Wednesday, December 21, 2005

The Dover Verdict

The Dover verdict came as no surprise to me. In fact, because such a decision would have a wide impact on schools, I predicted that the judge would cower to political correctness and rule exactly the way he did.

I have posted a very interesting article called, The Descent of the Strawman at my message board which provides links to several more. This article really tells it like it is...warts and all. It reiterates what is truly the basis of this controversy. Those who do not want the falsehoods, deceptions and frauds of biological (macro) Evolution exposed in high schools will do anything to disparage, degrade, ridicule and debase the Intelligent Design hypothesis and it's proponents. This excerpt from the article states it well:


"Nevertheless, that’s what happened in Dover, Pennsylvania, and what’s happening now in Kansas. The evolution controversy has dominated the news here for months. Despite the fact that nothing the state Board of Education has done with its standards will change in the slightest what happens in Kansas schoolrooms, the ongoing controversy is giving a solid boost to the state’s “moderate” Republicans and Democrats on a wide range of issues, none of which have anything to do with evolution. The Left believes no other issue has the potential to turn this red state blue, which is why it rages on. It’s allowed the secularists to demean the religiously inclined with impunity — but also laid bare the thoughts of those who viciously revile those who hold those beliefs. The evolution debate makes anyone who touches it look terrible."

The fact is that Intelligent Design doesn't fit into the box that evolutionary biologists want to keep it in. It crosses over into the study of the Cosmos as well. When you read the Starry fight link, you will notice that the discussion between myself and someone with an opposing view immediately shifts downward in direction. Again, as always, this particular opponent's counter-argument resorts to that familiar, tired, worn-out, old, excuse of an argument that when an hypothesis comes along that successfully explains how to avoid identifying just who the designer is (which allows for several possible answers as to "who the designer might be,") opponents want to bring Him (God) back in just for the purpose of having a reason to discredit the hypothesis.

3 comments:

Repack Rider said...

I applaud the judge in the Dover case for resisting the force of Religious Correctness and judging his case based on its merits.

Obviously the defendants did themselves no good by being caught lying under oath, but in fact ID does not meet the minimum standard of a scientific theory, i.e. it is not testable, it is not falsifiable, it makes no predictions, and it does not explain why we see evolution taking place in nature.

Since evolution is observed taking place, there must be an explanation for this observation, and only one has been proposed so far, the Theory of Evolution. Until another comes along, we are choosing from only one theory.

Why do you suppose the defendants, supposedly Christian gentlemen, felt it necessary to lie to the court so blatantly that the judge noted the lies in his opinion? Isn't there a commandment about bearing false witness?

Doug said...

I remember once hearing somebody say "if evolution is a fact, how come there are still monkeys?"

Made sense to me.

Boo said...

Christine- you believe that the essence of the controversy over teaching Intelligent Design in public schools is Paul Mirecki making an ass out of himself?

Doug- the reason there are still monkeys is because they evolved from earlier forms. No evolutionary biologist will tell you that monkeys are humanity's ancestors, unless they're just messing with you.