new Intelligent Design doc
Nov 17 2007 16:09
Dunno if anyone's interested in this stuff but the new PBS documentary Judgment Day: ID on Trial is now online.
Just about to watch it, it centres around the 2005 Dover trial. Kinda baffles me that it took US networks 2 years to get a documentary like this on public TV, especially seeing as BBC Horizon covered it less than 2 months after the Dover verdict.
Nov 19 2007 14:41
#2
Just to clarify Rasputin, the people behind the Creation Museum (Answers in Genesis) are not ID advocates - they're young-earthers. The two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive, but AiG happen to be critical of intelligent design becaus ethey think it's a wee bit too vague and refuses to bluntly acknowledge God as the creator. ID is "agnostic" in terms of who the designer is - AiG are certain it's the christian God!!!
ID rather is like the concept of "mere creation" - so there is a spectrum of opinion within the ID camp from people who accept most of evolutionary theory and the old-age of the earth like Michael Behe, to those who are defintiely young-earthers but see ID as a vehicale to inject supernatural causation into science like Andy McIntosh, Paul Nelson etc etc.
Nov 22 2007 18:13
#3
here's an extended trailer of the pro-ID film "Expelled"
It's fucking mental - it's acting like there's a McCarthy-conspiracy about querstionning "Darwinism" (who the fuck calls it darwinism?) and how by simply watching the movie you'll lose your job and all kinds of paranoid mental shit.
Of course he seems completely blind to the fact that there are numerous debates going on with biology from phyletic gradualism vs punctuated equilibrium, debates over sociobiology, units of selection and what-not.
The trailer is in part of a talk at some big conference/rally (27.20 in) thing of a christian-right think-tank and is part of some jingoistic pro-war anti-abortion crap
Nov 23 2007 06:38
#4
ID proponents are only ambiguous about which God did it in public. In private, they're pretty clear that Jesus did it, as evidence by their internal documents and memos that came under scrutiny in Kitzmiller v Dover. Hell, the ID textbook "Of Pandas and People" actually has a bit where the word "creationist" has "design proponent" copy/pasted into the middle of it- apparently they fucked up that particular c/p. The ID people are Creationists, plain and simple.
Nov 23 2007 12:05
#5
Our shop just got "Darwin's Black Box", by the Behe character. Interesting timing.
Nov 23 2007 12:58
#6
Haha - why'd they get Darwin's Black Box though??? It's 11 years old and he's just brought out "Edge of Evolution", like 2 months ago! which has been demolished in several journal and book reviews by many inc. Dawkins, Sean B Carroll, Ken Miller etc
Nov 23 2007 13:06
#7
Guilt wrote:
ID proponents are only ambiguous about which God did it in public. In private, they're pretty clear that Jesus did it, as evidence by their internal documents and memos that came under scrutiny in Kitzmiller v Dover. Hell, the ID textbook "Of Pandas and People" actually has a bit where the word "creationist" has "design proponent" copy/pasted into the middle of it- apparently they fucked up that particular c/p. The ID people are Creationists, plain and simple.
Oh totally I don't disagree with a single word of this, but Rasputin was way off saying that ID was synonymous with young-earth ccreationism. Rasputin's use of Answers in Genesis material, especially from their museum betrays an ignorance of the fact that AiG are actually very critical of the ID movement becasue they're too wishy-washy!
It's still perfectly clear what the motivations of the ID movement are as evidenced by the Wedge document (I'm guessing that one of the internal documents you're on abaout, it's certainly the most well-known)
They want to "defeat [scientific] materialism" represented by evolution, "reverse the stifling materialist world view and replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions" and to "affirm the reality of God."
But to view them as some homogenous christian grouping is daft. Discovery Institute (authors of the Wedge) members include Jonathan Well (a Moonie), and Michael Behe (catholic). Fo fuck sake Behe accepts just about every aspect of modern science- common ancestry, age of the earth, descent with modification etc, he just thinks evolution doesn't explain everything.
They're only homogenous in the sense that they all thinks there's a designer.
Nov 23 2007 14:10
#8
Quote:
Oh totally I don't disagree with a single word of this, but Rasputin was way off saying that ID was synonymous with young-earth ccreationism. Rasputin's use of Answers in Genesis material, especially from their museum betrays an ignorance of the fact that AiG are actually very critical of the ID movement becasue they're too wishy-washy!
apologies - the main experience I've had with ID is as a would-be acceptable front for the Creationist movement, I wasn't aware there was more to it - interesting tho.
Nov 23 2007 14:14
#9
rasputin wrote:
Quote:
Oh totally I don't disagree with a single word of this, but Rasputin was way off saying that ID was synonymous with young-earth ccreationism. Rasputin's use of Answers in Genesis material, especially from their museum betrays an ignorance of the fact that AiG are actually very critical of the ID movement becasue they're too wishy-washy!apologies - the main experience I've had with ID is as a would-be acceptable front for the Creationist movement, I wasn't aware there was more to it - interesting tho.
don;t feel too bad, that xconorx get's paid to read up on those lunatics, well that and spending all day on message boards and youtube.
Nov 23 2007 14:29
#10
rasputin wrote:
Quote:
Oh totally I don't disagree with a single word of this, but Rasputin was way off saying that ID was synonymous with young-earth ccreationism. Rasputin's use of Answers in Genesis material, especially from their museum betrays an ignorance of the fact that AiG are actually very critical of the ID movement becasue they're too wishy-washy!apologies - the main experience I've had with ID is as a would-be acceptable front for the Creationist movement, I wasn't aware there was more to it - interesting tho.
Na it's cool - it's just important to know in case you ever argue with them in public, they'll make you look a tool if you don't know the difference.
No matter how rediculous their arguments are, they do know their own crap inside out and if you aren't aware of at leats the broad distinctions they can
You can actually watch Genesis TV online - they sometimes have Answers in Genesis stuff on and here I've seen them criticizing the ID-movement for just not representing for tha G.O.D. enough.
You're totally right though Rasputin, ID is "creationism in a cheap tuxedo"
Nov 25 2007 00:47
#11
xConorx wrote:
Haha - why'd they get Darwin's Black Box though??? It's 11 years old and he's just brought out "Edge of Evolution", like 2 months ago! which has been demolished in several journal and book reviews by many inc. Dawkins, Sean B Carroll, Ken Miller etc
I have no idea. We just get these random "science" books from time to time. And then they decide to take down things for some reason, like that Jewish Lobby book (while the "response" to it, that whiny diatribe by Abe Foxman, is still on display).
Nov 25 2007 08:46
#12
rasputin wrote:
....
(from the Creation Museum, Kentucky)
Oh jeez, how embarrassing.
how can you disagree with ID when they've got iron-clad arguments like this:
(from the Creation Museum, Kentucky)