I make myself nervous sometimes.
I have been accused of worse.
The worldview that pervades these discussions is of interest here. I suspect that in many cases people are accused of not understanding ID arguments simply because they don’t accept them as true. When people start with the conclusion and have strong emotions tied to that conclusion being true it can cloud their judgement as to the quality of the arguments supporting that conclusion. This is probably best seen in the groups that support ID.
With evolution there is acceptance across cultures, religions, worldviews, and nations. With ID, the people who support this movement are almost entirely christian, and they often are battling culture wars as part of that movement. Forums like these are about the only place you can find ID discussed because ID isn’t being brought to the scientific community. Evolution is.
Scientists usually have a pretty good bovine excrement detector, and the ID movement pegs that detector.
This is very insightful and has been my feeling for years now.
What are you thinking about this @colewd?
I am not sure this is accurate. There are a large number of muslim ID advocates.
Correction noted. The larger point is that ID is strongly tied to religious apologetics.
- I do not report to the “principles” - don’t you mean ‘principals’?
- I am an independent thinker plenty educated and with working experience in many of the fields discussed.
- My views are at times different than those of ID proponents (as in “microevolution”, “irreducible complexity”, “specified complexity”).
- I am not so much arguing in favor of ID as I am arguing against the pseudoscience of Darwinist “evolution” (including its ‘neo’ and ‘neo’s neo’) and only with logic, observational, and in general scientific arguments.
- Sorry to say this, but if you’re incapable of winning a scientific argument, you will have to ban me in an admission of defeat as did Biologos.
- And stop grouping people together in “you people” - it only reflects badly on you.
That is right, thanks .
None of this is verifiable or visible. For this to mean anything you have to unmask yourself. Until then, it means nothing.
Couldn’t tell at all from what you write. Why not go argue with them about what you disagree with?
Darwinism has already been falsified. You missed the party by about 60 years. You will enjoy reading up on Haldane and Kimura’s work.
I’m not trying to win a scientific argument with you.
No one in science cares who “wins” on forums in the internet with anonymous polemicists. I’m not engaging your arguments.
- Can’t do.
- I do.
- You already said that. And you are the only one claiming it.
- Then don’t.
I am YEC but know iD is the most important intellectual scientific revolution in origin subjects that has happened, well ever. thats why its famous and always but always topic of conversation and why forums like this exist.
it was the energy, intellect, success of iD that was a game changer. IT helps YEC too. We tag along on the wave.
biology is intuitive?! HMMM. i don’t agree. Its complicated. ,ath etc are not. they are simple in framework. If they work/fail its right away shown/proved.
In biology its difficult to figure it out. In origin biology its almost impossible to prove past and gone processes and results.
in fact I see origin biology as just about looking at the last results and guessing how it got there.
Thats why its so open to error. its a study in invisible things. Physics is almost invisible but not as much. They celebrate every discovery EVER in physics as a intellectual cut above.
Biology is the most complicated and its source the most brilliant. God or happanchance.
ID is doing fine in dismissing old time evolutionism.
ITS evolutionism that needs to hustle to make its dying case.
It doesn’t matter about numbers. Those in their ranks are just memorizers unrelated to revolutions.
The action really iS on these forums. In the future kids will do projects and use these forums in documentating either the demise of evolutionism/rejection of a creator in nature or the defeat of ID/YEC.
In our time.
Other than the Atheist participants here… can you name a single Christian Neo-Darwinism on this forum?
I don’t think you can.
Yep… such a game-changer, they managed to create a Supreme Court decision contradicting the ID position.
I think it needs to spread its wings beyond the discovery institute and possibly do what you are trying which is to move the argument into theology/philosophy discussions.
Then show us all of those revolutionary peer reviewed papers containing original scientific research.
I wholeheartedly agree with this. Inherent in the ID argument is that ID isn’t true unless it is scientific. By struggling so hard to make ID into a scientific theory it creates the appearance that philosophical and religious beliefs are not enough, that they are somehow inferior to scientific theories. This also creates the situation where Christians are led to believe that if evolution is true then God doesn’t exist.
It is a game changing in intellectual investigation of origins.
a Supreme court decision contradicting iD is a absurdity of judicial legitimacy.
This is a ID/YEC world today where before it was a evolution/some religious opposition world.
The game has changed and this forums existence documents it.
sure it does.
What world do you live in? I live in an increasingly secular scientific world where Christianity is fading away generationally.
ID/YEC is all scientific research. YES is ORGANIZED biblical creationism. iD is about seeing a creator fingerprints in nature and some opposition to evolutionism depending on the thinker.
Peer reviewed papers are not the foundation of modern evolutionism. In sum or part.
Such things are always about very specific points. ID/YEC deals with great concepts, and great evidences dealing with same.
Indeed the famous discussions are the peer review. perr reiew is a old school idea of a few people checking a few people in a world of a few people.
These subjects are reviewed intellectually by a great perrage and great common.
Come folks. ID/YEC is the talk of the town and evolutionism is uniquely a subject under great opposition in science. Even politicians must , often, answer for it.
In Canada university textbooks address with great passion. To dismiss, aye, but no other subjects are likewise treated as such.
This is a revolution in process. A American one or a Russian one. Right or wrong but the origin world is changing. Surely evolutionists here are here because of a important threat worthy to spend their time on.
It was not this way before the 1990’s or so.
This is a rather dubious claim. ID/YEC is pseudoscience to me.