IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Some more information
A book that was written at Amazon:
[link|http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0801064430/qid=1073672003/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-2675730-7780050?v=glance&s=books|http://www.amazon.co...?v=glance&s=books]

A review of it:

Doubts about Darwin is a very objective book about the Intelligent Design Movement (ID). This work, a revision of the author's Ph.D. thesis completed at the University of South Florida, has much information that is not commonly known, such as many of the forerunners of the ID movement were atheists or agnostics. For example, the role of such people as Murray Eden (professor emeritus at MIT) and other ID forerunners such as Professor Michael Denton (p. 24) are discussed. Many excellent quotes are included that show the dogmatic attitude of the Darwinists, such as Gould's statement to Professor Johnson calling him (falsely) a creationist and then emotionally proclaiming "I've got to stop" your work, obviously by any means he can (p. 96). This is hardly the attitude of an objective scientist intent on searching for the truth about origins. Woodward, a college professor himself, documents the many unethical attacks by the so called science and university establishment against those who dare to question Darwin. Rarely are Darwin doubters given an opportunity to respond to attacks against them in the journals that published the attacks and, thus, few people have an objective understanding of the movement. Reading sections of this book at times made me ashamed to be a scientist. Woodward does note that many scientists have been objective and fair critics, even supportive of ID, such as University of Chicago Professor David Raup (I was a fan of his work long before I learned about his positive contribution's to ID). The book also tries to answer questions such as, why more and more people are having serious doubts about Darwinism, who they are, and why the ID movement is growing so fast. The motive for the growth of ID is clearly major "doubts about Darwinism" and the book covers these in some detail. Now what is needed is an objective book on ID by a professional historian.





"Lady I only speak two languages, English and Bad English!" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"

New What was the point of that?
Your pointing to a review of a book on Amazon as evidence?

The book you are pointing to is not even a book of ID theory, it is a history of the ID movement by a follower of the movement.

Jay
New The point was
to explain where ID came from. To dispell the myth that it was created by Christians to get Creationism back in schools. If Atheists and Agnostics worked on the theory, then that myth gets busted.



"Lady I only speak two languages, English and Bad English!" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"

New Re: The point was
Not being able to read the book, I can't see if there is any real connection there or not. There is nothing in what I have seen about the book that says if covers the poltical background of the movement or not.

Just reading the review I found one outright falsehood already.
Many excellent quotes are included that show the dogmatic attitude of the Darwinists, such as Gould's statement to Professor Johnson calling him (falsely) a creationist and then emotionally proclaiming "I've got to stop" your work, obviously by any means he can (p. 96).

Phillip Johnson, the effective founder of the ID movement and the person that coined the ID name is a Creationist, by any defintion of the word. He believes that the Christian God created the universe and guided the creation of the species on earth. To try and claim he is not is absurd.

As for the "I've got to stop" quote, the second part is pure slander, designed to imply that Gould would lie or cheat when there is no reason to think that Gould considered either. As a pro-evolution scientist and an activist in the area of increasing the quality of school biology education, Gould did want to stop creationists like Johnson from getting their material in school books. It didn't help that Gould disliked Johnson for misquoting him in Johnson's books.

A good deconstruction of Johnson's first book can be found here [link|http://www.talkdesign.org/faqs/johnson.html|TalkDesign.org]. I can't find any discussion of the Doubts About Darwin book itself, being too new to have been really critiqued.

Jay


New Apparently you missed part of that review quote
Here let me show it to you:


Reviewer: A reader from Middle America
Doubts about Darwin is a very objective book about the Intelligent Design Movement (ID). This work, a revision of the author's Ph.D. thesis completed at the University of South Florida, has much information that is not commonly known, such as many of the forerunners of the ID movement were atheists or agnostics. For example, the role of such people as Murray Eden (professor emeritus at MIT) and other ID forerunners such as Professor Michael Denton (p. 24) are discussed. Many excellent quotes are included that show the dogmatic attitude of the Darwinists, such as Gould's statement to Professor Johnson calling him (falsely) a creationist and then emotionally proclaiming "I've got to stop" your work, obviously by any means he can (p. 96). This is hardly the attitude of an objective scientist intent on searching for the truth about origins.


Obviously you read the part about forerunners of the ID movement being atheists or agnostics. Maybe you forgot it and focused on the "I've got to stop your work" part? Only way to know for sure is to read that book.


Woodward, a college professor himself, documents the many unethical attacks by the so called science and university establishment against those who dare to question Darwin. Rarely are Darwin doubters given an opportunity to respond to attacks against them in the journals that published the attacks and, thus, few people have an objective understanding of the movement. Reading sections of this book at times made me ashamed to be a scientist. Woodward does note that many scientists have been objective and fair critics, even supportive of ID, such as University of Chicago Professor David Raup (I was a fan of his work long before I learned about his positive contribution's to ID). The book also tries to answer questions such as, why more and more people are having serious doubts about Darwinism, who they are, and why the ID movement is growing so fast. The motive for the growth of ID is clearly major "doubts about Darwinism" and the book covers these in some detail. Now what is needed is an objective book on ID by a professional historian.


It documents the many attacks on the ID movement. Again I guess you need to read the book to learn what they are.

If I wasn't so poor, I'd pay the $13.99USD to buy a copy and read it. I'd like to learn more myself. See what parts I can follow and understand.



"Lady I only speak two languages, English and Bad English!" - Corbin Dallas "The Fifth Element"

New "Were atheists" ne "are atheists"
My experience is that people who have changed belief systems tend to be far more aggressive about it than those who haven't. When I spent time on atheist newsgroups, the ones who had grown up fundamentalist christian were by far the most radical. Looking the other way, you don't have to look farther than C.S. Lewis to see what a Christian who used to be an atheist acts like.

People with a memory of IWETHEY history can just remember Ben Kosse and Nick Petreley to see examples each way of this, with each having made the opposite transition in beliefs.

Therefore the revelation that key members of the ID movement were once atheists doesn't surprise me. I'd have expected that. Doubly so since acceptance of a personally acceptable compromise between existing scientific evidence and their developing religious faith could well have been a key part of converting for them.

Cheers,
Ben
"good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not"
- [link|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html|Stefano Mazzocchi]
New I saw that
Obviously you read the part about forerunners of the ID movement being atheists or agnostics.

I saw that part, I just didn't read that much into it. Forerunners covers a lot of ground beyond those that actually founded the ID movement.

Jay
     I won't walk on coals about that - (ben_tilly) - (183)
         Science and Religion meet here - (orion) - (116)
             There is a Christian anti everything else . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (6)
                 Not every Christian is a fundamentalist - (orion) - (5)
                     Re: Not every Christian is a fundamentalist - (deSitter) - (4)
                         Amen, brother-- and with holy vestments and 'blessed' oil.. -NT - (Ashton)
                         Stupidest thing I've read all year. - (cwbrenn) - (2)
                             Care to explain why? - (deSitter) - (1)
                                 Or, in the words of Heinrich Heine: - (a6l6e6x)
             No, they do NOT meet here - (ben_tilly) - (30)
                 Yes indeed they do - (orion) - (29)
                     Talk about rapidly changing your position - (ben_tilly) - (6)
                         Fix your ring species link, please. - (admin)
                         Not really - (orion) - (4)
                             You can use whatever definition you want - (ben_tilly) - (3)
                                 Let us just agree to disagree then. - (orion) - (2)
                                     /me chuckles while pulling hair out -NT - (bepatient)
                                     Yes, we have passed the point of uselessness - (ben_tilly)
                     Norman... - (pwhysall) - (21)
                         Peter... - (orion) - (20)
                             Riiiiiight. - (pwhysall) - (19)
                                 Re: Riiiiiight. - (deSitter) - (1)
                                     Re: Riiiiiight. - (pwhysall)
                                 It is because - (orion) - (16)
                                     potential root cause is fear of death? Interesting - (boxley) - (15)
                                         Fear of the known - (orion) - (14)
                                             so fear is the main issue - (boxley) - (13)
                                                 "The Gift of Fear" is an interesting book. - (Another Scott)
                                                 Perhaps it is part of the illness - (orion) - (11)
                                                     Re: Perhaps it is part of the illness - (deSitter) - (10)
                                                         You have no idea what you are talking about - (Nightowl) - (9)
                                                             Re: You have no idea what you are talking about - (deSitter) - (3)
                                                                 You clearly stated... - (Nightowl) - (2)
                                                                     Re: You clearly stated... - (deSitter) - (1)
                                                                         Well as Scott said in the Hardware forum - (Nightowl)
                                                             Not to mention - (orion) - (4)
                                                                 Re: Not to mention - (deSitter)
                                                                 perhaps you need to take up driving in demolition derbies - (boxley) - (1)
                                                                     You have a point - (orion)
                                                                 Nah, I agree with Ross - (lister)
             Science and Religion don't intersect much. - (JayMehaffey) - (60)
                 Re: Science and Religion don't intersect much. - (deSitter)
                 Oh yeah? - (orion) - (58)
                     Still not getting it - (JayMehaffey) - (57)
                         No you are not getting it - (orion) - (56)
                             Re: No you are not getting it - (JayMehaffey) - (54)
                                 You are getting some of it - (orion) - (53)
                                     Re: You are getting some of it - (JayMehaffey) - (52)
                                         One more time with feeling - (orion) - (51)
                                             Re: One more time with feeling - (JayMehaffey) - (7)
                                                 Some more information - (orion) - (6)
                                                     What was the point of that? - (JayMehaffey) - (5)
                                                         The point was - (orion) - (4)
                                                             Re: The point was - (JayMehaffey) - (3)
                                                                 Apparently you missed part of that review quote - (orion) - (2)
                                                                     "Were atheists" ne "are atheists" - (ben_tilly)
                                                                     I saw that - (JayMehaffey)
                                             Ah, yes - (ben_tilly) - (42)
                                                 It shows an example - (orion) - (41)
                                                     You need some perspective - (ben_tilly) - (40)
                                                         excellent +10 - (deSitter)
                                                         And that is a decently compact one. - (Ashton)
                                                         More suspect evidence - (orion) - (37)
                                                             Talk about missing the point - (ben_tilly) - (36)
                                                                 I was presented it as - (orion) - (35)
                                                                     What is that about motes vs beams? - (ben_tilly) - (34)
                                                                         The truth is - (orion) - (33)
                                                                             Do you think that your opinion should count or not? - (ben_tilly) - (32)
                                                                                 Everyone's opinions count - (orion) - (30)
                                                                                     Re: Everyone's opinions count - (jake123) - (28)
                                                                                         Re: Everyone's opinions count - (deSitter)
                                                                                         Here in the US - (orion) - (26)
                                                                                             Not the same. - (admin) - (6)
                                                                                                 I only ask - (orion) - (5)
                                                                                                     That's not what you said. -NT - (admin) - (4)
                                                                                                         What did I say? - (orion) - (3)
                                                                                                             MWBC. 'nuff said. -NT - (jake123) - (2)
                                                                                                                 Sorry I did not get that - (orion) - (1)
                                                                                                                     Here's the one that I mean: - (jake123)
                                                                                             Re: Here in the US - (jake123) - (18)
                                                                                                 Well I could have been reading it wrong - (orion) - (17)
                                                                                                     That wasn't your point - (jake123) - (16)
                                                                                                         I had many points - (orion) - (15)
                                                                                                             Passive aggressive too -NT - (jake123) - (14)
                                                                                                                 You got more to add? - (orion) - (13)
                                                                                                                     Yes - (jake123) - (1)
                                                                                                                         I do agree with you somewhat - (orion)
                                                                                                                     Ok, let me have a whack at it - (hnick) - (10)
                                                                                                                         Qualified opinions - (orion) - (9)
                                                                                                                             Shopping for experts - (ben_tilly) - (8)
                                                                                                                                 Heh.. - (Ashton)
                                                                                                                                 Searching for experts - (orion) - (6)
                                                                                                                                     Any possibility of useful conversation has ended - (ben_tilly) - (5)
                                                                                                                                         Obviously you are mistaken - (orion)
                                                                                                                                         Let me put it another way - (orion) - (3)
                                                                                                                                             Re: Let me put it another way - (JayMehaffey)
                                                                                                                                             Please review the thread from the beginning. - (Another Scott)
                                                                                                                                             Die, Norman! Die! (new thread) - (rcareaga)
                                                                                     But not equally - (ben_tilly)
                                                                                 In the words of Dinah Maria Mulock Craik, - (a6l6e6x)
                             You learn to Love the Mystery - (Ashton)
             You need to understand the meaning of the words you're using - (Another Scott) - (15)
                 Re: You need to understand the meaning of the words you're u - (deSitter) - (14)
                     9 times 6 is 42. -NT - (admin)
                     Yes and no. - (Another Scott) - (9)
                         That is not the reasonableness that Ross is asserting - (ben_tilly) - (8)
                             Hume discussed this - (jake123) - (1)
                                 And to quote Aleister Crowley . . - (Andrew Grygus)
                             Even more interesting "reasonableness" - (Arkadiy) - (5)
                                 Info is in the Principia. - (Another Scott) - (2)
                                     Re: Info is in the Principia. - (deSitter) - (1)
                                         I'm not - (ben_tilly)
                                 Several things - (ben_tilly)
                                 Re: Even more interesting "reasonableness" - (deSitter)
                     To quote Slim Pickens in Blazing Saddles... - (danreck) - (2)
                         Re: To quote Slim Pickens in Blazing Saddles... - (deSitter) - (1)
                             It is the highest compliment I can give. - (danreck)
             And ill met they are - (tuberculosis)
         What I find unreasonable. - (static) - (64)
             Re: What I find unreasonable. - (deSitter)
             But that WAS NOT excluded from the possibilities! - (ben_tilly) - (41)
                 Oops? - (Nightowl)
                 I've been staying out of this... - (Nightowl) - (15)
                     Quite a few believe that - (ben_tilly) - (14)
                         I'm in that group - (FuManChu)
                         Speaking of Catholic thought - (ChrisR) - (12)
                             Nowhere in particular - (ben_tilly) - (11)
                                 Tielhard only wrote once about Piltdown - (ChrisR) - (10)
                                     As I said, this I do not know about - (ben_tilly) - (9)
                                         As long as this thread won't die - (ChrisR) - (8)
                                             I see no evidence of a global goal direction - (ben_tilly) - (7)
                                                 Meandering along - (ChrisR) - (6)
                                                     Re: Meandering along - (deSitter) - (4)
                                                         Which touches on a different concern I've had.... - (ChrisR) - (1)
                                                             Exactly! - (deSitter)
                                                         Your knowledge is insufficient - (ben_tilly) - (1)
                                                             Fascinating - I stand corrected! - (deSitter)
                                                     The boundaries are broader than you might think - (ben_tilly)
                 Good. - (static) - (23)
                     You did not answer the question - (ben_tilly) - (4)
                         I rather thought I did. - (static) - (3)
                             Bullshit - (ben_tilly) - (2)
                                 I made a mistake. - (static) - (1)
                                     How you should interpret my actions - (ben_tilly)
                     Pardon me, but that'll be when pigs fly. - (mmoffitt) - (17)
                         Why would I assail you? - (ben_tilly) - (16)
                             Okay, here we go. - (mmoffitt) - (15)
                                 Umm *cough* - I thought this had been "done": piecemeal - (Ashton) - (7)
                                     "Silly that"? - (mmoffitt) - (6)
                                         Re: "Silly that"? - (deSitter) - (4)
                                             Unless they look too deep. - (mmoffitt) - (3)
                                                 ? It's right on the surface - (deSitter) - (1)
                                                     Concur. -NT - (mmoffitt)
                                                 You have to know what is relevant - (ben_tilly)
                                         Re: "Silly that"? - (Ashton)
                                 I think that you misunderstood me then - (ben_tilly) - (6)
                                     What we can agree to disagree on. - (mmoffitt) - (5)
                                         If you need actual proof... - (ben_tilly) - (4)
                                             Ah... - (mmoffitt) - (3)
                                                 Depends on which mathematical truth... - (ben_tilly) - (2)
                                                     IMO 'religion' is oft a sub-set: religiosity - (Ashton) - (1)
                                                         Einstein's thought on that: - (a6l6e6x)
             "special creation may have occurred" - (Ashton) - (4)
                 Ashton you know me better than that. - (static) - (3)
                     I think you meant... - (Nightowl) - (1)
                         Dang. Thanks. -NT - (static)
                     Why, of course.. - (Ashton)
             Touching faith in the GICB's omnipotence. - (Silverlock) - (15)
                 Re: Touching faith in the GICB's omnipotence. - (deSitter) - (2)
                     Fundamentalists don't like mystery - (JayMehaffey)
                     It is the Heat Death of the literalists - - (Ashton)
                 Re: "right wicked sense of humor"? - (a6l6e6x) - (11)
                     What I believe - (orion) - (10)
                         Re: What I believe - (JayMehaffey) - (9)
                             Re: What I believe - (Ashton) - (2)
                                 While you were out: - (danreck) - (1)
                                     s'OK Danno - (Ashton)
                             I see it as this - (orion) - (5)
                                 Didn't address the issue - (JayMehaffey) - (4)
                                     Disagree - (ben_tilly) - (3)
                                         That's true - (Nightowl)
                                         Re: Disagree - (JayMehaffey) - (1)
                                             It's most likely pointless - (Ashton)
         Faith and Science - (andread)

Hello, boys and girls! Here we are in Romper Room school again!
167 ms