LGF

more options

  

Advertisement

  

Link address:
Link title:
Description: 
Remaining:

Jindal's College Professor Says, 'Don't Hold Back the Next Generation'

Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 5:06:56 pm PDT

Judging from the loony leftists in his blogroll, Joshua Rosenau will be a bit surprised to see referrals from LGF. But this is an important update to yesterday’s post about Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal’s support for the “intelligent design” hoax, as Jindal’s college genetics professor asks him not to “hold back the next generation of Louisiana’s doctors.”

Professor Arthur Landy, University Professor at Brown University who teaches in the medical school, taught the then-premed. Landy says “Without evolution, modern biology, including medicine and biotechnology, wouldn’t make sense. In order for today’s students in Louisiana to succeed in college and beyond, in order for them to take the fullest advantages of all that the 21st century will offer, they need a solid grounding in genetics and evolution. Governor Jindal was a good student in my class when he was thinking about becoming a doctor, and I hope he doesn’t do anything that would hold back the next generation of Louisiana’s doctors.”

This comes in the context of a press release from the Louisiana Coalition for Science, calling on Jindal to veto the stealth creationist bill recently passed by the LA legislature. Here’s the first section of their letter to the governor:

LA Coalition for Science
June 16, 2008

Honorable Bobby Jindal
Baton Rouge, LA 70802
Re: Veto of SB 733

Dear Governor Jindal:

SB 733, recently passed by both houses of the legislature, purports to enable teachers to help students “develop critical thinking skills, and respond appropriately and respectfully to differences of opinion about controversial issues.” This is a seemingly noble-sounding but deceptive goal.

SB 733 is a thinly disguised attempt to advance the “Wedge Strategy” of the Discovery Institute (DI), a creationist think tank that is collaborating with the LA Family Forum to get intelligent design (ID) creationism into LA public school science classes. John West, associate director of DI’s Center for Science and Culture, has even presumed to interpret SB 733 on DI’s website so as to favor his group’s agenda. (See West’s “Questions and Answers About the Proposed Louisiana Science Education Act.”) Within minutes of the Senate’s passage of the bill on June 16, West posted the news of Louisiana’s passage of the “landmark” LA Science Education Act on DI’s website. According to one Louisiana news account, West indicated that DI hopes to see its own creationist textbook, the deceptively titled Explore Evolution, used in our science classes as one of the supplements that SB 733 will permit teachers to use (Opelousas Daily World, 6/16/08). DI apparently has a financial as well as a religious and political interest in this legislation.

Creationism, which includes both young-earth creationism and ID, is not science but a sectarian view based on the Bible. Young-earth creationism is based on Genesis, and ID is based on the Gospel of John, as was established in federal court in the case of Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District (2005). The Bible was never intended to be a science textbook. Evolution has long been accepted by the Catholic Church and most other mainstream churches. The late Pope John Paul II said in 1996 that “new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis.” (Truth Cannot Contradict Truth, October 22, 1996) As the pope recognized and other mainstream religions also recognize, there is no conflict between teaching children the scientific fact of evolution in school and providing religious instruction at home and in church. Millions of Americans lead committed religious lives while fully accepting modern science.

Since you hold a biology degree from Brown University, one of the nation’s most prestigious schools, you certainly appreciate Theodosius Dobzhansky’s famous insight, “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.” You also surely understand that there is no scientific controversy over the fact of evolution. The current controversy is a political one, manufactured nationally by the Discovery Institute and here in Louisiana by the LA Family Forum, which does not represent the majority of Louisiana’s citizens but would impose its agenda on our entire state, even our children.

The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is violated when the government endorses a sectarian doctrine, as SB 733 would do, despite denials by the bill’s supporters. The section of SB 733 stipulating that the bill “shall not be construed to promote any religious doctrine, promote discrimination for or against a particular set of religious beliefs, or promote discrimination for or against religion or nonreligion” actually comes from the DI’s own model academic freedom act. If SB 733 were truly about teaching science, no such disclaimer would be needed.

282 comments

  • Comments are open and unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Little Green Footballs.
  • Obscene, abusive, silly, or annoying remarks may be deleted, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their views by Little Green Footballs.
  • Posts that contain phone numbers, street addresses, email addresses or other personal information will also be deleted, as will posts that consist only of a variation on the word, "First!"
  • Comments that advocate violence will be cause for immediate banning with no appeal.
  • REMEMBER: posting comments at LGF is a privilege, not a right. Abuse that privilege, and your account will be blocked.

Hide comments | Jump to bottom

1 WrathofG-d  6/17/08 5:08:54 pm reply quote 1

G-d intelligently created this thread.

2 buzzsawmonkey  6/17/08 5:09:47 pm reply quote 5

Fie upon those who would vote the human brain out of existence.

3 buzzsawmonkey  6/17/08 5:12:46 pm reply quote 4

A governor named Bobby Jindal
Seemed to buy into the ID swindle
Let's hope he regains
The full use of his brains
Conservative strength to re-kindle.

4 godfrey  6/17/08 5:12:57 pm reply quote 0

So who is Kenneth Miller?

5 DeathtotheSwiss  6/17/08 5:12:57 pm reply quote 1
6 pegcity  6/17/08 5:13:29 pm reply quote 1

So according to these creationists is the Flinestones a true account of ye old days?

What about ancient chinese artifacts that date back to 5 or 6 thousand years ago?

I don't remember seeing them describe any dinasours

7 Salem  6/17/08 5:14:05 pm reply quote 0

I don't think he'll be McCain's pick, anyway.

8 Dotcoman  6/17/08 5:14:52 pm reply quote -7

Evolution is the hoax. Darwinism is the Left's faith based religion.

9 Dr. Shalit  6/17/08 5:15:12 pm reply quote 3

OK, What IS the Problem? -

I believe in "Ha-Shem" as Creator - AND - also believe that said creator has endowed us with critical thought - and - Free Will. Comments?

-S-

10 godfrey  6/17/08 5:15:17 pm reply quote 0

Charles, do you think Jindal is the wisest choice for McCain's VP?

11 pegcity  6/17/08 5:15:33 pm reply quote -2

re: #8 Dotcoman

Evolution is the hoax. Darwinism is the Left's faith based religion.

yeah enjoy your time here, i don't think you have much left.

12 buzzsawmonkey  6/17/08 5:16:15 pm reply quote 0

re: #8 Dotcoman

Darwinism

The flatulent blat of the ignoramus.

13 Ojoe  6/17/08 5:17:16 pm reply quote 22

Here we go again.

Belief in evolution does not preclude belief in God.

You can see evidence for both.

Ding me down.

'Bye.

14 Toasty  6/17/08 5:17:24 pm reply quote 1

I hope he's not McCain's pick, because the left will run him to the ground for believing in creationism. I don't think any less of him for it even though I don't believe in creationism, I don't think it's wrong for him to believe that. But it would hurt the ticket.

15 pegcity  6/17/08 5:17:40 pm reply quote 0

re: #12 buzzsawmonkey

yeah cause they haven't made a single scientific breakthrough since Mr Darwin went and spent his time with the turtles.

16 infidel Alan  6/17/08 5:17:43 pm reply quote 0

Everybody knows "intelligent design" is a Trojan horse to insert creationism into science classes where it doesn't belong. How could both houses of the LA legislature fall for this?

17 Ojoe  6/17/08 5:17:55 pm reply quote 0

re: #13 Ojoe

I landed on comment 13 for that.

Cosmic!

18 astronmr20  6/17/08 5:18:02 pm reply quote 1

Oh shit. Here we go again.

19 buzzsawmonkey  6/17/08 5:18:03 pm reply quote 3

re: #13 Ojoe

Here we go again.

Belief in evolution does not preclude belief in God.

You can see evidence for both.

Ding me down.

'Bye.

Howzabout I ding you up instead?

20 JCM  6/17/08 5:18:12 pm reply quote 0

Prof. Landy,

WHAT ABOUT THE TURTLES?

I'm outraged he failed to mention the turtles!

/

21 Ojoe  6/17/08 5:18:17 pm reply quote 0

re: #17 Ojoe

And do not mention comment # 17 above.

22 Ojoe  6/17/08 5:18:34 pm reply quote 0

re: #19 buzzsawmonkey

OK

23 calvin coolidge  6/17/08 5:18:37 pm reply quote 3

Man-made Global warming is also a religion. They ask us to believe without solid scientific facts to back it up. So why is it being taught in every school from here to China?

24 Dianna  6/17/08 5:18:46 pm reply quote 0

re: #14 Toasty

I see the problem.

25 pegcity  6/17/08 5:18:49 pm reply quote -2

re: #16 infidel Alan

Everybody knows "intelligent design" is a Trojan horse to insert creationism into science classes where it doesn't belong. How could both houses of the LA legislature fall for this?

these are the same people who elected David Duke

26 brickthruplateglasswindow  6/17/08 5:18:53 pm reply quote 0

re: #9 Dr. Shalit

OK, What IS the Problem? -

I believe in "Ha-Shem" as Creator - AND - also believe that said creator has endowed us with critical thought - and - Free Will. Comments?

-S-

+1 Ding (hopefully, Charles has worked out that javascript rum and coke thing for you.)

27 Carridine  6/17/08 5:18:57 pm reply quote 0

Stay sane, Bobby! Real world people need you in real time, BIGtime!

28 Nevergiveup  6/17/08 5:19:09 pm reply quote 0

An update on Obama's approach to national security:

[Link: bp0.blogger.com...]

29 buzzsawmonkey  6/17/08 5:19:21 pm reply quote 0

re: #23 calvin coolidge

Man-made Global warming is also a religion. They ask us to believe without solid scientific facts to back it up. So why is it being taught in every school from here to China?

Time-servers protecting their access to grant money.

30 Dianna  6/17/08 5:19:39 pm reply quote 0

re: #16 infidel Alan

Because people got tired of fighting about it, and many of them are so badly educated in science that they don't see the problem.

31 Mars Needs Neocons  6/17/08 5:19:43 pm reply quote 2

I don't think Jindal would be the pick anyway. This election is going to have a debate about experience, and it will be hard to nail O on that if we have an inexperienced veep candidate.

32 JCM  6/17/08 5:19:47 pm reply quote 0

re: #28 Nevergiveup

An update on Obama's approach to national security:

[Link: bp0.blogger.com...]

He has a strategy?

33 godfrey  6/17/08 5:20:05 pm reply quote 0

Ah

Ken Miller's evolution page

Booga booga!

34 Nevergiveup  6/17/08 5:20:27 pm reply quote -1

re: #25 pegcity

these are the same people who elected David Duke

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for Jindal?

35 Dianna  6/17/08 5:21:02 pm reply quote 0

re: #23 calvin coolidge

It isn't. It's being taught here, but I hope not as much as we find ourselves afraid.

The Chinese have better sense than to teach nonsense to their children; they simply use it for propaganda.

36 Toasty  6/17/08 5:21:06 pm reply quote 2

re: #24 Dianna

I don't see a problem if it's a private belief. I only have a problem if it involves forcing it on others. Someone who believes in creationism but doesn't demand it be taught in schools does no harm.

37 brickthruplateglasswindow  6/17/08 5:21:21 pm reply quote 1

re: #18 astronmr20

Oh shit. Here we go again.

The hamsters must need some exercise. :)

38 godfrey  6/17/08 5:21:28 pm reply quote 0

re: #31 Mars Needs Neocons

Ding up. No to Jindal this time. Build success in Louisiana (yikes), then go for it. Let this ID flap subside.

39 buzzsawmonkey  6/17/08 5:22:00 pm reply quote 0

re: #15 pegcity

People who dismiss evolution by dissin' old Charlie D. are being spoonfed talking points and spitting them out on command.

40 Nevergiveup  6/17/08 5:22:00 pm reply quote 0

re: #32 JCM

He has a strategy?

Does the word " Appeasement" ring a bell?

41 godfrey  6/17/08 5:22:08 pm reply quote 0

re: #36 Toasty

It does harm to rationality. That is harm!

42 Dianna  6/17/08 5:22:44 pm reply quote 0

re: #36 Toasty

Maybe. Though I hope my doctor isn't a creationist.

43 wolfie  6/17/08 5:22:59 pm reply quote 0

re: #17 Ojoe

I landed on comment 13 for that.

Cosmic!

You should celebrate with a little snack!
Or.......if you dare.......a big one!

44 Gjergj Skënderbeu  6/17/08 5:23:04 pm reply quote 0

Yes, intelligent design in Louisiana, that's something that is going to ruin the country, erode it from the core.

45 JCM  6/17/08 5:23:57 pm reply quote 1

re: #40 Nevergiveup

Does the word " Appeasement" ring a bell?

The last time that was given a serious go, 60 million paid the price.
Let's keep Poobama out of the White House.

46 Nevergiveup  6/17/08 5:25:05 pm reply quote 3

The only rational argument against evolution is a cursory glance at the present members of the US Senate and Congress. They have got to be DEvolving. But that's just my opinion.

47 Toasty  6/17/08 5:25:29 pm reply quote 0

re: #41 godfrey

Some people think believing in G-d at all is irrational.

48 Spiny Norman  6/17/08 5:25:32 pm reply quote 0

re: #38 godfrey

Ding up. No to Jindal this time. Build success in Louisiana (yikes), then go for it. Let this ID flap subside.

If Jindal can fix Louisiana, he WILL be President if and when he runs.

49 The Other Les  6/17/08 5:25:50 pm reply quote 0

What I want to know is who are "The Designers" of the Cylons that Brother Cavil mentioned. With the Significant Seven in a shooting war with each other it looks like they may have to go back to the drawing board.

50 pegcity  6/17/08 5:26:13 pm reply quote 0

re: #46 Nevergiveup

The only rational argument against evolution is a cursory glance at the present members of the US Senate and Congress. They have got to be DEvolving. But that's just my opinion.

it's amazing such dumb people can get into such high positions of power.

51 godfrey  6/17/08 5:26:27 pm reply quote 1

Frankly, if "intelligent design" proponents raise interesting problems for other people to solve, then they serve a useful (heuristic) purpose.

52 reine.de.tout  6/17/08 5:26:30 pm reply quote 0

I hope Jindal pays a lot of attention to that letter, but I'm afraid he doesn't pay enough attention to things he ought to.


re: #48 Spiny Norman

If Jindal can fix Louisiana, he WILL be President if and when he runs.

Jindal may or may not "fix" Louisiana - but even if he doesn't, he'll talk like he did.

53 Dr. Shalit  6/17/08 5:27:21 pm reply quote 0

re: #10 godfrey

Charles, do you think Jindal is the wisest choice for McCain's VP?

Godfrey -

JINDAL is the best of the best of the up and coming Conservative "Movement" - I wish him well - VERY WELL INDEED! As to his position on the 2008 Republican Ticket:

1. I WOULD SUPPORT HIM.

2. I Hope He Does Not Have to Run on the National Ticket This Year, and is able to create a RECORD in Louisiana that will make him the unassailable front runner in 2012 if McCain loses.

3. This Fellow could be what all we all believed GEORGE ALLEN would have been before the VA, US SENATE LOSS - (which was VERRY close!)

-S-

54 Ojoe  6/17/08 5:27:25 pm reply quote 1

re: #43 wolfie

Big Snack

55 Sharmuta  6/17/08 5:27:30 pm reply quote 6

re: #36 Toasty

I don't see a problem if it's a private belief. I only have a problem if it involves forcing it on others. Someone who believes in creationism but doesn't demand it be taught in schools does no harm.

I agree- people are free to think and believe what they want, but they do not, however, have a right to force this on other people's children in the public schools.

56 JCM  6/17/08 5:27:30 pm reply quote 0

re: #48 Spiny Norman

If Jindal can fix Louisiana, he WILL be President if and when he runs.

He'll just have to make reasonable progress. LA is way broke.

57 The Other Les  6/17/08 5:27:41 pm reply quote 0

re: #46 Nevergiveup

The only rational argument against evolution is a cursory glance at the present members of the US Senate and Congress. They have got to be DEvolving. But that's just my opinion.

While they are devolving they are not DEVO.

[Link: www.youtube.com...]

58 StinkHammer  6/17/08 5:27:43 pm reply quote 0

Apparently Jindal's also had a run-in with a demon.

As Derbyshire put it, "I spend a lot of time defending the GOP against sneers about us being 'the snake-handling party.' Bobby Jindal sure isn't making it any easier."

59 MrSnuggles  6/17/08 5:28:04 pm reply quote -3

i dont get it, why do we need to be taught that man evolved from sludge? how does that enable us people to become doctors? they should stop teaching anything about creation period, whether it be the hoax that single celled organism evolved from nothing or that God created life at the snap of a finger.

60 pegcity  6/17/08 5:28:11 pm reply quote 0

what's intelligent about the design of human beings?

If its so intelligent why are we so prone to diseases and illness, and why do we have useless organs and teeth.

The human body is anything but intelligent and points to nothing more than evolution, why do people think we don't use our gullbladders or apendix or wisdom teeth anymore.

61 Nevergiveup  6/17/08 5:28:35 pm reply quote 0

re: #52 reine.de.tout

I hope Jindal pays a lot of attention to that letter, but I'm afraid he doesn't pay enough attention to things he ought to.


Jindal may or may not "fix" Louisiana - but even if he doesn't, he'll talk like he did.

I don't know if anybody can fix Louisiana. Let's give it back to France in exchange for a couple of Nuclear Reactors for energy.

62 reine.de.tout  6/17/08 5:28:43 pm reply quote 0

re: #56 JCM

He'll just have to make reasonable progress. LA is way broke.

So broke, the legislature just voted themselves enough of a raise it will double their pay.

63 godfrey  6/17/08 5:28:53 pm reply quote 4

re: #44 Gjergj Skënderbeu

That is a slur, and I resent it.

I know plenty of fine, smart, successful people in Louisiana. Every student in that state, whether they live in Tensas, Lafayette, or East Baton Rouge parish, deserves just as good an education as any student anywhere else in the world.

64 Mars Needs Neocons  6/17/08 5:29:28 pm reply quote 0

re: #49 The Other Les

What I want to know is who are "The Designers" of the Cylons that Brother Cavil mentioned. With the Significant Seven in a shooting war with each other it looks like they may have to go back to the drawing board.

The Cylons were created by Count Iblis. Oh I forgot that was in the REAL BSG.

65 pegcity  6/17/08 5:29:44 pm reply quote 0

re: #59 MrSnuggles

i dont get it, why do we need to be taught that man evolved from sludge? how does that enable us people to become doctors? they should stop teaching anything about creation period, whether it be the hoax that single celled organism evolved from nothing or that God created life at the snap of a finger.

um cause one is real and the other is a belief,

66 reine.de.tout  6/17/08 5:29:47 pm reply quote 0

re: #61 Nevergiveup

I don't know if anybody can fix Louisiana. Let's give it back to France in exchange for a couple of Nuclear Reactors for energy.

Naw, I don't wanna belong to Fwance. Besides, then you'd lose the oil coming from Louisiana gulf oil drilling operations.

67 Dr. Shalit  6/17/08 5:29:58 pm reply quote 0

re: #23 calvin coolidge

Man-made Global warming is also a religion. They ask us to believe without solid scientific facts to back it up. So why is it being taught in every school from here to China?

"cal - cool" -

BECAUSE - it is the ONLY theory that allows "WATERMELONS" (Green Outside/Red Inside) to look legitimate. Take it from there.

-S-

68 JCM  6/17/08 5:30:08 pm reply quote 3

re: #60 pegcity

what's intelligent about the design of human beings?

If its so intelligent why are we so prone to diseases and illness, and why do we have useless organs and teeth.

The human body is anything but intelligent and points to nothing more than evolution, why do people think we don't use our gullbladders or apendix or wisdom teeth anymore.

From a Biblical perspective disease and such is a result of the fall.

Gull bladders result from eating to many seagulls.
/

69 reine.de.tout  6/17/08 5:30:10 pm reply quote 0

re: #63 godfrey

That is a slur, and I resent it.

I know plenty of fine, smart, successful people in Louisiana. Every student in that state, whether they live in Tensas, Lafayette, or East Baton Rouge parish, deserves just as good an education as any student anywhere else in the world.

THANK YOU.

70 Cato  6/17/08 5:31:11 pm reply quote -4

OK, I'm about to get it as I always do when I bring up this subject.

ID should not be taught because it is not science, but NEITHER IS DARWINIAN THEORY.

Darwinism lacks the one thing that makes a scientific theory a scientific theory -- the ability to be disproven.

Newton will get you to the moon, but given a set of circumstances, Darwinism cannot predict what will dedevelop.

71 Toasty  6/17/08 5:31:35 pm reply quote 2

I hope Jindal vetoes the bill.

72 metrolibertarian  6/17/08 5:31:36 pm reply quote 0

I think no further evidence of the Young Earth, Genesis story being the case is stronger than this:

[Link: i27.tinypic.com...]

Obviously if Jesus was riding dinosaurs, the whole Earth being older than 6000 years is bs.

73 Spiny Norman  6/17/08 5:31:52 pm reply quote 0

re: #45 JCM

re: #40 Nevergiveup
re: #32 JCM
He has a strategy?

Does the word " Appeasement" ring a bell? The last time that was given a serious go, 60 million paid the price.

Let's keep Poobama out of the White House.

The last time we had a "Hopey, Changey" presidential candidate, we ended up with James Earl Carter, and we are still dealing with the consequences.

:^þ

74 neocon hippie  6/17/08 5:32:10 pm reply quote 0

re: #23 calvin coolidge

Man-made Global warming is also a religion. They ask us to believe without solid scientific facts to back it up. So why is it being taught in every school from here to China?

AGW is a pseudo-science and a political program but is not a religion.

75 David IV of Georgia  6/17/08 5:32:12 pm reply quote 0

If HaShem was worried about this, He would have given us a detailed blueprint of what was done.
Instead He told through the writings of Moses (Moshe) what He did in a poetical fashion.
This does not mean the poetical version is false at all.
It just lacks the details that modern scientists would want to know.
Maybe He decided not to bore the people of the last 3 to 3.5 millennia with details they could have cared less about.

76 experiencedtraveller  6/17/08 5:32:16 pm reply quote 0

re: #61 Nevergiveup

I don't know if anybody can fix Louisiana. Let's give it back to France in exchange for a couple of Nuclear Reactors for energy.

Trade the best gumbo in America for a couple of US licensed nuclear plants? They better throw a few tons of truffles into the deal...

77 pegcity  6/17/08 5:32:29 pm reply quote 1

re: #70 Cato

why do people keep quoting darwin?

Darwin did nothing more than get the ball rolling,

Its called evolution, it didn't stop with Darwin, Darwinism is a shell game played to make evolution out to be some facist plot.

78 ContraJihadi  6/17/08 5:32:30 pm reply quote 1

re: #46 Nevergiveup

I don't know. They seem rather well adapted. Just look at those fat sinecures--travel expenses, earmarks, favors from lobbyists, retirement packages. Seems they have found quite an environmental niche, at least until the Chinese call start dumping treasury bills.

79 godfrey  6/17/08 5:32:57 pm reply quote 1

re: #47 Toasty

Some people think believing in G-d at all is irrational.

And that is irrational and wrong. :-)

re: #61 Nevergiveup

Let's give it back to France in exchange for a couple of Nuclear Reactors for energy.

Louisiana is a proud member of the USA, and if you don't believe it, just spout off what you wrote there on the streets of Clinton.

Moreover, there's a nuclear reactor on the river near St. Francisville. Would you like to give that one back to France?

80 stuiec  6/17/08 5:33:21 pm reply quote 0

You know what amazes me? That so many people who accept that species evolve through natural selection nevertheless seem not to believe in ecological succession. They tend to want to force humankind to behave as if the current mix of species in the current set of ecological niches in the biosphere ought to remain fixed and constant forevermore, as if some Higher Power (which they call "Nature" or "The Planet") has decreed this set of conditions as perfect.

I am confident that neither "Nature" nor "The Planet" have a plan for the biosphere. Whether God has a plan for it or whether it is subject to random physical forces, it is bound to change, and human policies meant to obstruct or impede that change are foolish, useless and self-destructive.

81 philosoteric  6/17/08 5:33:22 pm reply quote 0

"Oh, Jesus - not this crap again!"

82 Nevergiveup  6/17/08 5:33:23 pm reply quote 0

re: #66 reine.de.tout

Naw, I don't wanna belong to Fwance. Besides, then you'd lose the oil coming from Louisiana gulf oil drilling operations.

I stand corrected

83 czekmark  6/17/08 5:33:33 pm reply quote -2
re: #8 Dotcoman

Evolution is the hoax. Darwinism is the Left's faith based religion.

Couldn't agree with you more. Darwinists has no answer to the creation question yet they spend much energy condemning those who think there is sound basis for a God creator. True science discovery impartially accepts all theories. Obviously Darwinism does not adhere to those principles.

84 reine.de.tout  6/17/08 5:34:27 pm reply quote 0

re: #79 godfrey

Godfrey - you from around these parts?

85 Dr. Shalit  6/17/08 5:34:39 pm reply quote 0

re: #58 StinkHammer

Apparently Jindal's also had a run-in with a demon.

As Derbyshire put it, "I spend a lot of time defending the GOP against sneers about us being 'the snake-handling party.' Bobby Jindal sure isn't making it any easier."

"stinkster"

Re-Mem-Mem-Re-Mem-Me-Member - 1973 - MIKE OLDFIELD - TUBULAR BELLS - a/k/a - Theme From the Exorcist. Everything old becomes NEW agian - in the right circumstances. Take it from there.

-S-

86 godfrey  6/17/08 5:35:05 pm reply quote 0

re: #82 Nevergiveup

I stand corrected

C'est bon! Have some crawfish!

87 funky chicken  6/17/08 5:35:36 pm reply quote 0

"intelligent design" : conservatives :: "global warming" " liberals

88 moonstone  6/17/08 5:35:57 pm reply quote -1

Charles:

I'm probably not alone in fervently wishing that you'd put a stop to the evolution-ID-creation debates on LGF. I guarantee you that no one has ever persuaded anyone to change his or her views on the matter, and it's a huge waste of a thread.

In addition, it's not even any fun to follow the other threads when everyone's busy trading blows on that topic. That effectively closes LGF to me (and a lot of others) for the day/evening. No fun at all. :(

89 Spiny Norman  6/17/08 5:36:16 pm reply quote 0

re: #74 neocon hippie

re: #23 calvin coolidge
Man-made Global warming is also a religion. They ask us to believe without solid scientific facts to back it up. So why is it being taught in every school from here to China?

AGW is a pseudo-science and a political program but is not a religion.

It's a world-wide wealth-redistribution scheme, true, but the absurd New-Agey, Mother Gaia-worship many of its proponents indulge in might qualify.

;^)

90 canerican  6/17/08 5:36:56 pm reply quote -4

Are you kidding me? Another one of these? I expect Christian bashing from the lefty-blogs. Not from LGF. Trust me, I don't want this to become a religious forum, but belittling one of Christianity's fundamental beliefs is pathetic - yesterday we heard it from Charles, not yet today, but surely we will hear it from others.
Christians aren't idiots, most are at the very least smart. How many of you can honestly say that you fully understand evolution? Probably few. I can't say that I understand creation fully, but I have two years of college science under my belt, and there are holes in the evolution theory - and some things might best be explained by creation - but they say that its to simple and a cop out and it should be disproved at any cost.
I have no doubt that evolution does exist, but the Earth was created initially.

I find it ironic that a majority of scientists agree with the theory of global warming, and many non-scientists can disagree, yet when we hear that the majority of scientists believe in the theory of evolution - we MUST agree with them.

It just strikes me as utterly bizarre, the amount of intolerance for other beliefs that I am seeing here.

91 reine.de.tout  6/17/08 5:36:56 pm reply quote 0

re: #86 godfrey

C'est bon! Have some crawfish!

Oh, yum!

92 godfrey  6/17/08 5:37:01 pm reply quote 1

re: #84 reine.de.tout

Was. Moved away last year. Just there last week, visiting friends. It was a fun, interesting, verycool friendly place, and I love it. I gave it seven years of hard work, and it was worth every minute.

93 Charles  6/17/08 5:38:05 pm reply quote 6

Yes, it's another one of these. Sorry if some people don't like it, but if you want to promote anti-science viewpoints, there's nothing stopping you from starting your own blogs.

94 Sharmuta  6/17/08 5:38:13 pm reply quote 1

re: #88 moonstone

That's not true as I, and reine.de.tout will attest to.

95 Dr. Shalit  6/17/08 5:38:38 pm reply quote 0

re: #91 reine.de.tout

Oh, yum!

"Queenie" -

Can I have some "JAX" with that? Pray Tell.

-S-

96 godfrey  6/17/08 5:38:56 pm reply quote 1

re: #91 reine.de.tout

I don't see any corn and potatoes in it. Ah well, beer is a carb.

97 Charles  6/17/08 5:39:33 pm reply quote 7

re: #90 canerican

Are you kidding me? Another one of these? I expect Christian bashing from the lefty-blogs. Not from LGF. Trust me, I don't want this to become a religious forum, but belittling one of Christianity's fundamental beliefs is pathetic - yesterday we heard it from Charles, not yet today, but surely we will hear it from others.
Christians aren't idiots, most are at the very least smart. How many of you can honestly say that you fully understand evolution? Probably few. I can't say that I understand creation fully, but I have two years of college science under my belt, and there are holes in the evolution theory - and some things might best be explained by creation - but they say that its to simple and a cop out and it should be disproved at any cost.
I have no doubt that evolution does exist, but the Earth was created initially.

I find it ironic that a majority of scientists agree with the theory of global warming, and many non-scientists can disagree, yet when we hear that the majority of scientists believe in the theory of evolution - we MUST agree with them.

It just strikes me as utterly bizarre, the amount of intolerance for other beliefs that I am seeing here.

This is insulting and false. The post above makes it very clear that there is NO Christian-bashing going on.

There are many Christians who refuse to buy into this hoax. It's simply dishonest to try to tie belief in God to belief in intelligent design.

98 freetoken  6/17/08 5:39:36 pm reply quote 0

re: #13 Ojoe

Here we go again.

Belief in evolution does not preclude belief in God.

How many times can people miss the point? Which is, namely, that the political baggage that comes from the ID movement arises out of the intellectual/moral baggage that movement owns.

Unfortunately for Jindal the ID lightning rod is now attached to his house. As such, it is probably in McCain's best interest not to go calling at that residence.

99 Ma Sands  6/17/08 5:39:44 pm reply quote -4

Charles.....

My Dad the newspaperman taught me not to use labels. I've been, therefore, trying to get a handle on the definition of Intelligent Design, and of Creationism....

I thought last night, to contact the Discovery Institute and ask them for help. They responded this afternoon, offering to give suggestions to any comments I FWD-ed to them.

Took 'em up on it just now, and was surprised how quickly they responded! :) I used your last couple of comments from last night's Jindahl thread. Here's their response:

[next comment]

100 Ma Sands  6/17/08 5:40:24 pm reply quote -5
Charles wrote: “But the "intelligent design" concept itself is a fraud -- it's repackaged creationism, very deliberately calculated to appear as science, when it is not.”

I reply: Darwinists love to employ in namecalling, labels, personal attacks, and insults rather than actual argumentation in this debate. Charles provides an excellent example of this. In fact intelligent design is different from creationism:

“Is intelligent design theory the same as creationism?

No. Intelligent design theory is simply an effort to empirically detect whether the "apparent design" in nature acknowledged by virtually all biologists is genuine design (the product of an intelligent cause) or is simply the product of an undirected process such as natural selection acting on random variations. Creationism is focused on defending a literal reading of the Genesis account, usually including the creation of the earth by the Biblical God a few thousand years ago. Unlike creationism, the scientific theory of intelligent design is agnostic regarding the source of design and has no commitment to defending Genesis, the Bible or any other sacred text. Honest critics of intelligent design acknowledge the difference between intelligent design and creationism. University of Wisconsin historian of science Ronald Numbers is critical of intelligent design, yet according to the Associated Press, he "agrees the creationist label is inaccurate when it comes to the ID [intelligent design] movement." Why, then, do some Darwinists keep trying to conflate intelligent design with creationism? According to Dr. Numbers, it is because they think such claims are "the easiest way to discredit intelligent design." In other words, the charge that intelligent design is "creationism" is a rhetorical strategy on the part of Darwinists who wish to delegitimize design theory without actually addressing the merits of its case.” ([Link: www.intelligentdesign.org...]

[continued in next comment]
101 godfrey  6/17/08 5:40:46 pm reply quote 0

re: #88 moonstone

Moonstone, do like me and mutate the thread! Better LGF through random thread topic mutation! If everyone starts talking about crawfish, who knows what evolutionary marvels we can achieve!

102 reine.de.tout  6/17/08 5:40:57 pm reply quote 5

re: #90 canerican

Are you kidding me? Another one of these? I expect Christian bashing from the lefty-blogs. Not from LGF. Trust me, I don't want this to become a religious forum, but belittling one of Christianity's fundamental beliefs is pathetic - yesterday we heard it from Charles, not yet today, but surely we will hear it from others.

I don't see any religion-bashing going on in the thread topic, at all.

It is absolutely possible to believe in evolution and believe in the need to teach science as science, leaving religious instruction for the home and church, without "bashing" religion. That is what these discussions are about. They are not discussions about whether or not God exists.

An individual on another recent thread went off on a tear, bashing a particular religion, and he ended up blocked. So I don't see how you can believe these threads are about religion "bashing". They are not.

103 Ma Sands  6/17/08 5:40:59 pm reply quote -6
Moreover, intelligent design IS science because it uses the scientific method to make its claims. According to [Link: www.ideacenter.org...] intelligent design uses the scientific method as follows:

“Intelligent design uses the scientific method to detect design. The following is a description of the scientific method: Observation, Hypothesis, Experiment, Conclusion. Basic Intelligent Design:

i. Observation: The ways that intelligent agents act can be observed in the natural world and described. When intelligent agents act, it is observed that they produce high levels of "complex-specified information" (CSI). CSI is basically a scenario which is unlikely to happen (making it complex), and conforms to a pattern (making it specified). Language and machines are good examples of things with much CSI. From our understanding of the world, high levels of CSI are always the product of intelligent design.

ii. Hypothesis: If an object in the natural world was designed, then we should be able to examine that object and find the same high levels of CSI in the natural world as we find in human-designed objects.

iii. Experiment: We can examine biological structures to test if high CSI exists. When we look at natural objects in biology, we find many machine-like structures which are specified, because they have a particular arrangement of parts which is necessary for them to function, and complex because they have an unlikely arrangement of many interacting parts. These biological machines are "irreducibly complex," for any change in the nature or arrangement of these parts would destroy their function. Irreducibly complex structures cannot be built up through an alternative theory, such as Darwinian evolution, because Darwinian evolution requires that a biological structure be functional along every small-step of its evolution. "Reverse engineering" of these structures shows that they cease to function if changed even slightly.

iv. Conclusion: Because they exhibit high levels of CSI, a quality known to be produced only by intelligent design, and because there is no other known mechanism to explain the origin of these "irreducibly complex" biological structures, we conclude that they were intelligently designed.”

Charles also wrote: “The arguments are fraudulent, the premise is fraudulent, and the methods that the Discovery Institute uses to promote it are dishonest and fraudulent. ... It's obvious from your posts in this thread that you are almost completely clueless about science, so that doesn't surprise me.”

I reply: These are just more character attacks and personal insults, not arguments. Sadly, these are very common tactics from Darwinists. I challenge Charles to actually show why ID is “fraudulent.” He has the right to disagree with it, but disagreeing with it does not mean that he has the right to call it fraudulent. If Charles must resort to such personal attacks rather than actual arguments, then it seems that his position is quite weak.

104 CIA Reject  6/17/08 5:41:16 pm reply quote 4

BOHICA! ! !

That being said here is what I see as the "money quote" from the article:

"The Bible was never intended to be a science textbook."

Now my rant, *ahem*

The Bible IS NOT a science text book.
It IS NOT a history book.
It IS NOT an economics text book.
It IS NOT a sociology text book.
It IS NOT an engineering manual

At one time or another since it was written people have tried to force the Bible to be ALL these things- always with disasterous results.

Faith in G*d does not preclude belief that He may have chosen ANY means, including evolution, to accomplish his purpose in creating the universe- a purpose,by the way, which is unknown to us. His mind is not our mind, His thoughts are not our thoughts. We know not His reasons or His methods, only His Mercy and His Love.

*Dismounts soapbox*

Thank You...

105 Charles  6/17/08 5:41:45 pm reply quote 7

re: #99 Ma Sands

Charles.....

My Dad the newspaperman taught me not to use labels. I've been, therefore, trying to get a handle on the definition of Intelligent Design, and of Creationism....

I thought last night, to contact the Discovery Institute and ask them for help. They responded this afternoon, offering to give suggestions to any comments I FWD-ed to them.

Took 'em up on it just now, and was surprised how quickly they responded! :) I used your last couple of comments from last night's Jindahl thread. Here's their response:

Oh, for Pete's sake.

I think I've made it clear enough that I do not trust the Discovery Institute one bit. They are the main promoters of the ID hoax, and I've heard all their obfuscations and falsehoods before.

Zero credibility. No, less than zero. Negative credibility.

106 reine.de.tout  6/17/08 5:41:47 pm reply quote 0

re: #92 godfrey

{godfrey}. so glad you enjoyed it.