Search results

Stu: I never said it wasn't. What I dispute is that evolution is an entirely non-teleological process. The assumption of ateleology is based on philosophical materialism not science.

Stu: If it's scientific to argue against design then it's scientific to argue for design.

Stu: Do you agree that children are being taught that evolution is a purposeless process?

Stu: Do you deny that Darwinian evolution is a purposeless process? Are you claiming that school children are not being told the truth about evolution?

Stu said: Not accidental/coincidental evolution but rather evolution by design.

My "tactic" is to refute whatever bogus arguments the ID critics bring against ID. That's been my "tactic" from the beginning. Are you just now noticing it?

James Bond 3rd: This thread has no goalpost. Witness the 15 pages devoted to Buddhism. I'm willing to debate anything related to the ID versus Blind Watchmaker topic.

James Bond 3rd: Well, you wanted to debate Buddhism. There are many facets to the ID versus Blind Watchmaking debate. I'm not locked into only debating one aspect of this topic. I was responding to 2 cents that claimed that ID is a faith-driven inquiry. In endeavoring to rebut that...

Stephen Meyer says:

2 Cents said: ID is an empirically-driven inquiry. There are things in nature that look designed even to an atheist like Richard Dawkins. He says: There are only two possibilities here. Either what looks like design in nature is real or it is an illusion. According to Richard...

Stu said: I replied to James Bond 3rd that the FSM is according to its originator a supernatural entity and I don't think discussions concerning the supernatural belong in the science classroom. ID has nothing to do with the supernatural.

Stu said: Yes, it does. Thanks. What was being discused when this all came up was the comments of Roman Catholic Cardinal Cristoph Schoenborn of Vienna that sharply criticized efforts in America to prevent students from learning about the debate over Darwin’s theory. I don't know if ID...

TraderNik said: I hereby challenge any ID critic to tell me what Buddhism has to do with ID.

ZZZzzz said: And bringing up Buddhism is suppose to show that ID is denominational?

ZZZzzz said: I agree, but what I'm trying to pin down is why the ID critics here seem to think that Buddhism refutes your claim. When I ask them what their point is they say to ask you. So, I'm asking you. What does Buddhism have to do with ID? Maybe you understand the point they are trying...

Okay, I've lost track of why Buddhism has been brought into the debate over ID. For the sake of argument let's say that Buddhism is incompatible with ID. So what?

Here is an article by Tom Armstrong from a Buddhist group political blog. He has been the guru behind Zen Unbound since its inception in 1998. Currently, he is the reporter for Blogmandu, a Buddhist metablog. Let us welcome the teaching of Intelligent Design Writted by Tom Armstrong...

Academic Freedom Bill Introduced into New Mexico Legislature By Casey Luskin on January 29, 2007 New Mexico State Senator Steve Komadina has introduced a bill into the New Mexico Senate which would protect the academic freedom of teachers to discuss scientific strengths and weaknesses of...

James Bond: According to Wikipedia: ID doesn't posit a supernatural creator and leading ID proponents are not calling for ID theory to be taught in science classrooms.

Settle Down: It's not wrong. It's just not based on facts. by Logan Gage on January 30, 2007 NPR’s Morning Edition recently had a story on Northwestern High school in Baltimore. Students there have been struggling to pass the state science test. The interesting part of this story is...