THIS BLOG IS NOW IN STASIS.


PLEASE VISIT MY NEW WEBSITES:


My other projects include:


TrueFreethinker.com


My side projects are:


Worldview and Science Examiner


Fitness Trends Examiner (wherein I review individual exercises and workout routines, diet and nutrition, supplements and healthy snacks)


My YouTube channel

1/17/10

Global Warming and Intelligent Design

This post has been moved to this link.

3 comments:

  1. Where is this data, by the way? It tends to just be rampant speculation which inserts Yahweh into science.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Stop lying for Jesus, Mariano. Claim that you believe the universe was created by the Christian God, and stop claiming that you have anything more than faith to back this belief up.

    You heap scorn on anyone who credibly debunks the faith=fact myth, and in doing so, reveal your dissatisfaction at the impotence of such faith.

    You've got two choices: have faith in the fact of Biblical Creationism (and thus have no need to discredit opposing opinions) or admit that you don't have as much faith as you'd like (and seek to pick apart opposing opinions in order to bolster your faith).

    You're trying to have it both ways, but it's sadly apparent that you lack the faith you crave.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Note Mariano's dishonesty here:

    Note the statement by Scott C. Todd (Department of Biology, Kansas State University),


    Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic.[2]


    Whoops, it's a misquote, big surprise. Check out Quote #4.9.

    Let's see, shall we?

    Creationists quote the above but leave out the very next sentence:

    Of course the scientist, as an individual, is free to embrace a reality that transcends naturalism.

    In that next sentence, Dr. Todd correctly identifies the basis of the exclusion of the design hypothesis from science as methodological, not philosophical, naturalism. While it might be quibbled that Dr. Todd could have put it better, science, contrary to the fondest wishes of creationists, is still not metaphysics. To suggest that Dr. Todd was expressing a commitment to philosophical Naturalism is the height of disingenuousness.

    Also, the text which immediately precedes the quotation is:


    Most important, it should be made clear in the classroom that science, including evolution, has not disproved God's existence because it cannot be allowed to consider it (presumably).

    That is hardly dogmatic anti-theism on Dr. Todd's part.

    ReplyDelete