|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 3939 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Significance of the Dover Decision | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trixie Member (Idle past 3733 days) Posts: 1011 From: Edinburgh Joined: |
If you could be bothered to actually read even a smidgeon of the judgement and the judge's description of how the Lemon test applies, you might start to see what is so unique about Dover. It may have been a District Court but the jude ruled on two importnt aspects. He ruled that Pennsylvania State constitiution had been breached as well as the US Constitution.
You say that the US constitution wasnot breached so show us exactly where Jones misapplied lemon. Lemon is relevant until it is overturned. Since it hasn't been overturned as yet, your insistence that it is irrelevant is just so much uninformed handwaving, Make your case, show us what's wrong with Lemon, show us where the judge misapplied Lemon. if all else fails you could always (again) declare this off topic and ask me to start another thread. I will not be diverted. Provide evidence of your assertion, because until you do all you capable of is making unsupported assertions from a position of self-proclaimed and wilful ignorance. I say wilful because you refuse even to read parts of the transcript, even when links have been provided. Before you say anything - it is on topic and will stay in this thread unless an admin deems that supporting your assertions that Dover has no significance because it is wrong, is off topic. I suggest that in a topic with the title "The Significance of the Dover Decision", providing evidence for your position that it has no significance is very much on topic, especially when you declare it has no significance because it is wrong. That means provide evidence that it is wrong. I wonder how many different ways I have to say this?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22500 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Hi Randman,
You don't really seem too interested in discussing the significance of the Dover decision, but if I could slip into admin mode for just a bit to comment on one thing:
randman writes: Percy writes: It may be the author's opinion that his research supports ID, but how are scientists going to know this if he only points it out at ID websites instead of in the paper itself? Imo, this argument is disingenious. I wouldn't recommend making these kinds of characterizations. Nor accusations of witchhunts and persecution. These kinds of behaviors represent your modus operandi, it's how you draw threads into fractious discord, and they won't be permitted anymore. I said a number of things specific to Dover, and if you'd care to comment on any of them I'd be happy to respond. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4927 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
It's not an extraordinary claim. In fact, the more extraordinary claim is Darwinism and the evidence isn't there.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4042 Joined: Member Rating: 7.7 |
It's not an extraordinary claim. In fact, the more extraordinary claim is Darwinism and the evidence isn't there. Uh huh. Your incredulity or personal belief is irrelevant. There are 200 years worth of scientific research and evidence in favor of Evolution, including direct observation of the process. The only evidence brought forward for ID is incredulity and faith. Which is why it was struck down at the Dover trial - it's religion in a poor disguise, which cannot be taught in schools, and cdesign proponentists are not actually doing any science. Until they start bringing extraordinary evidence to the table to back up their extraordinary claims (and violating parsimony with an additional entity in the form of a "designer" with no evidence of such an entity is most definitely an extraordinary claim), cdesign proponentists will continue to be mocked in scientific circles, and their BS will not enter classrooms. When you know you're going to wake up in three days, dying is not a sacrifice. It's a painful inconvenience.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22500 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
randman writes: It's not an extraordinary claim. In fact, the more extraordinary claim is Darwinism and the evidence isn't there. Aside from the question of whether you're on-topic, can't this reply be summarized as, "Am not, you are!"? Will you be addressing the topic anytime soon? --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jazzns Member (Idle past 3939 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: |
Randman has already said that he hasn't read the transcripts so seemingly cannot discuss this with more than superficial depth.
Who else has read the transcripts and decision? Common people! This is the Scopes trial of our day! Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2134 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
quote:With this statement you demonstrate that you are willing to ignore any evidence that opposes your religious belief; you show that you are not a debater but an unreasoning zealot, blindly clinging to a particular belief and unwilling to even admit that there is evidence to the contrary. Have you been into a science library? The journals alone take up floors! You claim there is no evidence, but have you read any of those journals? Here is a link to a current issue of Journal of Human Evolution (one of literally hundreds of journals within which the evidence is accumulating):
Journal of Human Evolution, Volume 54, Issue 1, Pages 1-168 (January 2008) By the way, that link will also provide the table of contents for a lot of back issues. You can find such interesting titles as "Biomechanics of phalangeal curvature" and "Evidence of amelogenesis imperfecta in an early African Homo erectus" -- and thousands of other articles. And that is just one journal out of hundreds. What do you call that, chopped liver? Or do you prefer to just sit there and try to wish it all away? This is the evidence ID only wishes it had; when the Dover trial came along ID found itself holding an empty sack.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rahvin Member Posts: 4042 Joined: Member Rating: 7.7 |
This is the evidence ID only wishes it had; when the Dover trial came along ID found itself holding an empty sack. The sack wasn't empty. It was what they were using to hide their Bible. Which is why they lost, badly. When you know you're going to wake up in three days, dying is not a sacrifice. It's a painful inconvenience.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trixie Member (Idle past 3733 days) Posts: 1011 From: Edinburgh Joined: |
I'd appreciate a considered and on-topic reply to my post number 136 above. Either defend your assertions or retract them. If you retract them, you have to stop making them. You choose, the ball's firmly in your court.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3075 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
which is why it was struck down at the Dover trial - it's religion in a poor disguise, which cannot be taught in schools The Darwinian judge ruled as expected. Ray
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1282 days) Posts: 3509 Joined: |
The Darwinian judge ruled as expected. Not entirely true. Some folks were worried that the Bush appointee might not be inclined to follow the law. Fortunately, their worries proved unfounded. The creo witnesses, however, performed as expected, lying, evading, dissembling, the very cream of christian hypocrisy that has come to exemplify most creo apologia. Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
FliesOnly Member (Idle past 4173 days) Posts: 797 From: Michigan Joined: |
Jazzns writes: Well, I didnt want to get dragged into a "discussion" with randman, so I have only trolled on this thread...but to answer your question: Who else has read the transcripts and decision? Common people! This is the Scopes trial of our day! I have read the transcripts at least a couple of times and the judges ruling more than that (I even have a copy of it somewhere here in my office). I followed the trial on a daily basis. I loved it. Oddly, I found myself rather sad and lonely when it was over.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 312 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
natural selection is not exclusive evidence of Darwinian evolution, nor imo is it evidence at all since it works against increasing genetic diversity and so against macroevolution. So, you've made over 5700 posts on this forum and you still haven't found out what evolution is or how it works. I suggest that either you read a basic biology textbook or that you take up a less intellectually demanding hobby, such as basketweaving.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
waqasf  Inactive Member |
spam deleted
Edited by AdminModulous, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minnemooseus Member Posts: 3945 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
First posted by me elsewhere.
----- Taken to School: An Interview with the Honorable Judge John E. Jones, III Taken to School: An Interview with the Honorable Judge John E. Jones, III | PLOS Genetics ----- I was alerted to this by Carol at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/evolutionversuscreationism/ (the precursor of ). Even if you never post there, it may well be worth being a member just to get Carol's tidbits. Just be sure you're set up to receive the messages via e-mail. From Carol's message there:
quote: Moose
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024