"The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands." (Psalm 19:1)
https://discussions.godandscience.org/
Careful, careful, klowns have feelings, too!Storyteller wrote:
are you RickD as in Deem? You're the site owner? Was it you that compiled the main site?
No, Rick is not Rich, he is just our resident clown
Amen Annette , as Rick not deem D said (Storyteller wrote:Still making my mind up on all of this having recently come to God. I had always gone with evolution, now I'm not so sure.
Is ID Independent Design? As in God, the creator?
How do Neanderthal Man fit in? Dinosaurs?
When (and who) were Adam and Eve?
My take on it all is that these are all details. All we need is faith. I'm sure, when we meet God, it will all become clear. Like bippy says I don't see it as being important to salvation.
) these are nit salvatiin issues .Also if you want to learn more about intelligent design, the best lace to go is their main blog at uncommon descent 
My views on science and religion are pretty much mainstream for China. The contortions people go thru to try to get out ofDanieltwotwenty wrote:I agree with you Audie, maybe it is religion, not the pure form but man's religiousness and the need for a legalistic life style.Audie wrote:It looks to me that its more that religion pushes people away from science than the other way around.
It wont improve my popularity to say that, I say so only because regardless of my nationality I care about the future of the west.
Who cares about popularity, my views have never been popular. A friend once said to me "Daniel your views could be classed as heretical" I said "Heretical to who? What the institutional Church" we both had a good laugh.
Yes those painted on smiles can be very deceptive.Philip wrote:Careful, careful, klowns have feelings, too!Storyteller wrote:
are you RickD as in Deem? You're the site owner? Was it you that compiled the main site?
No, Rick is not Rich, he is just our resident clown
Welcome, Annette!
Science sees that as a good thing, not a problem.bippy123 wrote:The problem here morny is that Sagan is using this within the context of methodological naturalism which means that if it can't be analyzed within this paradigm , that it can't be falsified .Morny wrote:Apropos to this discussion is Carl Sagan's response to the 14th Dalai Lama's claim about reincarnation being hard to disprove:
"Plainly the Dalai Lama is right. Religious doctrine that is insulated from disproof has little reason to worry about the advance of science. The grand idea, common to many faiths, of a Creator of the Universe is one such doctrine - difficult alike to demonstrate or to dismiss."
The nested hierarchy doesn't have to be perfect. For example, hybridization is just one known mechanism that causes deviation from the simple model. But common descent is still our best hypothesis for the observed nested hierarchy of biological traits.bippy123 wrote:The problem morny is that what evolutionist biologist represent to the public isn't what the fact say..... Exactly .
http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2014/05 ... signs.html
Anti intellectual ?Audie wrote:My views on science and religion are pretty much mainstream for China. The contortions people go thru to try to get out ofDanieltwotwenty wrote:I agree with you Audie, maybe it is religion, not the pure form but man's religiousness and the need for a legalistic life style.Audie wrote:It looks to me that its more that religion pushes people away from science than the other way around.
It wont improve my popularity to say that, I say so only because regardless of my nationality I care about the future of the west.
Who cares about popularity, my views have never been popular. A friend once said to me "Daniel your views could be classed as heretical" I said "Heretical to who? What the institutional Church" we both had a good laugh.
facing the reality of deep time and evolution are generally viewed with amused contempt. If any attention at all is paid to
the eccentricities of a minority religious group's uneducated ideas.
I see things from having feet on both shores and knowing both cultures..what I see in the USA scares me. The anti intellectual
demands of the fundamentalist churches are a danger to the whole nation. I cant prove it, its their country to do as they like,
but I think the atrociously poor scores of US students in science are due in no small part to the number..what is it, 46 percent?
who think deep time / evolution are false and the devil's work.
I see people here just treating it as something to pick,like a new dress or a menu item. Putting their personal reading of scripture ahead of all the research in the world. Or searching out any pseudo-site to confirm whatever they choose on the menu of beliefs.
It just makes me sad for the future, anti intellectualism and passing it to the children is a very dangerous indulgence in an ever
increasingly competitive world.
I'm being a bit incoherent, too many interruptions.
Gotta go now.
That should suffice for any residual popularity I might have had anyway.
Are these guys nuts mony? How date they teach both sides of the fence there ? Sounds like Korea is going down the tubes . I really think that Korea should take a page out of China's book and arrest any of those hoodlum rats that that dare to make bible studies in their own home .THE NERVE OF THOSE ANTIINTELLECTUALS !!! WHO the heck do they think they are ???But get this: While some Darwinists have worriedly taken note of spreading doubts about evolutionary theory in Europe, Asia has emerged as the hottest new frontier for the scientific critique of Darwinism.
In Korea, a mainstream publisher of popular and science texts, Book 21 Publishing Group, has brought out an edition of Explore Evolution, a textbook presenting both sides of the evolution debate. The translation was done by a pair of Korean academics, Seung Yup Lee and Eung Bin Kim, whose scientific specialties are respectively in biomimetics and environmental microbiology. Both teach at universities, Sogang and Yonsei, ranked in Korea's top ten.
2 professors losing their jobs for daring to critique Darwin? I think people like that should be hung from the middle of the town square .Dr. Lee's research fuels his questions about macroevolution. His work on the amazing "natural design" of the South American Hercules beetle and its humidity-sensing shell was highlighted in Nature. In the Preface to the Korean Explore Evolution, Lee advocates investigating "alternative theories" to undirected Darwinian evolution.
Korea also has its own Research Association for Intelligent Design, with an impressive masthead of biologists, chemists and other scientists at top research institutions. Sogang University in Seoul hosts an Annual Symposium on Intelligent Design. The event has included presentations on William Dembski and Robert Marks's Law of Conservation of Information and on protein translation as evidence of intelligent design.
China, of course, is Asia's biggest market for ideas. Illustra Media has had considerable success distributing DVDs of prime ID-related titles there. If you've ever wondered what Stephen Meyer or Jonathan Wells would sound like if they spoke fluently in the Cantonese dialect, or Jay Richards or Guillermo Gonzalez in Japanese, you no longer have to wait to find out.
Producer and director Lad Allen had Unlocking the Mystery of Life and Privileged Planet dubbed into Cantonese and Mandarin, moving a hundred thousand copies into China via Hong Kong. He estimates that three or four times that many DVDs were illegally pirated and copied. "They're sold on the street for a buck," said Allen, who's not complaining. Non-existent copyright enforcement is a fact of life in China.
Illustra has completed a Japanese translation of The Privileged Planet, lip-synced by Japanese actors in Tokyo. But Unlocking the Mystery of Life is Illustra's most-translated film, with editions in Khmer (Cambodian), Thai, Sri Lankan, and Mongolian as well as a variety of European languages.
On the book-publishing side, Center for Science & Culture senior fellow Paul Chien has been largely responsible for introducing intelligent design to China. A biologist at the University of San Francisco, Chien has translated Phil Johnston's Darwin on Trial and Michael Behe's Darwin's Black Box among other titles.
He recently finished work on Denyse O'Leary's By Design Or By Chance?, to be followed by Stephen Meyer's Signature in the Cell.
Publishing in China is tricky, not only because of copyright and related complications that mean you never really know how many copies of your books have been printed and sold. This is China, after all, where ideas can be dangerous things. Because publishing houses are all government-owned, Chien has found it prudent to work with publishers in the provinces some distance from Beijing.
Even so, one of his Chinese editors lost his job for editing a pro-ID book. Dr. Chien knows of two professors who were expelled from teaching because they criticized Darwin. Still, compared to the U.S., he regards the situation in Chinese academia as relatively open.
From informants in the country, Dr. Chien knows that ID "is doing really well in academic circles, among science professors, philosophy professors, and grad students. They use the material in their classes. This is the frontier of science."
Morny, again your post is riddled with innuendos . Why do you assume that the real world consists of only things that can be found by methodological naturalism . Specified complex information is one such example and I've used it continually over and over again. Now ur insertion of the word better is a red herring because it depends on what it is being used to find .Morny wrote:Science sees that as a good thing, not a problem.bippy123 wrote:The problem here morny is that Sagan is using this within the context of methodological naturalism which means that if it can't be analyzed within this paradigm , that it can't be falsified .Morny wrote:Apropos to this discussion is Carl Sagan's response to the 14th Dalai Lama's claim about reincarnation being hard to disprove:
"Plainly the Dalai Lama is right. Religious doctrine that is insulated from disproof has little reason to worry about the advance of science. The grand idea, common to many faiths, of a Creator of the Universe is one such doctrine - difficult alike to demonstrate or to dismiss."
When you have something better than methodological naturalism for making discoveries about the real world, please let someone know. Oh, and they'll want a corresponding discovery.
Doesnt look imaginary, What point is there to posting it tho?bippy123 wrote:Audie wrote:My views on science and religion are pretty much mainstream for China. The contortions people go thru to try to get out ofDanieltwotwenty wrote:I agree with you Audie, maybe it is religion, not the pure form but man's religiousness and the need for a legalistic life style.Audie wrote:It looks to me that its more that religion pushes people away from science than the other way around.
It wont improve my popularity to say that, I say so only because regardless of my nationality I care about the future of the west.
Who cares about popularity, my views have never been popular. A friend once said to me "Daniel your views could be classed as heretical" I said "Heretical to who? What the institutional Church" we both had a good laugh.
facing the reality of deep time and evolution are generally viewed with amused contempt. If any attention at all is paid to
the eccentricities of a minority religious group's uneducated ideas.
I see things from having feet on both shores and knowing both cultures..what I see in the USA scares me. The anti intellectual
demands of the fundamentalist churches are a danger to the whole nation. I cant prove it, its their country to do as they like,
but I think the atrociously poor scores of US students in science are due in no small part to the number..what is it, 46 percent?
who think deep time / evolution are false and the devil's work.
I see people here just treating it as something to pick,like a new dress or a menu item. Putting their personal reading of scripture ahead of all the research in the world. Or searching out any pseudo-site to confirm whatever they choose on the menu of beliefs.
It just makes me sad for the future, anti intellectualism and passing it to the children is a very dangerous indulgence in an ever
increasingly competitive world.
I'm being a bit incoherent, too many interruptions.
Gotta go now.
That should suffice for any residual popularity I might have had anyway.Anti intellectual ?
Maybe these guys in Asian are crazy right ? This must be a figment of my imagination .
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/06/as ... 60691.html
"Darwinist" and "Darwinism" are rather quaint terms, but ok... some might take the inquiries as a sign of something.. (what, exactly?), scientific critique of any theory is good.But get this: While some Darwinists have worriedly taken note of spreading doubts about evolutionary theory in Europe, Asia has emerged as the hottest new frontier for the scientific critique of Darwinism.
.In Korea, a mainstream publisher of popular and science texts, Book 21 Publishing Group, has brought out an edition of Explore Evolution, a textbook presenting both sides of the evolution debate. The translation was done by a pair of Korean academics, Seung Yup Lee and Eung Bin Kim, whose scientific specialties are respectively in biomimetics and environmental microbiology. Both teach at universities, Sogang and Yonsei, ranked in Korea's top ten
I presented my hearfelt and I think entirely sound thoughts. What call is therre for such snarkiness?Are these guys nuts mony? How date they teach both sides of the fence there ? Sounds like Korea is going down the tubes . I really think that Korea should take a page out of China's book and arrest any of those hoodlum rats that that dare to make bible studies in their own home .THE NERVE OF THOSE ANTIINTELLECTUALS !!! WHO the heck do they think they are ???
It is always good to investigate. Basic research finds many things.Anyways back at the barn .
Dr. Lee's research fuels his questions about macroevolution. His work on the amazing "natural design" of the South American Hercules beetle and its humidity-sensing shell was highlighted in Nature. In the Preface to the Korean Explore Evolution, Lee advocates investigating "alternative theories" to undirected Darwinian evolution.
That is fine, but irrelevant to my concern with anti intellectualism in the West. If someone can demonstrate ID, that will be spectacular. By all means try.Korea also has its own Research Association for Intelligent Design......
someone is always picking on China.Non-existent copyright enforcement is a fact of life in China.
Again, ID is not the topic, fut if someone can show it, fine. If they did, it would still not address the anti intellectualism I referred to. You know, the kind that says ice core dating has to be wrong because it doesnt match their idea of what the bible says.On the book-publishing side, Center for Science & Culture senior fellow Paul Chien has been largely responsible for introducing intelligent design to China. A biologist at the University of San Francisco, Chien has translated Phil Johnston's Darwin on Trial and Michael Behe's Darwin's Black Box among other titles.
Hmm, I see the word "expelled" has come in. You nor I know what happened there.Even so, one of his Chinese editors lost his job for editing a pro-ID book. Dr. Chien knows of two professors who were expelled from teaching because they criticized Darwin. Still, compared to the U.S., he regards the situation in Chinese academia as relatively open.
It may be a frontier, it may be a dead end. As of now, it is speculation , like cold fusion.From informants in the country, Dr. Chien knows that ID "is doing really well in academic circles, among science professors, philosophy professors, and grad students. They use the material in their classes. This is the frontier of science."
You cannot back that with evidence, you do not know what they taught nor how they taught it.2 professors losing their jobs for daring to critique Darwin? I think people like that should be hung from the middle of the town square .
Why no, I will have to disagree completely there. I can bring in vast reams of it.I mentioned a couple, above.Mony it's easy to call something anti intellectual , it's a little harder to back that claim with evidence my friend .
I do have a real topic that is of concern to me, and perhaps to some few others.It's good that china allows state sponsored churches but I think they are being too nice
Could you provide us with precise scientific definitions of these words, and explain what they mean in the phrase? Best if you dont refer to anything but your own understanding.bippy123 wrote:
Every normal, high iq intellectual knows from our experience as human beings knows that specified complex information can never come about from anything other the. Blind undirected natural forces .
and to that I say ""BRING on that magic show !!!!!!""
I don't. As far as I know, angels guide atoms around. If so, because of methodological naturalism, I can infer that such angels seem to have a flawless knowledge of and devotion to physics. But to simplify study, I make the provisional assumption that atoms obey simple physical laws. This practical approach also saves me from having to take courses on angel psychology.bippy123 wrote:Why do you assume that the real world consists of only things that can be found by methodological naturalism .
False again. We know from experience that lovers are prone to writing messages on sand. And patriots are prone to carving portraits of leaders into the side of a mountain.bippy123 wrote:An example would be if we saw a sign drawn on the sand in the beach that said "Steve loves sandy " the methodological naturalist wouod say ""golly gosh far it , this message was made naturally by the waves crashing on the beach a billion times , you illiterate anti-intellectual intelligent design idiots"
Experts across fields of geology, biology, mathematics, and so on, nearly unanimously point out massive problems with Stephen Meyer's writings. And when even a slow-witted person like me can see Meyer's basic misunderstandings, your case is on shaky ground.bippy123 wrote:This is also why I brought up doctor Meyers video on the specified complex information contained within the arrangement of the individual nucleotide bases and even their attachment sites which cannot be explained by chemical affinity or blind chance or any evolutionary mechanism.
Morny , so no answer huh ? That's like you explaining evolution and asking me for a refutation and me saying "the experts say he's wrong ""Experts across fields of geology, biology, mathematics, and so on, nearly unanimously point out massive problems with Stephen Meyer's writings. And when even a slow-witted person like me can see Meyer's basic misunderstandings, your case is on shaky ground.
Helpful Hint #17: when you google topics, force yourself to read and understand something from at least one non-creationist website.
Well I do not prescribe to the many worlds interpretation as I see idealism as being able to explain reality in a much simpler way , but that's another topicAudie wrote:Could you provide us with precise scientific definitions of these words, and explain what they mean in the phrase? Best if you dont refer to anything but your own understanding.bippy123 wrote:
Every normal, high iq intellectual knows from our experience as human beings knows that specified complex information can never come about from anything other the. Blind undirected natural forces .
and to that I say ""BRING on that magic show !!!!!!""
Considering how much of what has been learned about physics and other areas of research is very counter intuitive, and very difficult to understand even with a
deep background in higher math, its not reasonable to say that normal human experience will tell everyone how to spot what is impossible.
It is of course quite hard sometimes to tell what is an artifact, and what is not.Morny wrote:I don't. As far as I know, angels guide atoms around. If so, because of methodological naturalism, I can infer that such angels seem to have a flawless knowledge of and devotion to physics. But to simplify study, I make the provisional assumption that atoms obey simple physical laws. This practical approach also saves me from having to take courses on angel psychology.bippy123 wrote:Why do you assume that the real world consists of only things that can be found by methodological naturalism .
bippy123 wrote:An example would be if we saw a sign drawn on the sand in the beach that said "Steve loves sandy " the methodological naturalist wouod say ""golly gosh far it , this message was made naturally by the waves crashing on the beach a billion times , you illiterate anti-intellectual intelligent design idiots"
False again. We know from experience that lovers are prone to writing messages on sand. And patriots are prone to carving portraits of leaders into the side of a mountain.
.
