Secular folks should worry.

[Gadianton]

Nobody here would sign that stupid list except for you, MG. DCP might, but he might also hesitate and try to find a way out.

MG, There is no way to teach biology in context of intelligent design. Intelligent design is a short statement, and once that statement is made, the class goes back, implicitly, to evolution.

everyone else,

on the same point I just made to MG, biology IS evolution. Taxonomy from elephants to viruses is evolution. You could literally never utter the word "Darwinism" again, and Biology would still be evolution. Identity.

Intelligent design is a hypothesis that takes one minute to explain. After that hypothesis is explained, the rest of the 99.9% of the class time will be evolution, since that's what biology is. IDers accept evolution, they just draw lines at certain places and say, "natural selection can't explain that".

This line has shifted quite a bit. Recall that the bacteria flagella was a big "you can't explain that!" from Iders; then it was explained, and the line gets drawn elsewhere.

IDs impact to any biology text is about a paragraph. Any biology text I've seen spends about 2 paragraphs explicitly on natural selection. Everything else in the textbook is implicitly natural selection. Nobody has ever tried to draw a different family tree based on ID.

Other than including the line "Some intelligence did this" one or more times in the text, everything else is the same, and the rest of the text demonstrates natural selection implicitly. I've got to the point where where I accept that religious nuts might one day get their paragraph in the text. The smart kids will figure it out and science will continue on, ignoring ID in principle, since ID is a relatively short statement of no consequence to anything in any biology text aside from the explicit paragraph on page 5 explaining natural selection.

ID is a landmine for right-wing anti-vaxxers. On the one hand, IDers have said gain-of-function is intelligent design, but on the other, if God steps in to do cuts and splices -- I liked the Rev's comments -- we have no way of knowing how he altered the world, and its very possible at key points where anti-vaxxers pose a natural selection framework to say vaccines induced selection of deadlier strains, for all we know, God did the cutting there.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Thanks for that Marcus.

In addition to that I’ll also post this:

https://evolutionnews.org/2006/02/the_n ... isses_the/

The list has only grown since this article was published.

It isn’t surprising that the list would cause a fair amount of consternation.

Regards,
MG

Do you even read what you post? That article is a mess. And no the list isn't causing 'consternation.' It is, however, if you had noticed from RI's link, causing this:

...a "tongue-in-cheek parody" of creationist attempts to collect a list of scientists who "doubt evolution", such as ... the Discovery Institute's A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism.

The list pokes fun at such endeavors while making it clear that, "We did not wish to mislead the public into thinking that scientific issues are decided by who has the longer list of scientists!"

Lol

eta:

The ideology and philosophy of neo-Darwinism which is sold by its adepts as a scientific theoretical foundation of biology seriously hampers the development of science and hides from students the field’s real problems

- Dr. Vladimir L. Voeikov, Professor of Bioorganic, Moscow State University; member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences

Powerful.

- Doc

[MG 2.0]

Thanks for that Marcus.

In addition to that I’ll also post this:

https://evolutionnews.org/2006/02/the_n ... isses_the/

The list has only grown since this article was published.

It isn’t surprising that the list would cause a fair amount of consternation.

Regards,
MG

Do you even read what you post? That article is a mess. And no the list isn't causing 'consternation.' It is, however, if you had noticed from RI's link, causing this:

...a "tongue-in-cheek parody" of creationist attempts to collect a list of scientists who "doubt evolution", such as ... the Discovery Institute's A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism.

The list pokes fun at such endeavors while making it clear that, "We did not wish to mislead the public into thinking that scientific issues are decided by who has the longer list of scientists!"

Your responses are of course expected and not surprising.

But in the end, it’s good to have the information available to those that have eyes to see.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

Intelligent design is a hypothesis that takes one minute to explain. After that hypothesis is explained, the rest of the 99.9% of the class time will be evolution, since that's what biology is. IDers accept evolution, they just draw lines at certain places and say, "natural selection can't explain that".

Not much of a quibble with that.

That may well be the opinion of many of those that signed the list.

Regards,
MG

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Out of interest what are your credentials? Do they supersede those that have signed the list?

Regards,
MG

Are you sure you want to play the appeal to authority game? Would you stop making bad arguments if the quantity and qualifications of those who recognize the evolution of species through natural selection is strongly supported though evidence while ID is not vastly outnumbers and outweighs the lists you have put forward? Or would that not impact your thinking at all?

From Marcus’ link, which predictably MI didn’t click:

After the Discovery Institute presented the petition as part of an amicus curiae brief in the Kitzmiller v. Dover intelligent design court case in October 2005, a counter-petition, A Scientific Support For Darwinism, was organized and gathered 7,733 signatures from scientists in four days.

As of 6 July 2015, the Clergy Letter Project[58] has collected signatures of 13,008 American Christian clergy who "believe that the timeless truths of the Bible and the discoveries of modern science may comfortably coexist." Over 500 Jewish clergy have signed a similar "Rabbi Letter". The Clergy Letter Project has also circulated an "Imam Letter" affirming that "the timeless truths of the Qur'an may comfortably coexist with the discoveries of modern science." [As of October, 2022, there were 15,679 signatures from Christian clergy, 839 signatures from Jewish rabbis, 688 signatures from Unitarian Universalist clergy, 75 signatures from Buddhist clergy, and 58 signatures from Humanist clergy.]

This’ll move the needle for MI exactly 0%.

- Doc

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

“Because no scientist can show how Darwin’s mechanism can produce the complexity of life, every scientist should be skeptical. The fact that most won’t admit to this exposes the unhealthy effect of peer pressure on scientific discourse.”

- Dr. Douglas Axe, Director of Biologic Institute and Maxwell Visiting Professor of Molecular Biology, Biola University

Huh?

https://www.discovery.org/p/axe/

Douglas Axe is the Maxwell Professor of Molecular Biology at Biola University, the founding Director of Biologic Institute, the founding Editor of BIO-Complexity, and the author of Undeniable: How Biology Confirms Our Intuition That Life Is Designed. After completing his PhD at Caltech, he held postdoctoral and research scientist positions at the University of Cambridge and the Cambridge Medical Research Council Centre. His research, which examines the functional and structural constraints on the evolution of proteins and protein systems, has been featured in many scientific journals, including the Journal of Molecular Biology, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, BIO-Complexity, and Nature, and in such books as Signature in the Cell and Darwin’s Doubt by Stephen Meyer and Life’s Solution by Simon Conway Morris.

Sounds like a smart cookie! Though, I get the feeling maybe “his research” may be overstated a bit, especially since “his research” has been found in books by Stephen Meyer and Simon Conway Morris.

Also, Biola University:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biola_University

It’s a Bible college. -_-

- Doc

Eta1: https://evolutionnews.org/2007/01/journ ... biology_a/

In the New Scientist profile last month of the new intelligent design research lab, there was discussion of two technical articles published in the Journal of Molecular Biology by protein scientist Doug Axe (for abstracts, see here and here). As the New Scientist acknowledged, funding for the research underlying these peer-reviewed articles was provided by Discovery Institute’s research fellowship program

-_-

[MG 2.0]

Out of interest, what are your credentials?

Regards,
MG

Occasional spurts of motivation to read current source material.

Occasional being the operative term.

Although, I do wish I had an advanced degree in in Electrical Engineering, or Water Resource Engineering, or Experimental Physics, or Nutrition, since those seems to hold sway.

OK. So you are more or less a layperson who tries to keep up with current science. That is good. Thanks for your honesty.

As I looked through the 1000 name list it appeared to me to have a whole lot of other signatories in various scientific fields besides those folks/areas that you mention in your list.

https://www.discovery.org/m/securepdfs/ ... 2023-2.pdf

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

Are you sure you want to play the appeal to authority game? Would you stop making bad arguments if the quantity and qualifications of those who recognize the evolution of species through natural selection is strongly supported though evidence while ID is not vastly outnumbers and outweighs the lists you have put forward? Or would that not impact your thinking at all?

From Marcus’ link, which predictably MI didn’t click:

After the Discovery Institute presented the petition as part of an amicus curiae brief in the Kitzmiller v. Dover intelligent design court case in October 2005, a counter-petition, A Scientific Support For Darwinism, was organized and gathered 7,733 signatures from scientists in four days.

As of 6 July 2015, the Clergy Letter Project[58] has collected signatures of 13,008 American Christian clergy who "believe that the timeless truths of the Bible and the discoveries of modern science may comfortably coexist." Over 500 Jewish clergy have signed a similar "Rabbi Letter". The Clergy Letter Project has also circulated an "Imam Letter" affirming that "the timeless truths of the Qur'an may comfortably coexist with the discoveries of modern science." [As of October, 2022, there were 15,679 signatures from Christian clergy, 839 signatures from Jewish rabbis, 688 signatures from Unitarian Universalist clergy, 75 signatures from Buddhist clergy, and 58 signatures from Humanist clergy.]

This’ll move the needle for MI exactly 0%.

- Doc

Thank you. That is more information to add to the pile.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

“Because no scientist can show how Darwin’s mechanism can produce the complexity of life, every scientist should be skeptical. The fact that most won’t admit to this exposes the unhealthy effect of peer pressure on scientific discourse.”

- Dr. Douglas Axe, Director of Biologic Institute and Maxwell Visiting Professor of Molecular Biology, Biola University

Huh?

https://www.discovery.org/p/axe/

Douglas Axe is the Maxwell Professor of Molecular Biology at Biola University, the founding Director of Biologic Institute, the founding Editor of BIO-Complexity, and the author of Undeniable: How Biology Confirms Our Intuition That Life Is Designed. After completing his PhD at Caltech, he held postdoctoral and research scientist positions at the University of Cambridge and the Cambridge Medical Research Council Centre. His research, which examines the functional and structural constraints on the evolution of proteins and protein systems, has been featured in many scientific journals, including the Journal of Molecular Biology, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, BIO-Complexity, and Nature, and in such books as Signature in the Cell and Darwin’s Doubt by Stephen Meyer and Life’s Solution by Simon Conway Morris.

Sounds like a smart cookie! Though, I get the feeling maybe “his research” may be overstated a bit, especially since “his research” has been found in books by Stephen Meyer and Simon Conway Morris.

Also, Biola University:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biola_University

It’s a Bible college. -_-

- Doc

Eta1: https://evolutionnews.org/2007/01/journ ... biology_a/

In the New Scientist profile last month of the new intelligent design research lab, there was discussion of two technical articles published in the Journal of Molecular Biology by protein scientist Doug Axe (for abstracts, see here and here). As the New Scientist acknowledged, funding for the research underlying these peer-reviewed articles was provided by Discovery Institute’s research fellowship program

-_-

I don’t think being from Biola University makes a person any less qualified.

I mean, gosh, his bona fides seem pretty darn impressive.

Regards,
MG

[Doctor CamNC4Me]