Richard Dawkins Accepts Possibility Of Intelligent Design
Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 5:13 pm
newberry wrote:My point is if James Watson wants to go on a lecture tour with his "evidence" for the intellectual inferiority of the people living on the African continent he should be able to, how ever ridiculous his findings (and the research behind them) are.
Whom is stating otherwise? Is anyone here, or Dawkins or other atheists saying that people don't have the right to free speech? Again, this is one of the straw men of "Expelled," that there is a movement to stifle discussion of ID.
ETA: I'm sure Christians wouldn't appreciate it if I went into churches and started preaching Islam or atheism or something. That's because it wouldn't be an appropriate venue for that speech. Like the science classroom isn't the proper venue for ID. But no one is saying that ID proponents shouldn't have the right to speak their mind, are they?
...but if someone from the religious faction wants his ideas on Darwin's faults considered by the scientific community they should be, provided he has evidence for them to test and most likely disprove.
newberry wrote:Proper science doesn't stubbornly cling to prior findings, but evolves when new information is available.
newberry wrote:...but if someone from the religious faction wants his ideas on Darwin's faults considered by the scientific community they should be, provided he has evidence for them to test and most likely disprove.
Agreed. But when, if ever, has that happened? Proper science doesn't stubbornly cling to prior findings, but evolves when new information is available. Can you name an instance when the "scientific community" rejected intelligent criticisms of Darwin? Sorry if I'm still missing your point, but I still feel like this is a bit of a straw man argument.
ETA: Let's flip this around. What if someone from the scientific community wants their ideas on atheism considered by the religious community. Will they seriously consider it?
It's OK if people of all viewpoints express themselves. It's OK if people disagree. If someone has scientific evidence that challenges Evolution or some other scientific theory, great, bring it on--but tell us what it is. If anyone knows of any credible argument that challenges current scientific knowledge that isn't being looked at by the scientific community, please name it.
'proper science' doesn't but there is a scientific community made up of people as fallible as anyone else.
But skepticism of scientists is a healthy component in making sure that happens - I reckon.
My stance on the issue raised by this movie is this: if these Christian "scientists" have published findings with research and testable data their ideas, no matter how ludicrous I or anyone else in the majority of the scientifically literate community find them, should be examined.
...if these Christian scientists featured in this movie are honestly having a hard time getting their findings considered by the rest of their colleagues I think they may have a valid complaint.
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed is a controversial documentary film[1] which claims that educators and scientists are being persecuted for their belief that there is evidence of “design” in nature. It claims that “Big Science" allows no dissent from the scientific theory of evolution, and blames the theory for a range of alleged societal ills.[2][3]
newberry wrote:I haven't seen the movie, but isn't it basically about ID? If so, ID has been looked at seriously by scientists, and found to be lacking. Do you believe that ID is indeed scientifically sound?