More Intelligent Design - Page 2

Cyclefrance · 10-29-2005, 04:14 AM

Not bad - actually bloody good. Would have liked some sausages though. Maybe a bit on more on the cullinary side. You know, forbidden fruit turning into mum's apple pie sort of thing and seven exciting ways to serve brassicas, or an expalanation for the creation of Jamie Oliver.

I know...., never satisfied.....

Urbane Guerrilla · 11-02-2005, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaguar

Democracy, you get the government you deserve. Or school board as the case may be.

Twain also had a memorable quote about school boards, something like "First, He created idiots for practice. Then, He created school boards." Twain died in 1910 -- have we a chronic problem here?

Quote:

. . . and seven exciting ways to serve brassicas . . .

Caesar, in an Astérix book: "Oh, stuff your Brassica olerata capitata!!!" The original French was perhaps a trifle more delicate: "Sais-tu où tu peux le mettre, ce brassica?!" Probably don't have either exactly, but that's the sense.

See the Recipe thread in Food & Drink for exciting way Number One, first post in the thread... something simpler is steam it well and drizzle with olive oil, salt and pepper. Excitingness there probably depends on the quality of the olive oil.

Amnesiac42 · 11-03-2005, 11:50 PM

i've thought from the beginning of this "intelligent design" business that it's pretty obiovus it's just a legalistic way of saying "God". the problem, of course, is that proponents of the ID theory want it taught in place of evolution, because they say that evoilution is only a theory and is therfor not to be taught as a truth (to which i agree). but the problem i have with ID is that it also claims to be a theory. if it claimed to be a truism, then that opens up a shitstorm of debate, which at first it did, imagine that. it's obivious that ID is just a way to get creationism taught instead of evolution. i've stated something similar to this in another post already, but i'll say it again: religion is not truth. it is faith. if something is true, then there is no need to have faith in it. i have no problems with faith, i have faith too. but parading your theological beliefs (note they are beliefs) around to be truisms is rediculous. i should also say that i have an easy solution:

we want to educate our children in the world because someday they will inherit it from us. in order for progress to trail on, it is important to provide information and information alone, allowing children to make their own decisions about the world. it is immoral and unethical to brainwash our kids into blindly accepting a shaky theory as a truth, be it scientific or idealogical. instead, education ought to be founded on the idea that we don't know which is correct, and we don't know what the great truth is. so we teach evolution in a philosophy class, for exactly what it is, and we teach creationism in a religion class, for exactly what it is, nothing more. let future generations make up their own minds.

i know most of us have, but you have to break free of something to do it, am i right? it's almost like a chore at first, it feels wrong when parents, teachers, and peers tell you that you are wrong because you are asking questions or deconstructing a problem. let's not burden our children with that chore. instead let's open up the world and all of it's information to them.

i've been drinking wine.

xoxoxoBruce · 11-04-2005, 01:59 AM

All that would accomplish is making their life more complicated and difficult.

Amnesiac42 · 11-04-2005, 08:15 AM

how so?

Happy Monkey · 11-04-2005, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amnesiac42

so we teach evolution in a philosophy class, for exactly what it is,

Evolution isn't philosophy, it's science. A philosophy class could discuss the moral implications of evolution, but the mechanics of evolution are science.

Cyclefrance · 11-04-2005, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Caesar, in an Astérix book: "Oh, stuff your Brassica olerata capitata!!!" The original French was perhaps a trifle more delicate: "Sais-tu où tu peux le mettre, ce brassica?!" Probably don't have either exactly, but that's the sense.

See the Recipe thread in Food & Drink for exciting way Number One, first post in the thread... something simpler is steam it well and drizzle with olive oil, salt and pepper. Excitingness there probably depends on the quality of the olive oil.

I'm getting a bit worried about UG - he seems to be metamorphosing into Gordon Ramsay.....

Amnesiac42 · 11-04-2005, 01:38 PM

evolution as science. well, let me put it this way: i think that adaptation and natural selection are scientific facts, like Stephen Hawking's example of the white and black moths on the paper trees and smoke stacks in a brief history of time. but, evolution is still a little shakey. it's still only a theory, there is little to no evidence. however, i suppose by me saying that one could argue that all physics are not scientific either because there is a lot of theory involved. but anyway, that's why i say philosophy instead of science. and philosoophy could discuss way more than moral implications, philosophy is an all encompassing school of thought. sure the mechanics are scientific, i will agree. but what are these mechanics?

you know, this whole thing boils down to two perspectives trying to explain reality. or rather the origin of reality. we have a theological one and a scientific one, neither of which is really what i would call an explination. i do believe in the big bang, that makes a lot of sense to me.

Happy Monkey · 11-04-2005, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amnesiac42

but, evolution is still a little shakey. it's still only a theory, there is little to no evidence.

No, "theory" is the scientific term for "strongly supported by evidence". There is no word that suggests more certainty than "theory". (If you're curious, the scientific term "law" refers to a theory that can be expressed mathematically. The concept behind the mathematical expression is still "only" a theory.)

Quote:

you know, this whole thing boils down to two perspectives trying to explain reality. or rather the origin of reality. we have a theological one and a scientific one

Right. The scientific one should be taught in science class, and the theological one(s) should be taught in religious institutions, or comparative religion classes, since there are so many of them.

Tonchi · 11-04-2005, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyclefrance

I'm getting a bit worried about UG - he seems to be metamorphosing into Gordon Ramsay.....

You noticed too?? Even a whole bottle of cooking sherry couldn't produce such a personality change. I was beginning to think he sent in a ghost writer whenever he had to visit the head

Urbane Guerrilla · 11-04-2005, 06:40 PM

:p :p Nanner nanner to both of you.

Eating well is living well. Aside from that, I don't look anything like the guy -- I'm bearded, slowly balding, and wear glasses. Like Walt Whitman, I'm vast; I contain multitudes (my forty-inch waistline (maybe shrinking) supports the contention). Unlike Walt, I'm pretty much heterosexual.

Oh, and have nothing to do with cooking sherry. Use sherry you'd enjoy drinking straight rather than that inferior salted stuff -- more flexible and your sherried sauces taste better.

Cyclefrance · 11-04-2005, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

:p :p Nanner nanner to both of you.

Eating well is living well. Aside from that, I don't look anything like the guy -- I'm bearded, slowly balding, and wear glasses.

Oh, and have nothing to do with cooking sherry. Use sherry you'd enjoy drinking straight rather than that inferior salted stuff -- more flexible and your sherried sauces taste better.

This is the trouble you see, you almost have me there with the looks bit, and then you go and wax lyrical in a Ramsayesque way about sherry. Quite confusing. Sorry, I'm still not convinced. I mean this metamorphosing thing, it doesn't just happen in a flash you know. It takes time. Remember the caterpillar is what I say.....

Griff · 11-04-2005, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyclefrance

Neat, just the thing for tequila night.

Urbane Guerrilla · 11-04-2005, 07:01 PM

Cycle: quick, look @ the re-edit. Might clarify.

You've seen a lot of me at daggers drawn, and you've seen me enjoying food and drink. These two have always been around, along with other goodies. It should not cause "character shock" if another facet of a character should from time to time emerge.

xoxoxoBruce · 11-04-2005, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amnesiac42

how so?

Send a buch of teens out into the real world with no knowlege of science and steeped in philosophy?
Well, that will give us a shot at beating out Pakistan in the 7-11 clerk dominance race.

10-29-2005, 04:14 AM	#16
Cyclefrance Pump my ride! Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Deep countryside of Surrey , England Posts: 1,890	Not bad - actually bloody good. Would have liked some sausages though. Maybe a bit on more on the cullinary side. You know, forbidden fruit turning into mum's apple pie sort of thing and seven exciting ways to serve brassicas, or an expalanation for the creation of Jamie Oliver. I know...., never satisfied..... __________________ Always sufficient hills - never sufficient gears

11-04-2005, 01:59 AM	#19
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	All that would accomplish is making their life more complicated and difficult. __________________ The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.

11-04-2005, 06:40 PM	#26
Urbane Guerrilla Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Southern California Posts: 6,674	:p :p Nanner nanner to both of you. Eating well is living well. Aside from that, I don't look anything like the guy -- I'm bearded, slowly balding, and wear glasses. Like Walt Whitman, I'm vast; I contain multitudes (my forty-inch waistline (maybe shrinking) supports the contention). Unlike Walt, I'm pretty much heterosexual. Oh, and have nothing to do with cooking sherry. Use sherry you'd enjoy drinking straight rather than that inferior salted stuff -- more flexible and your sherried sauces taste better. __________________ Wanna stop school shootings? End Gun-Free Zones, of course. Last edited by Urbane Guerrilla; 11-04-2005 at 07:00 PM.

11-04-2005, 07:01 PM	#29
Urbane Guerrilla Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Southern California Posts: 6,674	Cycle: quick, look @ the re-edit. Might clarify. You've seen a lot of me at daggers drawn, and you've seen me enjoying food and drink. These two have always been around, along with other goodies. It should not cause "character shock" if another facet of a character should from time to time emerge. __________________ Wanna stop school shootings? End Gun-Free Zones, of course. Last edited by Urbane Guerrilla; 11-04-2005 at 07:05 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

11-03-2005, 11:50 PM	#18
Amnesiac42 just a guy Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: SC Posts: 20	i've thought from the beginning of this "intelligent design" business that it's pretty obiovus it's just a legalistic way of saying "God". the problem, of course, is that proponents of the ID theory want it taught in place of evolution, because they say that evoilution is only a theory and is therfor not to be taught as a truth (to which i agree). but the problem i have with ID is that it also claims to be a theory. if it claimed to be a truism, then that opens up a shitstorm of debate, which at first it did, imagine that. it's obivious that ID is just a way to get creationism taught instead of evolution. i've stated something similar to this in another post already, but i'll say it again: religion is not truth. it is faith. if something is true, then there is no need to have faith in it. i have no problems with faith, i have faith too. but parading your theological beliefs (note they are beliefs) around to be truisms is rediculous. i should also say that i have an easy solution: we want to educate our children in the world because someday they will inherit it from us. in order for progress to trail on, it is important to provide information and information alone, allowing children to make their own decisions about the world. it is immoral and unethical to brainwash our kids into blindly accepting a shaky theory as a truth, be it scientific or idealogical. instead, education ought to be founded on the idea that we don't know which is correct, and we don't know what the great truth is. so we teach evolution in a philosophy class, for exactly what it is, and we teach creationism in a religion class, for exactly what it is, nothing more. let future generations make up their own minds. i know most of us have, but you have to break free of something to do it, am i right? it's almost like a chore at first, it feels wrong when parents, teachers, and peers tell you that you are wrong because you are asking questions or deconstructing a problem. let's not burden our children with that chore. instead let's open up the world and all of it's information to them. i've been drinking wine.

11-04-2005, 08:15 AM	#20
Amnesiac42 just a guy Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: SC Posts: 20	how so?

11-04-2005, 01:38 PM	#23
Amnesiac42 just a guy Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: SC Posts: 20	evolution as science. well, let me put it this way: i think that adaptation and natural selection are scientific facts, like Stephen Hawking's example of the white and black moths on the paper trees and smoke stacks in a brief history of time. but, evolution is still a little shakey. it's still only a theory, there is little to no evidence. however, i suppose by me saying that one could argue that all physics are not scientific either because there is a lot of theory involved. but anyway, that's why i say philosophy instead of science. and philosoophy could discuss way more than moral implications, philosophy is an all encompassing school of thought. sure the mechanics are scientific, i will agree. but what are these mechanics? you know, this whole thing boils down to two perspectives trying to explain reality. or rather the origin of reality. we have a theological one and a scientific one, neither of which is really what i would call an explination. i do believe in the big bang, that makes a lot of sense to me.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)