ARWallace wrote:I would agree that ID, being a relatively new field of inquiry (20 years or less) has a lot of research ahead of it. But the ToE has been around for over 150 years, and there are volumes of research in this field.
Actually ToE has been around longer than that... Darwin was the one to popularize it... So?
It depends on what type of evolution you are talking about... If you are talking about Darwinian evolution, I think, and it seems that you too would agree that neither DE nor ID have all the answers ... For the most part I agree with Rich with his General Rebuttal to the Theory of EvolutionARWallace wrote:Could you be a little more specific in what areas you think evolution needs? I'm not trying to be argumentative, just curious.
Looks like we both agree on something...ARWallace wrote:On this, I would agree.
Well that pretty much was what I said before.... ID has been labeled as another form of creationism, a breech between Church and State, a religious wedge. But if you know of a class on ID in some public school curricula, that would be the first time I have heard of that... Sure a teacher my allude to ID, but teach a course on it? Highly doubtful....ARWallace wrote:Well, there's a couple of issues you bring up here; first, will it be taught in public schools? You say no, and I tend to disagree - we have one teacher on this forum who admitted teaching it. I know many teachers in my district teach ID. I think this will continue even if cases are brought to the Supreme Court and ID - like YEC - is ruled a religious-based philosophy. Teachers with strong personal beliefs tend to teach what they want to teach.Now, whether public schools will promote the teaching of ID is another kettle of fish. I suspect in the coming years we will have school boards that will implement policies promoting its teaching on an ad hoc basis across the country, and I suspect that court cases will inevitably follow. And I would be surprised if the outcome of these cases is any different than the Kitzmiller v. Dover ruling. ID, in its current form, is deeply rooted in Christianity, and teaching it would violate the Establishment Clause of the Constitution. It will be rather difficult for ID to parse itself from its roots, IMHO. And I suppose this would also preclude it from receiving tax dollars to pursue its research.
So, in your opinion molecular biology or gradualism has confirmed the evolutionary mechanisms proposed by the Darwinian theory? How? This seems to go against what you said earlier... You said that you too would agree that neither DE nor ID have all the answers.ARWallace wrote:Now, ID is an area of active research at place like the Discovery Institute which is privately funded. But even if it wasn't ruled a religious idea and public money could fund it, I tend to think there wouldn't be a groundswell of interest. Scientists are sort of a tough crowd, and they tend to think the ToE is a valid, robust scientific theory and that ID hasn't produced on its promises (i.e. they haven't produced a demonstrably IC structure, as yet).
Ah... No it has been spot-welded... The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the 1987 case of Edwards v. Aguillard that design is another form of creationism and that it violates the Establishment Clause, which prohibits state funds to religion.ARWallace wrote:Finally, I wouldn't really argue that the ToE has been spot-welded in place - it sort of gained the status it enjoys in science on its own merits.
Of course the theory of evolution hasn't been discredited. That is what the evolutionary scientists are paid to do. Promote ToE.. If you worked for the Nike corporation would you start selling shoes from the Adidas corporation? I would think not... That is, if you wanted to keep your job and the respect of your peers...ARWallace wrote:That is, after 150 years of active research, there has not been a single published study that has discredited a major tenet of the theory of evolution. This sort of support is enjoyed be an elite group of ideas in science which is why the Wedge will have to be pretty big to be successful.
Cheers
Al
Cheers...