Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Dec 30, 2008 14:55:28 GMT -4
Boo Hoo! ID is so suppressed that no one can talk about it. Boo Hoo! There is no scientific discussion of ID because it is not science. It has no place in science education. People promoting ID are engaged in politics. If they want to advance in scientific careers, they should practice science. I am in full agreement with you that ID, as it stands, isn't realy science and shouldn't be taught as an acceptable scientific alternate theory to evolution. But does this mean you think scientists who want to talk about aspects of ID or problems with evolution should be denied tenure or even lose their jobs? |
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Dec 30, 2008 15:24:24 GMT -4
But does this mean you think scientists who want to talk about aspects of ID or problems with evolution should be denied tenure or even lose their jobs? And what scientist has been denied tenure or fired specifically because they want to talk about aspects of ID or problems with evolution? |
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Dec 30, 2008 16:14:30 GMT -4
But does this mean you think scientists who want to talk about aspects of ID or problems with evolution should be denied tenure or even lose their jobs? And what scientist has been denied tenure or fired specifically because they want to talk about aspects of ID or problems with evolution? Well there are several appearing in Expelled that claim to have had negative consequences from their interest in ID. I take it you agree with me that denying someone tenure or firing them because they are interested in ID goes too far? |
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Dec 30, 2008 17:08:24 GMT -4
I take it you agree with me that denying someone tenure or firing them because they are interested in ID goes too far?
IIRC, the university where he was denied tenure stated it was because he was deficient in publishing, getting grant money and had not been very good in shepherding grad students to their PhDs. So he was let go because of poor performance as a university scientist, not his interest in ID.
So here we have a prosaic explanation that can be refuted by showing it to be incorrect or Expelled's claim of bias. How do you refute a charge of bias when it is not substantiated?
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Dec 30, 2008 17:35:45 GMT -4
I take it you agree with me that denying someone tenure or firing them because they are interested in ID goes too far? IIRC, the university where he was denied tenure stated it was because he was deficient in publishing, getting grant money and had not been very good in shepherding grad students to their PhDs. So he was let go because of poor performance as a university scientist, not his interest in ID. So here we have a prosaic explanation that can be refuted by showing it to be incorrect or Expelled's claim of bias. How do you refute a charge of bias when it is not substantiated? So was that a yes? |
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Dec 30, 2008 18:46:05 GMT -4
I take it you agree with me that denying someone tenure or firing them because they are interested in ID goes too far? IIRC, the university where he was denied tenure stated it was because he was deficient in publishing, getting grant money and had not been very good in shepherding grad students to their PhDs. So he was let go because of poor performance as a university scientist, not his interest in ID. So here we have a prosaic explanation that can be refuted by showing it to be incorrect or Expelled's claim of bias. How do you refute a charge of bias when it is not substantiated? So was that a yes? I don't know of any case where someone was denied jobs because of an "interest in ID." And Expelled is certainly not the place to find an example. Besides lots of people are interested in ID. I am one of them. For the same general reasons I have been interested in radical racism, the moon hoax and other things. Those who hold beliefs without reason interest me. |
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Dec 30, 2008 19:08:24 GMT -4
I don't know of any case where someone was denied jobs because of an "interest in ID." And Expelled is certainly not the place to find an example. Besides lots of people are interested in ID. I am one of them. For the same general reasons I have been interested in radical racism, the moon hoax and other things. Those who hold beliefs without reason interest me. So, was THAT a yes?  |
|
Al Johnston
"Cheer up!" they said, "It could be worse!" So I did, and it was.
Posts: 1,453
|
Post by Al Johnston on Dec 31, 2008 8:31:38 GMT -4
Maybe we could investigate the controversy between literate people and those bold sceptics who insist that marks on paper are just meaningless squiggles...
|
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Dec 31, 2008 15:18:00 GMT -4
Maybe we could investigate the controversy between literate people and those bold sceptics who insist that marks on paper are just meaningless squiggles... Well we could if you want to argue that there is a contravery between those that think there was some sort of intelligence behind those squiggles and those that believe that they all happened by random chance..... ducks and runs..... ;D |
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Dec 31, 2008 20:01:49 GMT -4
What's with all the language analogies for evolution? First we had Data Cable talking about fossils of languages and ur-languages, and now Al comparing ID to a straw man trying to disprove that written language has meaning.
I don't think anyone will argue with me that all human languages were created by human beings - they therefore all have intelligent designers. That makes them a poor analogy for evolution without ID, guys.
|
|
Al Johnston
"Cheer up!" they said, "It could be worse!" So I did, and it was.
Posts: 1,453
|
Post by Al Johnston on Jan 1, 2009 12:37:46 GMT -4
Only one language was intelligently designed from scratch, and hardly anyone speaks it. That intelligent designers can develop something without the process requiring any intelligent direction is a subtlety that, among others, will continue to be elusive.
|
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Jan 1, 2009 12:59:45 GMT -4
Only one language was intelligently designed from scratch, and hardly anyone speaks it. That intelligent designers can develop something without the process requiring any intelligent direction is a subtlety that, among others, will continue to be elusive. There are a lot of constructed languages, though the comment about the number of speakers is still true, its between Esperanto and Klingon as to which is the most popular. |
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Jan 1, 2009 13:31:03 GMT -4
Only one language was intelligently designed from scratch, and hardly anyone speaks it. While you're probably referring to Esperanto, there are numerous constructed languages, not even counting the "fictional" examples such as Klingon and assorted Middle-Earth tongues created by Tolkien. [Edit: Curses! ToSeeked in the midst of a (rather long) composition period.] |
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Jan 1, 2009 14:02:11 GMT -4
All languages are constructed - it's just that most were constructed by a sort of group consensus rather than an individual.
|
|
