Kitzmiller vs. Dover, PA

[jcrawford]

An intelligently designed legal attack is exposing the soft underbelly of neo-Darwinist facism in public education.

Fascinating details emerging from the court transcripts of the historic Evo/ID legal battle in PA.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dover/k ... dover.html

[Grumpy]

snappyanswer

What a load.

Judge Jones(appointed by W) was absolutely correct in his descision, you are reduced to calling his motives into question because his logic is unassailable.

Science(evolution) is neutral on God's existance, neither supporting nor denying it. Being supernatural there is no way for science to provide evidence either way.

If YOUR interpretation of YOUR religious texts is in conflict with the reality revealed by science(any science) the it is YOUR INTERPRETATION that is faulty, not the science. If YOU cannot reinterpret YOUR religious texts to be in agreement with reality then YOU have left YOURSELF vulnerable to attack from those who oppose YOU, not from those who discovered the reality. Science doesn't attack religion but if your religion is in conflict with reality(flat earth) YOUR RELIGION IS AT FAULT.

Many Christians recognize this fact and have adjusted there understanding of scripture to conform with reality.

Many of the scientists who found that reality(including Darwin himself)hold or held sincere religious viewpoints themselves and they too adjusted their religious viewpoints to encompass the truths that their science revealed to them.

Historicly, sticking your head in the sand hasn't worked too well, those who simply fight against reality because they know God didn't do it that way find that God has a way of saying,"Yes, I did". That way can be the extinction of that particular sect(the Ludites, for example) or the dimenishing of their influence(The Quakers and Amish). Those religions that do not change given new understanding of the reality of God's creation(If you want to look at the universe that way) are doomed anyway, despite anything science does or does not find.

Sure, those who bear religion ill will will use these faults as weak spots to direct their attacks at, but don't confuse the tool(science) with the weilder(Your attacker) because the tool(science) has good and proper uses as well. I think Dawkins is wrong and do not support him in the least, but if your religion wasn't busy trying to deny reality and undermine science he would not be as powerful and influential as he is. You yourself hand him his best weapons to use against you.

I'm sorry if my science invalidates some of your treasured religious Ideas, for I bear religious folk no ill will. But reality is a flint hard thing against which many an erronious, if beloved, idea has been battered to pieces, whereas those creeds which can face their need for change in the face of new understanding can survive that flinty stone. It's up to you whether you want your religion to survive.

Grumpy 8)

[MagusYanam]

This "non-activist" Judge also laid down the guantlet; that if any Christrians dare to come after evolution again, they had better have a lot of money for the cost of going after this unchalllengeable icon worshipped by the "scientific" community of the modern world.

In one sentence you betray your utter lack of understanding of the workings of the scientific community. Biological evolution has been challenged legitimately, time and again, with peer-reviewed studies. It has been explored, refined, expanded, extrapolated with extraordinary success given each new finding. Given everything that biological evolution has done for the study of biology - contributing invaluably to the fields of preventative medicine, to genetics, to zoology - it is no idle icon. It produces results - real, tangible and good results. If not for the chloroquine that was created through the study of the evolution of malaria's acquired resistances to cinchona, I might have contracted the disease while in Guilin, which would not be pleasant in the slightest.

This judge knew what he was doing and why. There is no seperation of church and state mentioned anywhere "in the Constitution." That this Judge used this red herring for his support of humanist activism endeavor is also a place where a lie served an agenda.

Judge Jones saw in the dishonesty of the religious (Christian) Dover board members to hide their religious intentions, an angle to attack, that would make an honest refutation of Darwinism by other people, some being Christians, unsettling as an undertaking.

And he took it.

Unless you know this judge personally, I don't see anything in the Kitzmiller verdict which betrays any ulterior motive on his part. Though it is true that the words 'separation of church and state' never appear in the Constitution, it is quite clear from the First Amendment to the Constitution that no establishment of religion shall be established in the public sphere by publicly-elected officials.

And I don't see in the Kitzmiller verdict where an honest refutation of Darwinism would be precluded, since the only honest way to refute Darwinism is to show evidence for an alternative scientific hypothesis, applied through the scientific method, make sure it works into our current understanding of the natural world and subject the work to peer review to make sure the data and the scientific reasoning are sound. In other words, don't try to cheat the rules.

The little ass-covering blurb by Judge jones, about religion not being dissolved by evolution certainly goes against observable evidence, as evolution is always used by anti-religionists.

My Christian faith is not so fragile that inquiry into the workings of the natural world can dissolve it. I'm also not so stupid as to take everything an anti-religionist says at face value just because I accept the validity of biological evolution - that's the critical thinking bit. Jones didn't need to cover his ass here.

[jcrawford]

INVOLUNTARY ATTENDANCE?

See anything here a facist would love?

Yes. How else could socialist, communist and fascist dictorships come into power without involuntary servitude and forced attendance at government indoctrination centers called public schools which are the last bastion of institutionalized slavery in America. Everyone seems to have rights in America except those to whom children are born. I guess we are still blessed in this country though, since American Christians can still be as fruitful and multiply as Chinese Christians.

Now, the judge had a right to view these people in that light from the evidence of the court testimony, but it is also clear that Christianty will not be tolerated by the facists that will not allow it to be the foundation for the challenge of what holds their grip on the minds of children in piublic schools.

Neo-facists? No. Real Facists? Seems very likely.

Neo-Darwinist supremacy in government institutions is real fascism.

[Cathar1950]

Bird of a feather flock together?
Evolution is not fascist or anti-Christian.
Schools might be but that is another issue unrelated to this one.

[jcrawford]

This "non-activist" Judge also laid down the guantlet; that if any Christrians dare to come after evolution again, they had better have a lot of money for the cost of going after this unchalllengeable icon worshipped by the "scientific" community of the modern world.

Neo-Darwinism (Facism), or better labeled neo-Religion (Facism), anyone?

Neo-Darwinist fascism adequately describes the philosophy, ideology and activities of Judge Jones and the ACLU.

This judge knew what he was doing and why. There is no seperation of church and state mentioned anywhere "in the Constitution." That this Judge used this red herring for his support of humanist activism endeavor is also a place where a lie served an agenda.

Yes, his decision is comparable to Judge Taney's in the Dred Scott case of slavery infamy.

[jcrawford]

Bird brains of a feather flock together?
Evolution is not fascist or anti-Christian.

Not only is the teaching of evolution by the government anti-Christian and fascist, it is also a modern application of Social Darwinism in the form of evolutionary psychology which attempts to cover up the historical racism inherent in all neo-Darwinist theories and teachings of anatomically modern human evolution from non-human or less-than-human species.

[Cathar1950]

jcrawford your repeating your same old racist garbage.
The government is not teaching evolution schools are as science where it belongs.
I am not even sure ID is Christian. I am sure that evolution is not anti-Christian. If there is no fall then sure the bottom falls out of your flawed Pauline theology and his poor argument. Maybe it is just anti-Paul.

[steen]

But attack and the annihilation of religion IS the goal of many, many, many, people that always, always, always, use evolution to make Christians out to be idots for believing in their religion. And of course that means Christians and Christianity.

Nonsense. I have never had a problem with my Faith, nor with Evolution. Evolution doesn't attack Christianity. But some fundie lietralist Christians, in attackingt evolution, are exposing themselves as irrational loons.

But the classroom IS a place where we see the PUPOSEFUL attack on religion. Richard Dawkins as an atheist would be just the latest in that species to attack viciously religion and those that believe in it.

Dawkins is not in the classroom, your lies none withstanding; rather, the Scientific theory of Evolution is.

But as is also the case it is Christians that are in the center of the cross hairs.

More nonsense, only exposing your paranoia.

Christians should endeavor to fight against evolution

No, we should fight those who bear false witness, Like the creationists, f.ex.

and never lie about their intentions and goals - as evolution IS directed to destroy them and their children

You are still spewing fundie lies, you are still bearing false witness.

You know, this is silly. I'll just put your lying ass on ignore like I did with crawford.

[jcrawford]

jcrawford your repeating your same old racist garbage.

It's neither racist nor fascist when Christians observe and point to the racism and fascism inherent in all government teachings of neo-Darwinist racial theories of human evolution from monkey and ape ancestors in Africa.

The government is not teaching evolution schools are as science where it belongs.

Really.

If there is no fall then sure the bottom falls out of your flawed Pauline theology and his poor argument. Maybe it is just anti-Paul.

Maybe, although a theory imputing Christ's descent from African monkey and ape ancestors may be regarded as rather non-Christian.

[jcrawford]

Dawkins is not in the classroom, your lies none withstanding; rather, the Scientific theory of Evolution is.

Dawkins' atheistic beliefs are being advanced and promulgated in public schools by the government though, and teaching the theory of evolution is a form of scientific racism and fascism on the part of the government.

You know, this is silly. I'll just put your lying ass on ignore like I did with crawford.

Neo-Darwinists can't afford to ignore the obvious racism and fascism inherent in all government teachings of neo-Darwinist racial theories of human descent from non-human or less-than-human species in Africa. They have to refute it by scientific falsification. Ad hominem comments alone won't cut it, especially when directed at fellow Christians. Public attacks on Christian beliefs only serve to prove how similarly religious in content and context, neo-Darwinist beliefs about human origins truly are.