Is Kitzmiller the end of ID?

[juliod]

I've just finished reading the descision in Kitzmiller v Dover Area School Board. As a lot of people are discovering, it's a very interesting read. And very readable too, unexpectedly. I think it important for anyone interested in these debates to read it in it's entirety. It's 139 (short) pages (double spaced and wide margins).

I think it is critical for anyone who supports ID or creationism to read this decision. It is absolutely damning on ID, the leaders of the ID movement, and ID's supporters. If you don't read and digest the lessons of this case, you will walk right into the same wall.

One of the main findings of the judge is how fundementalist political movements evolve over time. Since about the 1920's they have consistently sought to enforce religion by legislation, with varying success. The judge traces this history through creationism, creation science, and now to "Intelligent Design".

Since this verdict will not be appealed (due to the diselection of the relevant school board members) the decision document will not be superceeded by higher court rulings. The analysis by this judge, and it is impressively comprehensive and thorough, will remain a major precedent.

An since ID is so thoroughly discredited in this case it seems likely to me that the fundementalists will discard it as a poltical ploy. What will be the next thing?

BTW, Creationists, fundementalists, and christians in general should read this document with great care. Strewn through it is words and phrases like "mendacious", "blatant lying", "untruthful", and as I'm sure you've read, "breathtaking inanity". Is this how a religion should be regarded?

DanZ

[jcrawford]

There seems to be a lot of controversy amongst Christians over whether current neo-Darwinist theories of human evolution in Africa are racist or not, and whether schoolboard approved teachings of neo-Darwinism are a form of biological fascism foisted on the people by state governments.

Really? Which other Christians are claiming that evolutionary science is racist? The only Christian I have seen on record to make the claim that human evolution is racist is JCrawford. Even the Christians who criticize human evolution, as far as I have seen, do not call it racist.

Obviously you are not keeping up to date in your reading of book publications by Christians like Cuozzo and Lubenow, and stubbornly resist reading all those Christian websites like AIG, ICR and others which have been focusing attention on neo-Darwinist racial theories for years.

Now that government forms of neo-Darwinist fascism and racism have both been exposed in the Dover decision, the new Social Darwinism emerging in American judicial philosophy and secular law will become the greater focus of attention in Christian civil rights lawsuits in the future.

[Cephus]

There seems to be a lot of controversy amongst Christians over whether current neo-Darwinist theories of human evolution in Africa are racist or not, and whether schoolboard approved teachings of neo-Darwinism are a form of biological fascism foisted on the people by state governments.

That's called "clutching at straws" and it seems to be about all fundamentalist Christians can do, since their whole theology is in the crapper. Regardless of your ridiculous posturing, evolution is a demonstrated and well-supported fact and the lies and misrepresentations of creationsts aren't going to change that.

Of course, they don't seem to be bright enough to get that through their little pea brains. How many times do the courts have to toss their ridiculous claims out before they figure it out?

Controversial or not, Christians are grateful for Newton's God-given theory of gravity since it helps them keep both their feet and theology well grounded on the same planet Adam and Eve were created on even though some of us have been known to get spaced out on big bang theories which allow for neo-Darwinist race theories to sprout up in spacetime.

*yawn*

Come on back when you decide to be remotely rational, okay? We won't hold our breath.

[McCulloch]

Obviously you are not keeping up to date in your reading of book publications by Christians like Cuozzo and Lubenow, and stubbornly resist reading all those Christian websites like AIG, ICR and others which have been focusing attention on neo-Darwinist racial theories for years.

Thank you for that clarification. You are right. I have checked on the sites you have indicated, and they indeed do attempt link the science of evolution to racism. Yes, there really does seem to be some controversy among Christians on this issue. Amazing!

[micatala]

jcrawford is correct. The spurious and illogical accusations that evolutionary biology is racist have a fairly long history. For an older treatement, see Henry Morris' "The Troubled Waters of Evolution".

micatala wrote:

jcrawford wrote:
Hmmm. Interesting suggestion. A class action civil rights lawsuit consisting of a combination of substantiated complaints and charges against neo-Darwinist psychology, racism and fascism in public school system curriculums would be perfectly legal.

Please, file the legal papers at once! Don't delay!

What's the rush? I've got to get all the Southern Christians and Baptists organized in support of their civil rights in the name of Dr. Martin Luther King and Christian freedom before we march into court. There are plenty of Baptist, Apostolic and Evangelical Churches up here in the North too which don't have much use for neo-Darwinist racial theories and pictures depicting so-called "primitive" African people evolving from monkey and ape ancestors once upon a time.

Well, I guess I don't blame you for trying to get all the allies you can. However, I doubt that most Christians will lend their support to the suit, because they understand how ridiculous the claims are.

Besides, creationists have always been more effective playing to the court of public opinion within certain circles than actually presenting their views and evidence to objective scrutiny, whether that be in the scientific community or the legal arena.

[Cathar1950]

snappyanswer wrote:

Cathar wrote:
I think we should start a thread.
Is Biblical Christianity(fundamentalist ) racist sexist and anti-semitic?
Of course it is. I guess it would be a short thread.

Starting a thread with this kind of ignorance as its basis would not help out this website. Just the anti-semitic dribble is enough to hope better minds prevail, as a sect of Judaism that was started by Jews following the Jewsih Messiah is an interesting place to see the goofiness of "Biblical Christianity," being any of the above epithets.

Please you are showing your ignorance and bias. These controversys and complaints have been around and shown to be valid for many generations of scholars. Including Christian scholars of all persuasions. I just tossed them out there as obvious issues in theology and Church history.
Anti-semitic charges are hardly dribble and I don't think the website needs you backhanded defence. The above charges are not meant for all Christian thought but it is prevalent among Fundamentalist and so called "bible believing" groups.

jcrawford wrote:

Yes, the more neo-Darwinsts fulminate against the Bible and Bible-believing Christians, the more their deep-seated and deep-rooted religious presuppostitions and prejudices are revealed to the general public and human population at large. One doesn't hear of astrophysicists or NASA scientists disparaging the Bible or Bible-believing Christians the way believers in neo-Darwinism do on a regular and constistent basis. Do you think the fact that they trace their ancestral origins back to smaller brained primates has anything to do with their peculiar philosophy of life?

Snappyanswer the above is a much better example of dribble.
My complaint are not so much the bible but your use of it.
As Albert Switzer pointed out every scholar that looks for the historical Jesus sees the reflection of their own bias and times. So it is with Bible believers. It has been a tool for exploitations and abuse as well as a inspiration for change.

[micatala]

It is also worth keeping in mind that the reason some who accept the fact of evolution criticize creationists is that the 'evolutionists' are responding to long-standing attacks from the creationists. Many of these attacks, as witness the racism charges, are spurious at best. If creationists don't like the opposition they get from those who accept evolution as fact then they should consider their own actions.

When creationists use insults and illogical arguments to try and subvert the truth or slander people who don't agree with them, they should not be surprised when at least some of those people point out the problems with the creationist position, and oppose its imposition on society.

One should remember that the teaching of evolution was outlawed in many places in the U.S. for many years, so evolutionary biologists and Christians and others who accept evolution arguably have much more reason to be concerned about abuses of power than creationists.

[Cephus]

It is also worth keeping in mind that the reason some who accept the fact of evolution criticize creationists is that the 'evolutionists' are responding to long-standing attacks from the creationists. Many of these attacks, as witness the racism charges, are spurious at best. If creationists don't like the opposition they get from those who accept evolution as fact then they should consider their own actions.

It's also worth keeping in mind that a lot of the creationists are proven liars and frauds. Even going back to Duane Gish's bombadier beetle example, even after he's been proven absolutely wrong, even after he's *ADMITTED* to being wrong, he keeps using it because it makes him sound like he knows what he's talking about. Most creationist arguments on the 'professional' level are similar to that. They know they're wrong, they know that what they're spouting is false, but they figure their flock is stupid enough not to know any better and unfortunately, too often they're right.

[steen]

Yes, their flock keeps buying their books about how to innoculate their kids against the evil visit to the Science museum.

[Cephus]

Yes, their flock keeps buying their books about how to innoculate their kids against the evil visit to the Science museum.

Unfortunately, this isn't a case of the blind leading the blind, it's a matter of the knowingly dishonest lying to the ignorant, and the ignorant buying it hook, line and sinker. Isn't it interesting how places like ICR are making a mint milking people who don't know better?

[micatala]

I hate to over-generalize, but would have to agree that, at least among those I would call "professional creationists," dishonesty is pretty rampant.

I did today finish reading the entire decision by Judge Jones. As juliod has said, truly interesting and quite damning with respect to the Dover Board members who promulgated the whole fiasco.

What is truly disturbing to me is the extent to which some will use religion to coerce and browbeat others of the faith in an attempt to force their own narrow views on society at large. Here is an excerpt.

Moreover, Board members and teachers opposing the curriculum change and its implementation have been confronted directly. First, Casey Borwon testified that following her opposition to the curriculum change on October 18, 2004, Buckingham called her an atheist and Bonsell told her that she would go to hell. Second, Angie Yingling was coerced into voting for the currciulum change by Board members acusing her of being an atheist and un-Christian. In addition, both Bryan Rehm and Fred Callahan have been confronted in similarly hostile ways, as have teachers in the DASD [Dover Area School District].

This is after the Board members promoting the ID policy browbeat the teachers into accepting, as a compromise, the reading of the infamous statement and the use of the Panda's book as a reference. Otherwise, the Board was going to refuse to allow the standard biology text that the teachers and administration had selected to be purchased. The Board members then went back on their promise to get the books purchased, and tried to demand further concessions from the teachers.

These teachers are to be admired for standing up to the creationist's dishonesty and bullying tactics, especially in the context of having their jobs in jeapardy.

Now we have an actual real occasion of government abuse on the part of creationists, as opposed to the fictitious accusations of fascism on the part of scientists made earlier in this thread.