November 2005, 03:51 PM

Originally Posted by Mercutio

In related news

Quote:

"Why publish it?" Sternberg says. "Because evolutionary biologists are thinking about this. So I thought that by putting this on the table, there could be some reasoned discourse. That's what I thought, and I was dead wrong."

Are evolutionary biologists really thinking about ID? In any other way than "it's religion, not science"? "Reasoned discourse" with ID supporters??

Quote:

Eugenie Scott, the executive director of the National Center for Science Education, says her group did consult with Smithsonian officials and the museum's concerns were valid.

"Clearly people were annoyed, they were frustrated, they were blowing off steam," Scott says. "Some probably did speak intemperately. Their concern was that somehow the Smithsonian would be associated with supporting the creationist cause by being associated with this journal that published a creationist paper."

Anyway, she says -- echoing the comments of a Smithsonian official -- Sternberg did not really suffer.

"He didn't lose his job, he didn't get his pay cut, he still has his research privileges, he still has his office," Scott says. "You know, what's his complaint? People weren't nice to him. Well, life is not fair."

Is that a reasonable summation, or has he really got a legitimate complaint?

Ducky · 10th November 2005, 03:53 PM

Originally Posted by bighairygoat

Are evolutionary biologists really thinking about ID? In any other way than "it's religion, not science"? "Reasoned discourse" with ID supporters??

Is that a reasonable summation, or has he really got a legitimate complaint?

He should have known better than to publish that crap if he has two PhD's in biology.

thatguywhojuggles · 10th November 2005, 04:14 PM

Quote:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Conservative Christian televangelist Pat Robertson told citizens of a Pennsylvania town that they had rejected God by voting their school board out of office for supporting "intelligent design" and warned them on Thursday not to be surprised if disaster struck.
...
"I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover: if there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God, you just rejected Him from your city,"
...
"And don't wonder why He hasn't helped you when problems begin, if they begin. I'm not saying they will, but if they do, just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that's the case, don't ask for His help because he might not be there,"
...
Source: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1300761

This man should be put away in a room with white walls where he can just sit a spew all this hateful garbage to himself. Give him a nice straight jacket too.

Edit to add: I thought the whole thing in Dover was about science, not religion. Is Robertson suggesting that there was a religious motivation behind the 8 people voted out?

Ducky · 10th November 2005, 04:18 PM

Originally Posted by thatguywhojuggles

This man should be put away in a room with white walls where he can just sit a spew all this hateful garbage to himself. Give him a nice straight jacket too.

Edit to add: I thought the whole thing in Dover was about science, not religion. Is Robertson suggesting that there was a religious motivation behind the 8 people voted out?

I seriously hope he gets cancer.

That's hateful and I yelled at other people for saying that, but that jackass really has it coming.

Bronze Dog · 10th November 2005, 04:22 PM

I'd prefer Robertson be struck by lightning on a clear day. I think I'll see if I can recruit a mad scientist to make it happen, since there doesn't seem to be an omnibenevolent being intent on electroshocking that nutbar into sanity. Or ashes.

BillHoyt · 10th November 2005, 04:43 PM

Originally Posted by delphi_ote

No, they aren't.

Exactly. I think that comment is quite interesting and very suggestive of a creationist agenda. At the very least, it is suggestive of a clueless journal editor.

catbasket · 10th November 2005, 05:03 PM

Quote:

... don't ask for His help because he might not be there.

Could I have another portion of irony, please? That was delicious.

Melendwyr · 10th November 2005, 07:06 PM

Originally Posted by fowlsound

That's hateful and I yelled at other people for saying that, but that jackass really has it coming.

I think it's well past time to acknowledge that this anti-hate movement that's become so popular in the last few decades is dead wrong. Hate has a purpose and a function, and to claim that any and all manifestations of hatred are evil is just plain silly.

Hate is not the problem. Unreasonably determining what to hate is.

Ducky · 10th November 2005, 07:23 PM

Originally Posted by Melendwyr

I think it's well past time to acknowledge that this anti-hate movement that's become so popular in the last few decades is dead wrong. Hate has a purpose and a function, and to claim that any and all manifestations of hatred are evil is just plain silly.

Hate is not the problem. Unreasonably determining what to hate is.

In that case, I reasonably hate the following:

Fred Phelps
Pat Robertson
Kevin Trudeau
Psychics/Mediums/frauds
Cancer

And I unreasonably hate the following:

Kevin Federline, who can't spell his name properly.
Jell-o
Dr. Suess
mushrooms
wombat shaving
penis envy
Ford Taurus' made in the 1990's
reality TV
spandex
infomercials
ebonics

Looks like I have some work to do on rectifying my unreasonable hate.

delphi_ote · 10th November 2005, 08:27 PM

Originally Posted by fowlsound

In that case, I reasonably hate the following:

Fred Phelps
Pat Robertson
Kevin Trudeau
Psychics/Mediums/frauds
Cancer

And just where am I on that list?! When a guy works this hard, he expects a little credit!

I now unreasonably hate the following:
fowlsound

Ducky · 10th November 2005, 08:30 PM

Originally Posted by delphi_ote

And just where am I on that list?! When a guy works this hard, he expects a little credit!

I now unreasonably hate the following:
fowlsound

You were included with "mushrooms."

KingMerv00 · 10th November 2005, 08:31 PM

Originally Posted by Mojo

Where does the effective removal of the old school leave the case? If the plaintiffs win, the new board will presumably not want to appeal the decision.

The new school board is supposedly on record saying they will not appeal a ruling against the old school board. The old board members have no power.

Even if the plaintiffs lose, the newly elected board members will most likely reverse Pandas vote.

Quote:

Where does this leave the case as a precedent? What other courts is Judge Jones's decision binding on?

It would be persuasive only. Other district courts wouldn't be bound but would be encouraged to follow precedent.

Quote:

Ideally this would have gone all the way up to the SC and set a proper precedent, binding on all courts in the US.

Normally you can't go directly to the SCOTUS. It is especially weird if you just won your case.

tsg · 10th November 2005, 08:37 PM

Originally Posted by thatguywhojuggles

Edit to add: I thought the whole thing in Dover was about science, not religion. Is Robertson suggesting that there was a religious motivation behind the 8 people voted out?

It was about teaching religion in a public school. There's nothing in the Constitution preventing a Board of Education from teaching bad science. There is against teaching religion.

delphi_ote · 10th November 2005, 09:07 PM

Originally Posted by BillHoyt

Exactly. I think that comment is quite interesting and very suggestive of a creationist agenda. At the very least, it is suggestive of a clueless journal editor.

Not clueless, no. He has a creationist agenda, plain as day. You'll find his name (along with several other familiar names) on this list:

http://www.iscid.org/fellows.php

He most certainly appears to have abused his position:

http://evolutionblog.blogspot.com/20...g-replies.html

His duplicity and persecution routine make me ill.

MRWiffen · 11th November 2005, 03:59 AM

I found this article this morning bushwatch.net/uhler.htm (still to new to post proper links.

Quote:

Who politicized the Kansas Board of Education and the recently ousted board members at Dover Area High School in Pennsylvania? Conservative zealots; some of whom have even admitted to not understanding intelligent design—and who certainly do not understand what constitutes genuine science.

The site is very left wing, I would change conservative to religious, with that change it does still make it's point.

CFLarsen · 11th November 2005, 04:13 AM

bushwatch.net?

That sounds positively like a porn site.

........

Yep. Political porn.

DavidJames · 11th November 2005, 09:04 AM

Originally Posted by MRWiffen

The site is very left wing, I would change conservative to religious, with that change it does still make it's point.

Or more accurately, Republican

catbasket · 11th November 2005, 09:25 AM

Ok, so it turns out that Sternberg (poor little victim of all those nasty scientists) is a Fellow of the International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design ... along with Behe, Dembski and others whose names you will probably recognise.

Barbara Bradley Hagerty (author of the NPR story) is the NPR's religion correspondent and turns out to be a member of the World Journalism Institute

Quote:

Have you heard of the "World Journalism Institute"? Probably not. It's an organization of journalists committed to helping members "accurately" report "the work of God in today's world." In other words, they are committed to reporting events from a conservative, evangelical Christian perspective.

What was that again about the "liberal media elite" and how the NPR is a bastion of "liberal news coverage" that fails to give adequate consideration to conservatives - especially to conservative religion? One of the members of the WJI is Barbara Bradley Hagerty, NPR's religion correspondent. Curious.

Quote taken from -
http://atheism.about.com/b/a/2004_03.htm?iam=dpile_100 (ETA - the post marked 09:00)

Explains a lot methinks.

Melendwyr · 11th November 2005, 09:46 AM

I think it's time to start writing letters to NPR.

Eos of the Eons · 11th November 2005, 10:43 AM

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9995578/

Quote:

Conservative Christian televangelist Pat Robertson told citizens of a Pennsylvania town that they had rejected God by voting their school board out of office for supporting “intelligent design” and warned them Thursday not to be surprised if disaster struck.

*cough* I thought ID "was science" *cough*

So, here we have IDiots contradicting themselves again. *ID is science* they try to tell us.

Then when they get mad, they forget their little mantra.

Oh, and somehow natural disasters are punishments for us puny mortals by this "loving god".

delphi_ote · 11th November 2005, 10:54 AM

Originally Posted by Melendwyr

I think it's time to start writing letters to NPR.

Make sure you read my second link there if you're steamed. It'll put you into the red.

Quote:

As managing editor it was my prerogative to choose the editor who would work directly on the paper, and as I was best qualified among the editors I chose myself...

fishbob · 11th November 2005, 11:24 AM

Originally Posted by KingMerv00

%&#@!

You know, of all of the IDers I think Behe bothers me the most. Unlike alot of them *cough* HOVIND *cough* the man has a real scientific education yet the scientific method is lost on him.

I read somewhere, I think in the Dover trial transcripts, that Behe has sold more than 400,000 copies of his Black Box book. Therefore ID = serious financial gain. The ID leaders all seem to be quite well off.

Melendwyr · 11th November 2005, 12:04 PM

I had wondered why the NPR stories kept referring to the controversy over "the origins of life". Now I know: NPR's religion correspondent is a member of an organization specifically dedicated to spreading Christian Fundamentalism through the mass media.

Expecting a religion correspondent to lack religious opinions is unreasonable, but a certain amount of dispassionate objectivity is called for. How is actively trying to promulgate the "Christian viewpoint" conducive to that requirement?!

KingMerv00 · 11th November 2005, 12:56 PM

Originally Posted by fishbob

I read somewhere, I think in the Dover trial transcripts, that Behe has sold more than 400,000 copies of his Black Box book. Therefore ID = serious financial gain. The ID leaders all seem to be quite well off.

Are you suggesting that he doesn't believe what he is saying? Behe is in it for the bling?

Upchurch · 11th November 2005, 01:56 PM

Originally Posted by KingMerv00

Are you suggesting that he doesn't believe what he is saying? Behe is in it for the bling?

You don't get the bling just teaching at a university...

eta: I'm so white.

tsg · 11th November 2005, 02:24 PM

Originally Posted by KingMerv00

Are you suggesting that he doesn't believe what he is saying? Behe is in it for the bling?

If by "bling" you are including "power", yes, absolutely.

The Discovery Institute wants nothing less than a complete theocratic state with themselves as the head.

delphi_ote · 11th November 2005, 02:42 PM

Originally Posted by tsg

The Discovery Institute wants nothing less than a complete theocratic state with themselves as the head.

If I hadn't read them saying essentially just that myself, you'd sound like a conspiracy nut.

And just to go back over our recent conversation topics, we've been discussing a journal editor that acted questionably in order to push through a flawed intelligent design article because he sympathized with their cause, and we've also been discussing a journalist who covered the journal editor's story in an biased way because she also sympathizes with the intelligent design cause. Both are members of religious organizations that publicly endorse intelligent design. Both actions were in some way furthered by government actions and political appointments. The organizations these folks belong to are funded by and allied with fundamentalist religious groups. All involved have the same goal: keeping unpleasant scientific facts from a generation of children.

Why do people invent conspiracy theories? I find reality has enough intrigue...

rjh01 · 11th November 2005, 03:41 PM

Will the trial make a good movie?

Dragon · 11th November 2005, 04:00 PM

Originally Posted by rjh01

Will the trial make a good movie?

Working title -"Inhibit the Mind".

Thank you, I'm here all week.

tsg · 11th November 2005, 04:38 PM

ETA: I misread your post (I thought you were accusing me of being a conspiracy nut), but I'll leave it anyway since I think it's important for people to know exactly where ID is coming from and so I can back up my own claim.

Originally Posted by delphi_ote

If I hadn't read them saying essentially just that myself, you'd sound like a conspiracy nut.

[...]

Why do people invent conspiracy theories? I find reality has enough intrigue...

Don't take my word for it. They've said so themselves. Look here and make up your own mind.

A few choice quotes:

Quote:

Discovery Institute's Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture seeks nothing less than the overthrow of materialism and its cultural legacies.

From their "Five Year Strategic Plan Summary":

Quote:

The social consequences of materialism have been devastating. As symptoms, those consequences are certainly worth treating. However, we are convinced that in order to defeat materialism, we must cut it off at its source. That source is scientific materialism. This is precisely our strategy.
[...]
Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions.

From their "Governing Goals":

Quote:

To defeat scientific materialism and its destructive moral, cultural and political legacies. [emphasis mine]

And from their "Twenty Year Goals"

Quote:

To see design theory permeate our religious, cultural, moral and political life. [emphasis mine]

And this gem from their "Five Year Objectives":

Quote:

Design becomes a key concept in the social sciences Legal reform movements base legislative proposals on design theory. [emphasis mine]

Pay particular attention to that last one. They want laws to be based on Intelligent Design, a religious view, for which they are the primary source of "research" . That is a theocratic state with them in control. This is no conspiracy theory, these are their own words.

JamesM · 12th November 2005, 07:28 AM

Originally Posted by bighairygoat

Ok, so it turns out that Sternberg (poor little victim of all those nasty scientists) is a Fellow of the International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design ... along with Behe, Dembski and others whose names you will probably recognise.

what is the ISCID? Does it have an avowedly anti-evolutionary or pro-ID agenda?

Mercutio · 12th November 2005, 07:55 AM

Originally Posted by JamesM

what is the ISCID? Does it have an avowedly anti-evolutionary or pro-ID agenda?

Take a look at the website that delphi_ote linked. Fascinating. Very carefully does not mention anything that would allow one to pin them down in such a category...until you look at the Journal. Then it is crystal clear--this is an intelligent-design group. Not only are the usual suspects there, writing the usual things, but lesser players are contributing additional ID materials.

So even though their stated purpose is to provide "a forum for free and uncensored inquiry into complex systems", their de facto purpose is to provide a forum for Intelligent Design.

JamesM · 12th November 2005, 08:42 AM

Originally Posted by Mercutio

look at the Journal. Then it is crystal clear--this is an intelligent-design group.

Wow, you're right. I hadn't looked at the journals.

I just noticed Henry Schaefer's name on the list of ISCID fellows. And he's a fellow of the Discovery Institute, too. He is a very very big noise indeed in quantum chemistry. I hadn't realised he was an IDer.

delphi_ote · 12th November 2005, 09:58 AM

Originally Posted by JamesM

I hadn't realised he was an IDer.

He's definitely a Jesus freak:
http://leaderu.com/offices/schaefer/...cientists.html

And this leaves me wondering...

Quote:

Science and Christianity: Conflict or Coherence?
Henry F. Schaefer III
Table of Contents
...

5. Climbing Mount Improbable: Evolutionary Science or Wishful Thinking? .................................77
...

http://apollostrust.com/

Melendwyr · 12th November 2005, 11:25 AM

Originally Posted by Mercutio

So even though their stated purpose is to provide "a forum for free and uncensored inquiry into complex systems", their de facto purpose is to provide a forum for Intelligent Design.

And by "free and uncensored", they mean "will tolerate whatever pro-ID arguments are put there and otherwise ignore modern biology".

Dr Adequate · 12th November 2005, 03:14 PM

Originally Posted by delphi_ote

Brilliant!

You just need to add the occational Greek in the background yelling "We're Greeks! We're Greeks!" while the lead Greek tries to keep them quiet.

I hope the judge has read Pat Robertson's remarks on the subject. I should think they'd help him make his mind up.

My little playlet continues...

Act II

Enter Pat Robertson.

PR: We're GREEKS, I tell you, GREEKS! We like retsina, sodomy, and right angled triangles!

[Sings]:

Se gnoriso apo tin kopsi,
Tou spathiou tin tromeri,
Se gnoriso apo tin opsi,
Pou me via metra tin yi.
Ap' ta kokala vialmeni,
Ton Ellinon ta iera,
Ke san prota andriomeni,
Haire, o haire, Eleftheria!

I AM SO F***ING GREEK THAT IF YOU LOOK UNDER "GREEK" IN THE DICTIONARY THEY HAVE A PICTURE OF ME TALKING ABOUT PHILOSOPHY AND BUGGERING A SLAVE BOY! Oh, and Zeus will use his magical powers to smite everyone who rejects our gift of a wooden horse.

10th November 2005, 01:30 PM	#481
delphi_ote Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 5,994	Yes, but he's not exactly doing his job as a researcher anymore, is he? His profession changed when he abandoned science and reason. The man who made those statements on a witness stand is a clown, not a scientist.
delphi_ote Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 5,994

10th November 2005, 01:32 PM	#482
Melendwyr Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 2,064	Originally Posted by delphi_ote Yes, but he's not exactly doing his job as a researcher anymore, is he? His profession changed when he abandoned science and reason. The man who made those statements on a witness stand is a clown, not a scientist. Ah, the joy of tenure! Behe is a perfect example of why tenure should be removed. University faculty are still vulnerable to retaliation from the administration in a thousand other ways, so tenure doesn't make academics immune to persecution, and it makes it virtually impossible to get rid of utter fools.
Melendwyr Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 2,064

10th November 2005, 03:47 PM	#484
delphi_ote Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 5,994	Quote: Because evolutionary biologists are thinking about this. No, they aren't.
delphi_ote Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 5,994

10th November 2005, 03:53 PM	#486
Ducky Guest Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 11,933	Originally Posted by bighairygoat Are evolutionary biologists really thinking about ID? In any other way than "it's religion, not science"? "Reasoned discourse" with ID supporters?? Is that a reasonable summation, or has he really got a legitimate complaint? He should have known better than to publish that crap if he has two PhD's in biology.
Ducky Guest Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 11,933

10th November 2005, 04:14 PM	#487
thatguywhojuggles Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 1,335	Televangelist Robertson warns town of God's wrath Quote: WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Conservative Christian televangelist Pat Robertson told citizens of a Pennsylvania town that they had rejected God by voting their school board out of office for supporting "intelligent design" and warned them on Thursday not to be surprised if disaster struck. ... "I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover: if there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God, you just rejected Him from your city," ... "And don't wonder why He hasn't helped you when problems begin, if they begin. I'm not saying they will, but if they do, just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that's the case, don't ask for His help because he might not be there," ... Source: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1300761 This man should be put away in a room with white walls where he can just sit a spew all this hateful garbage to himself. Give him a nice straight jacket too. Edit to add: I thought the whole thing in Dover was about science, not religion. Is Robertson suggesting that there was a religious motivation behind the 8 people voted out?

10th November 2005, 02:59 PM	#483
Mercutio Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 16,279	In related news. NPR just ran a story on "Intelligent Design and Academic Freedom". Mostly centered around Sternberg publication of an intelligent design article...http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=5007508 Quote: Sternberg was the editor of an obscure scientific journal loosely affiliated with the Smithsonian Institution, where he is also a research associate. Last year, he published in the journal a peer-reviewed article by Stephen Meyer, a proponent of intelligent design, an idea which Sternberg himself believes is fatally flawed. "Why publish it?" Sternberg says. "Because evolutionary biologists are thinking about this. So I thought that by putting this on the table, there could be some reasoned discourse. That's what I thought, and I was dead wrong." At first he heard rumblings of discontent but thought it would blow over. Sternberg says his colleagues and supervisors at the Smithsonian were furious. He says -- and an independent report backs him up -- that colleagues accused him of fraud, saying they did not believe the Meyer article was really peer reviewed. It was.

10th November 2005, 03:51 PM	#485
catbasket Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,478	Originally Posted by Mercutio In related news Quote: "Why publish it?" Sternberg says. "Because evolutionary biologists are thinking about this. So I thought that by putting this on the table, there could be some reasoned discourse. That's what I thought, and I was dead wrong." Are evolutionary biologists really thinking about ID? In any other way than "it's religion, not science"? "Reasoned discourse" with ID supporters?? Quote: Eugenie Scott, the executive director of the National Center for Science Education, says her group did consult with Smithsonian officials and the museum's concerns were valid. "Clearly people were annoyed, they were frustrated, they were blowing off steam," Scott says. "Some probably did speak intemperately. Their concern was that somehow the Smithsonian would be associated with supporting the creationist cause by being associated with this journal that published a creationist paper." Anyway, she says -- echoing the comments of a Smithsonian official -- Sternberg did not really suffer. "He didn't lose his job, he didn't get his pay cut, he still has his research privileges, he still has his office," Scott says. "You know, what's his complaint? People weren't nice to him. Well, life is not fair." Is that a reasonable summation, or has he really got a legitimate complaint?

10th November 2005, 04:18 PM	#488
Ducky Guest Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 11,933	Originally Posted by thatguywhojuggles This man should be put away in a room with white walls where he can just sit a spew all this hateful garbage to himself. Give him a nice straight jacket too. Edit to add: I thought the whole thing in Dover was about science, not religion. Is Robertson suggesting that there was a religious motivation behind the 8 people voted out? I seriously hope he gets cancer. That's hateful and I yelled at other people for saying that, but that jackass really has it coming.
Ducky Guest Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 11,933

10th November 2005, 04:22 PM	#489
Bronze Dog Copper Alloy Canid Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 4,993	I'd prefer Robertson be struck by lightning on a clear day. I think I'll see if I can recruit a mad scientist to make it happen, since there doesn't seem to be an omnibenevolent being intent on electroshocking that nutbar into sanity. Or ashes.
	__________________ Stop Sylvia Browne Warning: Beware of contaminated water supplies! Suspected source of contamination: Sarah-I A non-Rockstar Rambler and dissector of Doggerel

10th November 2005, 04:43 PM	#490
BillHoyt Guest Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,758	Originally Posted by delphi_ote No, they aren't. Exactly. I think that comment is quite interesting and very suggestive of a creationist agenda. At the very least, it is suggestive of a clueless journal editor.
BillHoyt Guest Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,758

10th November 2005, 05:03 PM	#491
catbasket Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,478	Quote: ... don't ask for His help because he might not be there. Could I have another portion of irony, please? That was delicious.

10th November 2005, 07:06 PM	#492
Melendwyr Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 2,064	Originally Posted by fowlsound That's hateful and I yelled at other people for saying that, but that jackass really has it coming. I think it's well past time to acknowledge that this anti-hate movement that's become so popular in the last few decades is dead wrong. Hate has a purpose and a function, and to claim that any and all manifestations of hatred are evil is just plain silly. Hate is not the problem. Unreasonably determining what to hate is.
Melendwyr Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 2,064

10th November 2005, 07:23 PM	#493
Ducky Guest Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 11,933	Originally Posted by Melendwyr I think it's well past time to acknowledge that this anti-hate movement that's become so popular in the last few decades is dead wrong. Hate has a purpose and a function, and to claim that any and all manifestations of hatred are evil is just plain silly. Hate is not the problem. Unreasonably determining what to hate is. In that case, I reasonably hate the following: Fred Phelps Pat Robertson Kevin Trudeau Psychics/Mediums/frauds Cancer And I unreasonably hate the following: Kevin Federline, who can't spell his name properly. Jell-o Dr. Suess mushrooms wombat shaving penis envy Ford Taurus' made in the 1990's reality TV spandex infomercials ebonics Looks like I have some work to do on rectifying my unreasonable hate.
Ducky Guest Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 11,933

10th November 2005, 08:27 PM	#494
delphi_ote Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 5,994	Originally Posted by fowlsound In that case, I reasonably hate the following: Fred Phelps Pat Robertson Kevin Trudeau Psychics/Mediums/frauds Cancer And just where am I on that list?! When a guy works this hard, he expects a little credit! I now unreasonably hate the following: fowlsound
delphi_ote Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 5,994

10th November 2005, 08:30 PM	#495
Ducky Guest Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 11,933	Originally Posted by delphi_ote And just where am I on that list?! When a guy works this hard, he expects a little credit! I now unreasonably hate the following: fowlsound You were included with "mushrooms."
Ducky Guest Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 11,933

10th November 2005, 08:31 PM	#496
KingMerv00 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 14,462	Originally Posted by Mojo Where does the effective removal of the old school leave the case? If the plaintiffs win, the new board will presumably not want to appeal the decision. The new school board is supposedly on record saying they will not appeal a ruling against the old school board. The old board members have no power. Even if the plaintiffs lose, the newly elected board members will most likely reverse Pandas vote. Quote: Where does this leave the case as a precedent? What other courts is Judge Jones's decision binding on? It would be persuasive only. Other district courts wouldn't be bound but would be encouraged to follow precedent. Quote: Ideally this would have gone all the way up to the SC and set a proper precedent, binding on all courts in the US. Normally you can't go directly to the SCOTUS. It is especially weird if you just won your case.

10th November 2005, 08:37 PM	#497
tsg Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 6,771	Originally Posted by thatguywhojuggles Edit to add: I thought the whole thing in Dover was about science, not religion. Is Robertson suggesting that there was a religious motivation behind the 8 people voted out? It was about teaching religion in a public school. There's nothing in the Constitution preventing a Board of Education from teaching bad science. There is against teaching religion.
tsg Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 6,771	__________________ Being offended by someone questioning your beliefs is a sign that you should be questioning them. In the beginning there was nothing. And the Lord said "Let There Be Light!" And still there was nothing, but at least now you could see it.

10th November 2005, 09:07 PM	#498
delphi_ote Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 5,994	Originally Posted by BillHoyt Exactly. I think that comment is quite interesting and very suggestive of a creationist agenda. At the very least, it is suggestive of a clueless journal editor. Not clueless, no. He has a creationist agenda, plain as day. You'll find his name (along with several other familiar names) on this list: http://www.iscid.org/fellows.php He most certainly appears to have abused his position: http://evolutionblog.blogspot.com/20...g-replies.html His duplicity and persecution routine make me ill.
delphi_ote Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 5,994

11th November 2005, 03:59 AM	#499
MRWiffen Student Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 43	I found this article this morning bushwatch.net/uhler.htm (still to new to post proper links. Quote: Who politicized the Kansas Board of Education and the recently ousted board members at Dover Area High School in Pennsylvania? Conservative zealots; some of whom have even admitted to not understanding intelligent design—and who certainly do not understand what constitutes genuine science. The site is very left wing, I would change conservative to religious, with that change it does still make it's point.
MRWiffen Student Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 43

11th November 2005, 04:13 AM	#500
CFLarsen Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 42,371	bushwatch.net? That sounds positively like a porn site. ........ Yep. Political porn.

11th November 2005, 09:04 AM	#501
DavidJames Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Front Range, CO Posts: 10,493	Originally Posted by MRWiffen The site is very left wing, I would change conservative to religious, with that change it does still make it's point. Or more accurately, Republican
	__________________ For 15 years I never put anyone on ignore. I felt it important to see everyone's view point. Finally I realized the value of some views can be measured in negative terms and were personally destructive.

11th November 2005, 09:25 AM	#502
catbasket Graduate Poster Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,478	Ok, so it turns out that Sternberg (poor little victim of all those nasty scientists) is a Fellow of the International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design ... along with Behe, Dembski and others whose names you will probably recognise. Barbara Bradley Hagerty (author of the NPR story) is the NPR's religion correspondent and turns out to be a member of the World Journalism Institute Quote: Have you heard of the "World Journalism Institute"? Probably not. It's an organization of journalists committed to helping members "accurately" report "the work of God in today's world." In other words, they are committed to reporting events from a conservative, evangelical Christian perspective. What was that again about the "liberal media elite" and how the NPR is a bastion of "liberal news coverage" that fails to give adequate consideration to conservatives - especially to conservative religion? One of the members of the WJI is Barbara Bradley Hagerty, NPR's religion correspondent. Curious. Quote taken from - http://atheism.about.com/b/a/2004_03.htm?iam=dpile_100 (ETA - the post marked 09:00) Explains a lot methinks.

11th November 2005, 09:46 AM	#503
Melendwyr Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 2,064	I think it's time to start writing letters to NPR.
Melendwyr Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 2,064

11th November 2005, 10:43 AM	#504
Eos of the Eons Mad Scientist Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 13,749	http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9995578/ Quote: Conservative Christian televangelist Pat Robertson told citizens of a Pennsylvania town that they had rejected God by voting their school board out of office for supporting “intelligent design” and warned them Thursday not to be surprised if disaster struck. cough I thought ID "was science" cough So, here we have IDiots contradicting themselves again. ID is science they try to tell us. Then when they get mad, they forget their little mantra. Oh, and somehow natural disasters are punishments for us puny mortals by this "loving god".
	__________________ Motion affecting a measuring device does not affect what is actually being measured, except to inaccurately measure it. the immaterial world doesn't matter, cause it ain't matter-Jeff Corey my karma ran over my dogma-vbloke The Lateral Truth: An Apostate's Bible Stories by Rebecca Bradley, read it!

11th November 2005, 10:54 AM	#505
delphi_ote Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 5,994	Originally Posted by Melendwyr I think it's time to start writing letters to NPR. Make sure you read my second link there if you're steamed. It'll put you into the red. Quote: As managing editor it was my prerogative to choose the editor who would work directly on the paper, and as I was best qualified among the editors I chose myself...
delphi_ote Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 5,994

11th November 2005, 11:24 AM	#506
fishbob Seasonally Disaffected Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Chilly Undieville Posts: 7,314	Originally Posted by KingMerv00 %&#@! You know, of all of the IDers I think Behe bothers me the most. Unlike alot of them **cough HOVIND cough** the man has a real scientific education yet the scientific method is lost on him. I read somewhere, I think in the Dover trial transcripts, that Behe has sold more than 400,000 copies of his Black Box book. Therefore ID = serious financial gain. The ID leaders all seem to be quite well off.
	__________________ "When you believe in things you don't understand, then you suffer . . . " - Stevie Wonder. "It looks like the saddest, most crookedest candy corn in an otherwise normal bag of candy corns." Stormy Daniels I hate bigots.

11th November 2005, 12:04 PM	#507
Melendwyr Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 2,064	I had wondered why the NPR stories kept referring to the controversy over "the origins of life". Now I know: NPR's religion correspondent is a member of an organization specifically dedicated to spreading Christian Fundamentalism through the mass media. Expecting a religion correspondent to lack religious opinions is unreasonable, but a certain amount of dispassionate objectivity is called for. How is actively trying to promulgate the "Christian viewpoint" conducive to that requirement?!
Melendwyr Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 2,064

11th November 2005, 12:56 PM	#508
KingMerv00 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 14,462	Originally Posted by fishbob I read somewhere, I think in the Dover trial transcripts, that Behe has sold more than 400,000 copies of his Black Box book. Therefore ID = serious financial gain. The ID leaders all seem to be quite well off. Are you suggesting that he doesn't believe what he is saying? Behe is in it for the bling?

11th November 2005, 01:56 PM	#509
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 34,264	Originally Posted by KingMerv00 Are you suggesting that he doesn't believe what he is saying? Behe is in it for the bling? You don't get the bling just teaching at a university... eta: I'm so white.
	__________________ "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.

11th November 2005, 02:24 PM	#510
tsg Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 6,771	Originally Posted by KingMerv00 Are you suggesting that he doesn't believe what he is saying? Behe is in it for the bling? If by "bling" you are including "power", yes, absolutely. The Discovery Institute wants nothing less than a complete theocratic state with themselves as the head.
tsg Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 6,771	__________________ Being offended by someone questioning your beliefs is a sign that you should be questioning them. In the beginning there was nothing. And the Lord said "Let There Be Light!" And still there was nothing, but at least now you could see it.

11th November 2005, 02:42 PM	#511
delphi_ote Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 5,994	Originally Posted by tsg The Discovery Institute wants nothing less than a complete theocratic state with themselves as the head. If I hadn't read them saying essentially just that myself, you'd sound like a conspiracy nut. And just to go back over our recent conversation topics, we've been discussing a journal editor that acted questionably in order to push through a flawed intelligent design article because he sympathized with their cause, and we've also been discussing a journalist who covered the journal editor's story in an biased way because she also sympathizes with the intelligent design cause. Both are members of religious organizations that publicly endorse intelligent design. Both actions were in some way furthered by government actions and political appointments. The organizations these folks belong to are funded by and allied with fundamentalist religious groups. All involved have the same goal: keeping unpleasant scientific facts from a generation of children. Why do people invent conspiracy theories? I find reality has enough intrigue...
delphi_ote Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 5,994

11th November 2005, 03:41 PM	#512
rjh01 Gentleman of leisure Tagger Join Date: May 2005 Location: Flying around in the sky Posts: 28,145	Will the trial make a good movie?

11th November 2005, 04:00 PM	#513
Dragon Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 1,639	Originally Posted by rjh01 Will the trial make a good movie? Working title -"Inhibit the Mind". Thank you, I'm here all week.
Dragon Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 1,639

11th November 2005, 04:38 PM	#514
tsg Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 6,771	ETA: I misread your post (I thought you were accusing me of being a conspiracy nut), but I'll leave it anyway since I think it's important for people to know exactly where ID is coming from and so I can back up my own claim. Originally Posted by delphi_ote If I hadn't read them saying essentially just that myself, you'd sound like a conspiracy nut. [...] Why do people invent conspiracy theories? I find reality has enough intrigue... Don't take my word for it. They've said so themselves. Look here and make up your own mind. A few choice quotes: Quote: Discovery Institute's Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture seeks nothing less than the overthrow of materialism and its cultural legacies. From their "Five Year Strategic Plan Summary": Quote: The social consequences of materialism have been devastating. As symptoms, those consequences are certainly worth treating. However, we are convinced that in order to defeat materialism, we must cut it off at its source. That source is scientific materialism. This is precisely our strategy. [...] Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions. From their "Governing Goals": Quote: To defeat scientific materialism and its destructive moral, cultural and political legacies. [emphasis mine] And from their "Twenty Year Goals" Quote: To see design theory permeate our religious, cultural, moral and political life. [emphasis mine] And this gem from their "Five Year Objectives": Quote: Design becomes a key concept in the social sciences Legal reform movements base legislative proposals on design theory. [emphasis mine] Pay particular attention to that last one. They want laws to be based on Intelligent Design, a religious view, for which they are the primary source of "research" . That is a theocratic state with them in control. This is no conspiracy theory, these are their own words.
tsg Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 6,771	__________________ Being offended by someone questioning your beliefs is a sign that you should be questioning them. In the beginning there was nothing. And the Lord said "Let There Be Light!" And still there was nothing, but at least now you could see it.

12th November 2005, 07:28 AM	#515
JamesM Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 1,821	Originally Posted by bighairygoat Ok, so it turns out that Sternberg (poor little victim of all those nasty scientists) is a Fellow of the International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design ... along with Behe, Dembski and others whose names you will probably recognise. what is the ISCID? Does it have an avowedly anti-evolutionary or pro-ID agenda?
JamesM Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 1,821