| Author |
Message |
Mike Lyle
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 4:30 am
Post subject: Re: Pennsylvania disses the Darwin dissers |
|
|
Bob wrote:
[...]
| Quote: | so far. All analogies break down at some point. The existence of an
appendix does not mean that it was intelegently designed. In
contrast, it can be explained, or is at leadst consistent with, by
the current theories of evolition.
|
So, appendix-wise, why don't we hear a bit more about _un_intelligent
design? Moronic design, even. By the limited means the intelligent
designer gave me, he looks positively insane. Perhaps the way to go
against intelligent design is not evolution, but to show how it
signally failed in the objectives declared in the Holy Books. It's a
tough call to prove that a ruptured appendix is all down to
divinely-granted Free Will.
Pass me that rattlesnake, will you?
--
Mike.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jerry_friedman@yahoo.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 5:07 am
Post subject: Re: Pennsylvania disses the Darwin dissers |
|
|
Mike Lyle wrote:
| Quote: | Bob wrote:
[...]
so far. All analogies break down at some point. The existence of an
appendix does not mean that it was intelegently designed. In
contrast, it can be explained, or is at leadst consistent with, by
the current theories of evolition.
So, appendix-wise, why don't we hear a bit more about _un_intelligent
design? Moronic design, even. By the limited means the intelligent
designer gave me, he looks positively insane. Perhaps the way to go
against intelligent design is not evolution, but to show how it
signally failed in the objectives declared in the Holy Books. It's a
tough call to prove that a ruptured appendix is all down to
divinely-granted Free Will.
|
This seems like a good place to wonder whether the religious
fundamentalists who support "intelligent design" know that it's
compatible with our being descended from apes. And to point out that I
can't imagine a teacher, after even a few days of classroom experience,
denying that we're descended from apes.
| Quote: | Pass me that rattlesnake, will you?
|
Sorry, my eyelash mites are using it.
--
Jerry Friedman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike Lyle
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 5:21 am
Post subject: Re: Pennsylvania disses the Darwin dissers |
|
|
jerry_friedman@yahoo.com wrote:
| Quote: | Mike Lyle wrote:
[...]
Pass me that rattlesnake, will you?
Sorry, my eyelash mites are using it.
|
Goddam Eyelashmites, Edomites, Jebusites, Hivites! Always getting in
the way of the Lord's work! If the hosts of Midian don't get them,
then drown 'em in the fishpools of Heshbon, I say, and good riddance!
--
Mike.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Stanton
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 6:44 am
Post subject: Re: Pennsylvania disses the Darwin dissers |
|
|
On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 11:48:47 -0800, "Bill Bonde ('by a commodius vicus
of recirculation')" <John.Methuen@magersfontein.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | Bob wrote:
Armond Perretta wrote:
One of the Kansas teachers who claims to be a supporter of introducing
"intelligent design" into the curriculum is, as I write, being
interviewed on NPR. He stated: "Evolution is only a theory. It hasn't
been proved."
My reply to that bit of nonsense is: Newton's and Einstein's theories of
Gravity are also "only" theories but that doesn't cause us to float off
into space.
But a lot of the problem with both arguments is that they conflate
multiple lay and scientific meanings for the single word, "theory". We
didn't need a theory of gravity not to float off into Space, and even
with one some of us still seem to.
Also -- if the universe is so perfect or so complicated that it must have
been designed by an "intellegence", who or what designed the intellegent
designer?
This is a retort that is used so often you'd think it proved something.
Science at its fringes ends up in metaphysics and faith and just saying
that it cannot deal with that issue scientifically. What is the universe
expanding into? What existed before the universe? What are quarks made
of? What are strings made of? Just because you cannot tell me who
designed the designer doesn't mean there wasn't a designer. Or look at
it another way, does the fact that your Chrysler was intelligently
designed, more or less, mean that Chrysler engineers must too have been
designed?
|
One wonders how excepting you would be of an "intellgent designer" who
placed the earth on the backs of an infinite tower of turtles.
Or one who placed the human happy fun places inauspicously near the
sewer works or designed the human gestation unit to be perfect for
creatures that walk on all fours rather than bipeds. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Lieblich
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 7:33 am
Post subject: Re: Pennsylvania disses the Darwin dissers |
|
|
Bob wrote:
[ ... ]
| Quote: | I'll grant you that the existence of a Chrysler strongly hints that
it was (intelegently) designed. But "science by analogy" can only go so
far. All analogies break down at some point. The existence of an appendix
does not mean that it was intelegently designed. In contrast, it can be
explained, or is at leadst consistent with, by the current theories of
evolition.
|
I know spelling flames are non-U, but after about a half-dozen or more
iterations of variants of "intellegent," I think it's time to say
something. So here is that something:
It's "INTELLIGENT", dammit.
Please take note.
Thank you.
--
Bob Lieblich
And it's "supersede", dammit |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 8:06 am
Post subject: Re: Pennsylvania disses the Darwin dissers |
|
|
On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 19:33:50 -0500, Robert Lieblich wrote:
| Quote: |
It's "INTELLIGENT", dammit.
Please take note.
|
Got it. I've grown lazy and depend on a spell-checker but my mail client
doesn't make it easy to invoke one.
You are welcome. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mark Brader
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 8:06 am
Post subject: Re: Pennsylvania disses the Darwin dissers |
|
|
John Stanton writes:
| Quote: | One wonders how excepting you would be ...
|
(Sigh)
--
Mark Brader "Poor spelling does not prove poor knowledge,
Toronto but is fatal to the argument by intimidation."
msb@vex.net -- Gene Ward Smith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John Stanton
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 8:07 am
Post subject: Re: Pennsylvania disses the Darwin dissers |
|
|
On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 11:48:47 -0800, "Bill Bonde ('by a commodius vicus
of recirculation')" <John.Methuen@magersfontein.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | This is a retort that is used so often you'd think it proved something.
Science at its fringes ends up in metaphysics and faith and just saying
that it cannot deal with that issue scientifically.
|
Fine. Just don't call it "creation science". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Lieblich
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 8:07 am
Post subject: Re: Pennsylvania disses the Darwin dissers |
|
|
John Stanton wrote:
| Quote: |
On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 11:48:47 -0800, "Bill Bonde ('by a commodius vicus
of recirculation')" <John.Methuen@magersfontein.co.uk> wrote:
This is a retort that is used so often you'd think it proved something.
Science at its fringes ends up in metaphysics and faith and just saying
that it cannot deal with that issue scientifically.
Fine. Just don't call it "creation science".
|
"Creation science" is a perfectly legitimate metaphorical English
phrase, much like "guinea pig" or "pig latin."
--
Bob Lieblich
Oink |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
R H Draney
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 2:26 pm
Post subject: Re: Pennsylvania disses the Darwin dissers |
|
|
Mark Brader filted:
| Quote: |
John Stanton writes:
One wonders how excepting you would be ...
(Sigh)
|
Is that an "OY!" with the air let out of it?...r |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jim Lawton
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 2:52 pm
Post subject: Re: Pennsylvania disses the Darwin dissers |
|
|
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 01:23:45 GMT, Bob <bob@dont.spam.me> wrote:
| Quote: | On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 19:33:50 -0500, Robert Lieblich wrote:
It's "INTELLIGENT", dammit.
Please take note.
Got it. I've grown lazy and depend on a spell-checker but my mail client
doesn't make it easy to invoke one.
I know - you need a pentagram and a sacrificial goat, and even then it's the |
very devil to use.
--
Jim
the Yorkshire polymoth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jim Lawton
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 2:56 pm
Post subject: Re: Pennsylvania disses the Darwin dissers |
|
|
On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:44:06 -0800, John Stanton
<stantonhome@example.com.invalid> wrote:
| Quote: | On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 11:48:47 -0800, "Bill Bonde ('by a commodius vicus
of recirculation')" <John.Methuen@magersfontein.co.uk> wrote:
One wonders how excepting you would be of an "intellgent designer" who
placed the earth on the backs of an infinite tower of turtles.
|
I think he would make an absolute exception.
--
Jim
the Yorkshire polymoth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Will
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Lieblich
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 6:49 pm
Post subject: Re: Pennsylvania disses the Darwin dissers |
|
|
Will wrote:
Hey -- who ya gonna believe: a loyal AUE ranter or some dictionary
thing?
--
Bob Lieblich
Jess funnin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Evan Kirshenbaum
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 11:27 pm
Post subject: Re: Pennsylvania disses the Darwin dissers |
|
|
Robert Lieblich <robert.lieblich@verizon.net> writes:
| Quote: | Bob wrote:
I'll grant you that the existence of a Chrysler strongly hints that
it was (intelegently) designed. But "science by analogy" can only
go so far. All analogies break down at some point. The existence of
an appendix does not mean that it was intelegently designed. In
contrast, it can be explained, or is at leadst consistent with, by
the current theories of evolition.
I know spelling flames are non-U, but after about a half-dozen or
more iterations of variants of "intellegent," I think it's time to
say something. So here is that something:
It's "INTELLIGENT", dammit.
Please take note.
|
One of the best examples of Skitt's law I've seen concerned this very
word and appeared in rec.arts.sf.tv in 2001:
| Quote: | I do not, I am very smart intellegent adult,
|
Your claim might have more credibility if you hadn't mispelled
"inteligent"
--
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |"The Dynamics of Interbeing and
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |Monological Imperatives in 'Dick
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |and Jane' : A Study in Psychic
|Transrelational Modes."
kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com | Calvin
(650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in