Rick Brattin’s Missouri bill redefines science, gives equal time to intelligent design
Posted: 14 February 2013 10:45 AM   [ Ignore ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4258
Joined  2010-08-15

Why do I keep getting that back sliding feeling - I though we were supposed to progress forward?

http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/02/missouri-bill-redefines-science-gives-equal-time-to-intelligent-design/

Missouri bill redefines science, gives equal time to intelligent design
by John Timmer - Feb 12 2013

Although even the Wikipedia entry for scientific theory includes definitions provided by the world’s most prestigious organizations of scientists, the bill’s sponsor Rick Brattin has seen fit to invent his own definition. And it’s a head-scratcher: “‘Scientific theory,’ an inferred explanation of incompletely understood phenomena about the physical universe based on limited knowledge, whose components are data, logic, and faith-based philosophy.” The faith or philosophy involved remain unspecified.

If scientific theory concerning biological origin is taught in a course of study, biological evolution and biological intelligent design shall be taught. Other scientific theory or theories of origin may be taught. If biological intelligent design is taught, any proposed identity of the intelligence responsible for earth’s biology shall be verifiable by present-day observation or experimentation and teachers shall not question, survey, or otherwise influence student belief in a nonverifiable identity within a science course.

Missouri Bill Redefines Science, Pushes Intelligent Design
TheYoungTurks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VlwTJq9iC8

 Signature 

How many times do lies need to be exposed
before we have permission to trash them?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2013 10:47 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3028
Joined  2010-04-26

*Sounds of a gun being loaded* BANG!!!  *thud*aenhrh;asbvuu9bvgfytvfyodolyu6fdp8y6ifdpvfypy68f

 Signature 

“In the end nature is horrific and teaches us nothing.” -Mutual of Omicron

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2013 11:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  757
Joined  2012-04-25

Actually I think this is progress. It’s good to expose this to the wider public.  And it’s very easy to deal with… just agree with it, and sue the pants off them if they so much as imply that god isn’t a women!

“That’s ridiculous, God isn’t a women, He’s a man”
“So are you saying women can’t be intelligent?”
“Uh uh no I’m not, just the Bible says…”
“Wait, the Bible says God has a penis?”
“Uh no but, well God doesn’t have a gender”
“Ok, so then let’s refer to God correctly as an It”

Expose their warped psychology.

[ Edited: 14 February 2013 11:31 AM by CuthbertJ ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2013 02:18 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1397
Joined  2010-04-22

Sometimes I wonder how often it is that people proposing such laws are sociopaths, that they are doing nothing more than seeing how far they can push others to act stupidly for their own pleasure.

 Signature 

“All musicians are subconsciously mathematicians.”

- Thelonious Monk

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2013 05:51 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5551
Joined  2010-06-16

How about, rather than presenting it as “Intelligent Design”, they present it as “Stupid Design”?  They could point out all the extinct species as dumb mistakes god made.  smile

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 February 2013 11:00 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  757
Joined  2012-04-25
Occam. - 14 February 2013 05:51 PM

How about, rather than presenting it as “Intelligent Design”, they present it as “Stupid Design”?  They could point out all the extinct species as dumb mistakes god made.  smile

Occam

Very good point.  Which part of the intelligent design is responsible for innocent children getting horrible diseases?  Better (worse) yet, which part of the ID resulted in natural disasters killing sometimes 100s of thousands of innocent people?

If I were the designer and wanted to give “my children” a little adversity I’d fix things so that natural events challenged them but didn’t kill them.  I’d *maybe* create a minor virus or something that made people feel bad for awhile but never killed them horribly.  Since I was all knowing and all powerful this type of design would be completely within my abilities.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 February 2013 11:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4258
Joined  2010-08-15
TromboneAndrew - 14 February 2013 02:18 PM

Sometimes I wonder how often it is that people proposing such laws are sociopaths, that they are doing nothing more than seeing how far they can push others to act stupidly for their own pleasure.

How I hate to admit I hear exactly what you’re saying.

I get the feeling many can’t wait for the serious gun firing to start.

 Signature 

How many times do lies need to be exposed
before we have permission to trash them?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 February 2013 04:00 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1397
Joined  2010-04-22
citizenschallenge.pm - 15 February 2013 11:58 PM
TromboneAndrew - 14 February 2013 02:18 PM

Sometimes I wonder how often it is that people proposing such laws are sociopaths, that they are doing nothing more than seeing how far they can push others to act stupidly for their own pleasure.

How I hate to admit I hear exactly what you’re saying.

I get the feeling many can’t wait for the serious gun firing to start.

We know this can happen even to otherwise ‘normal’ people who are given power. The Stanford Prison Experiment showed that, flawed as it was.

 Signature 

“All musicians are subconsciously mathematicians.”

- Thelonious Monk

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 February 2013 06:54 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  83
Joined  2012-12-01

How dare they impugn the Garuda Bird?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 February 2013 05:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  438
Joined  2009-01-28

Other scientific theory or theories of origin may be taught. If biological intelligent design is taught, any proposed identity of the intelligence responsible for earth’s biology shall be verifiable by present-day observation or experimentation and teachers shall not question, survey, or otherwise influence student belief in a nonverifiable identity within a science course.

that’s other SCIENTIFIC theories.  “intelligent design” is NOT scientific.

Profile