Re: 70,000 Australian scientists has rejected Intelligent Design


"winglesswonder03" <winglesswonder03@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:yGE6f.42755$Tf5.25189@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "GoldMine" <goldmine@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:%R%5f.1760$mD2.647@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> Glad to see that the "light" has not burnt out down under, and that the
>> Ausies are still using their brains to think.
>>
>> Good show, a flicker of brightness in the vast darkness of ignorance the
>> "stupid design" people want to brainwash us with.
>>
>> Here's a Fosters to you guys!
>>
>> Excuse me while I finish this giant beverage . . . .
>>
> Would you be open to the idea that all that lives on earth was
> brought
> by or engineered by an alien civilization? This also falls under the
> heading
> of intelligent design. Why did civilization suddenly appear 7 thousand
> years
> ago?

Civilization didn't suddenly appear 7,000 years ago. For instance, the
earliest remains of Jericho go back to 8,000 B.C (about 10,000 years ago).
However, from a geologic and anthropologic point of view, it is true that
civilization is relatively recent. To understand why, one has to
understand that prior to 12,000 years ago, the world was in an ice age, the
latest of four that have occurred in the last 2 million years. A fair
weather climate didn't exist where there were significant numbers of
people. In fact, prior to the end of the last ice age, significant numbers
of people didn't exist. The climate was harsh, warm seasons short or
non-existent, food scarce. Because of these conditions, people tended to
live nomadic lifestyles in small bands. Once the climate warmed, and the
glaciers retreated, food became more plentiful, and populations grew.
Along with the growing population came agriculture, and a more sedintary
lifestyle, which necessitated division of labor. As that labor became more
organized, settlements became more elaborate, along with the cultures that
developed out of them. This was a gradual thing, not a sudden one. There
is no reason whatsoever to assume a Von Daniken-mentality about the origins
of civilization.


> Who really built pyramids such as those in Central America and on the
> other side of the planet in Egypt?

The people who lived there. Who else?

>
>>
>> "George" <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:wt%5f.500555$xm3.474675@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,16988506-29277,00.html
>> >
>> > By Darrin Barnett
>> >
>> > October 21, 2005
>> >
>> > AUSTRALIA'S scientific community has fired its first broadside in a
>> looming
>> > war over a controversial theory of evolution known as intelligent
> design.
>> >
>> > The theory proposes that evolution alone cannot explain complex
> biological
>> > processes and that a God-like creator must be behind them.
>> > Advocates claim intelligent design differs from creationism as it uses
>> > science to back its claims.
>> >
>> > In the United States, President George W Bush has started a debate by
>> > suggesting intelligent design should be taught in the classroom as
>> > part
> of
>> > the science curriculum.
>> >
>> > Intelligent design is not currently taught in science classes in
>> Australian
>> > schools.
>> >
>> > A coalition of more than 70,000 Australian scientists has rejected the
>> > theory as scientifically untested, suggesting it is instead aimed at
>> > debunking the theory of evolution and lacks any credible evidence of
>> > its
>> > own.
>> >
>> > In an open letter entitled Intelligent design is not science, the
>> > group
>> > calls on all schools not to teach the topic as science because it
>> > fails
> to
>> > qualify on every count as a scientific theory.
>> >
>> > "As Australian scientists and science educators, we are gravely
> concerned
>> > that so-called intelligent design might be taught in any school as a
> valid
>> > scientific alternative to evolution," the letter says.
>> >
>> > "While science is a work in progress, a vast and growing body of
>> > factual
>> > knowledge supports the hypothesis that biological complexity is the
> result
>> > of natural processes of evolution."
>> >
>> > The coalition of scientists rejects the assertion that some living
>> > structures are so complex that they are explicable only by the agency
>> > of
> a
>> > superior force.
>> >
>> > They say intelligent design's central plank of a theological or
>> > philosophical notion of supernatural intervention is a belief which
> cannot
>> > be observed, tested, validated or falsified.
>> >
>> > "They are free to believe and profess whatever they like," the letter
>> says.
>> >
>> > "But not being able to imagine or explain how something happened other
>> than
>> > by making a leap of faith to supernatural intervention is no basis for
> any
>> > science: that is a theological or philosophical notion."
>> >
>> > To allow the theory to be taught as science would make a mockery of
>> > Australian science teaching and throw open the door of science classes
> to
>> > similarly unscientific world views such as astrology, spoon-bending,
>> > flat-earth cosmology or alien abductions, the letter said.
>> >
>> > Federal Education Minister Brendan Nelson said in August he believed
>> > parents should have the choice whether they wanted the theory taught
>> > in
>> > schools, but not to the exclusion of the established theory of
> evolution.
>> >
>> > He has since said the theory might be more at home in philosophy of
>> science
>> > or religious classes - but not in the science classroom.
>> >
>> > The theory is currently being tested in US courts to see whether it
>> > can
> be
>> > incorporated into science classes.
>> >
>> > _________________________________________
>> >
>> > Way to go, Aussies!!!
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Speculative Design Hypothesis (with predictions)
    ... In science one investigates by testing hypotheses. ... I know that the scientists investigating the subject are doing ... Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design (Annotated) ... three papers in academic journals. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Uncommon Conceit
    ... Intelligent Design is not a theory, at this point, it's ... taught in a science class. ... Dembski attempts to do this. ... Scientists are now in a position to demonstrate ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Speculative Design Hypothesis (with predictions)
    ... In science one investigates by testing hypotheses. ... I know that the scientists investigating the subject are doing ... Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design (Annotated) ... three papers in academic journals. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Uncommon Conceit
    ... Intelligent Design is not a theory, at this point, it's ... taught in a science class. ... Dembski attempts to do this. ... Scientists are now in a position to demonstrate ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: My views on evolution
    ... > have good science but tend to overstate their case. ... Do not confuse information theory with intelligent design. ... > humans evolve from a common ancestor with monkeys/apes; ... How many scientists know anything about Michael Polanyi ...
    (talk.origins)