Expelled (preaching, pagan, verse, religion, science)

[yossarian22]

Originally Posted by Hope

I am merely questioning why it's ok to come to the conclusion, based on the scientific method, that the universe is the result of random chance, and not come to the conclusion, based on the exact same scientific method, that perhaps the universe is not the result of random chance, i.e., therefore the result of a higher intelligence.

Ugh....
Show me a single person who stated that the universe was formed by random chance. You either do not understand what that means, or you are deliberately misrepresenting a claim.

[Sunstone]

Originally Posted by Hope

Perhaps you should wait to call it "trash" till after you've seen it.

Originally Posted by Hope

I guess we should all see the actual movie before jumping to too many conclusions.

Nonsense! There's an old saying in Texas, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." Creationists/IDers are more than infamous for their lies and distortions. Now you want to say, "Give 'em yet another chance". Well, that's just too bad. They've had all the chances they get from me.

[Darkness]

Originally Posted by Hope

I am merely questioning why it's ok to come to the conclusion, based on the scientific method, that the universe is the result of random chance, and not come to the conclusion, based on the exact same scientific method, that perhaps the universe is not the result of random chance, i.e., therefore the result of a higher intelligence.

The real test is to see how many of these Intelligent Design scientists are Deists. Because, if they are Deists, they have no agenda, but if they are Christians or Muslims it is likely that they are working first from their Holy Books and then looking at the Scientific evidence.

Does anybody know of a Deistic, creationist or ID? One name would be a start.

[doppelgänger]

Hope:

Do you think I haven't given Creationism/ID a fair hearing and do you think that's the reason I think it isn't science and doesn't belong in a science classroom?

[tomspug]

Originally Posted by Darkness

Correct me if I am wrong, but do not most people in America believe God created the world and the plants and the animals? Besides, I was not using propaganda in a particularly negative way.

See post #23

I have no problem with people teaching Intelligent Design, but it is not a Science.

I have no problem with that view either, but Intelligent Design has a 'relationship' with Science. You should not treat them as separate entities. Intelligent Design, by nature, MUST interact with science. By refusing to allow it to, you refuse it growth as well as critique.

[doppelgänger]

Originally Posted by tomspug

I have no problem with that view either, but Intelligent Design has a 'relationship' with Science.

True. But it doesn't have a scientific relationship to science. That's the problem.

[Autodidact]

Originally Posted by Hope

Question: why is merely considering the possibility that there is a Higher Intelligence not science? If that's where the evidence leads, then why stifle such a conclusion? It has nothing to do with religion. Religion says this is such and such a deity that one must believe in on faith. Merely admitting the evidence points to a non-specific higher intelligence is not religion and perfectly in line with science.

Because the supernatural by definition is outside the scope of science, and any attempt to use science to try to prove the existence of a supernatural being or lack thereof is intrinsically flawed. Science is about the natural world, period. Even the question of whether the "evidence" points to a "higher intelligence" is outside of the scope of science. It may (I don't think so, but you're entitled to your opinion), but it's not a scientific question; it's a religious one.

Further, there may well be a God who has acted through evolution. Accepting the theory of evolution does not in any way entail the rejection of the existence of a higher intelligence. Science asks: how? Your question is about: why?

[Hope]

Originally Posted by doppelgänger

Hope:

Do you think I haven't given Creationism/ID a fair hearing and do you think that's the reason I think it isn't science and doesn't belong in a science classroom?

No, I don't think that. Thanks for asking, though.