Re: [asa] Brownback on evolution

From: PvM <>
Date: Sat Jun 02 2007 - 23:36:13 EDT

<quote>David Clounch, of the US-based Intelligent Design Network, said
ID had not been disproved and, therefore, it was a theory that should
be taught to schoolchildren.</quote>


Is this you Dave? Did they quote you correctly?

ID has not been disproven thus it should be taught. And yet, Newton
was wrong to attribute the orbits of planets to a deity, and nothing
happened to ID, after all, finding scientific answers for our
ignorance hardly disproves our ignorance now does it? Ignorance will
continue and ID will find solace in our inabilities to understand
God's creation.
But really, ID can hardly be seen as a scientific theory worth
teaching to school children in a science class. Although I could
potentially see some reasons why it may be taught in schools, after
all we do still mention alchemy and witch craft I believe.

David Clounch again

<quote>"Are these people saying science has concluded there is no
design? I think it's completely unscientific to draw that conclusion,"
he said. "The plaintiffs want to tell everybody's kids if you believe
there is design in the world, that's irrational and science doesn't
say that. But science doesn't say anything about that.</quote>

No these people are saying that 1) ID fails to be a science 2) forcing
ID to be taught as such is fraught with religious problems, which run
so deep that it may be impossible to disentangle them. Perhaps David
is somewhat confused as to what the plaintiffs may believe? Is this
the miscarriage of justice you are referring to?
I believe Judge Jones' decision was one of great thought and care and
he did both science, education and religion a favor by his ruling I

To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat, 2 Jun 2007 20:36:13 -0700

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Jun 02 2007 - 23:36:30 EDT