- Jul 18, 2005
- Reaction score
- Political Leaning
Such atitude.....Engimo said:If you are not aware of all the evidence and facts surrounding I.D. (of which there is actually none), do not make the claim that you know that it is a scientific theory. I am well-informed on the issue and I can tell you definitively that there is no scientific basis to I.D., drop it.
I can know that you have, say, a suitcase full of clothes, without knowing your suitcase's contents.
I can know that there is a moon without being aware of "all the evidences and facts surrounding [the moon]".
A statement of belief is not a statement of fact, and if you will recall, I said....
If nothing ells, the science teacher should impartially present any such quasi-scientific theorys of I.D. to his/her class, and then use science and logic to dismantle such theorys.As for evolution, I believe that it belongs in both the science classroom and the philosophy classroom. Where I run into static from people is when I say that, in addition to evolution, (secular) I.D. should also be in the science classroom, because (secular) I.D. is a scientific topic.
I concede, again, the fact that until such a time as I.D. can be presented as pure, religiously sterile science, I.D. has absolutely NO place in the science classroom.
Today, I can not make a scientific argument for I.D., so, as I have said, I do not argue I.D.
Though, last night I saw a movie called What the Bleep Do We Know, in which 4 or 5 scholar's from various disciplines, while discussing how thought influences the body, scientifically and logically opened the door to God's existence using Quantum Mechanics.