Slashdot Mirror
Australian Schools To Teach Intelligent Design
An anonymous reader writes "It appears that schools within the Australian state of Queensland are going to be required to teach Intelligent Design as part of their Ancient History studies. While it is gratifying to note that it isn't being taught in science classes (since it most certainly isn't a science), one wonders what role a modern controversy can possibly serve within a subject dedicated to a period of history which occurred hundreds of years before Darwin proposed his groundbreaking theory?"
Oh, the irony!
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
cou7d save it all over America has been my only
Design theories go all the way back to ancient Greece. There is plenty to teach about.
Darwin's argument is many ways theological/philosophical and is trying to falsify design theories. So I guess if design arguments of any type isn't worth teaching and isn't science, Darwin shouldn't be taught either. How can a negative answer to design be considered science but a positive answer (even if you think it is false) is science? It just doesn't work unless you simply want to say any argument we find wrong or fault "isn't science", which opens its own can of worms.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
Yet, we still call it a "Theory" for some reason. And yes, I know about most of the evidence, and yes I buy that (more than anything else right now). I also understand that we might possibly be all wrong at any moment. As for the cosmology comment, I knew that was a veering off track a bit... but creationism and ID is a bit more broad reaching than evolution as they both tend to go over the concept on how "everything began" while evolution is more "the origin of species" - so I threw that in there.
ID is certainly a science:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/science
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design
I'm afraid it would be hard to define something that better fit the dictionary definition of 'science'.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
I would ask for the addition to define evolution. Evolution is tossed about to mean both micro- and macro-evolution as if they are one thing. Evolutionists would do themselves a tremendous favor to make a distinction between the two. Micro-evolution to a degree can be seen. Macro-evolution has no evidence of existence at all.
What are the odds of life evolving on its own from within an environment devoid of life?
What are the odds of such evolved life would mutate?
What are the odds of such mutated life to mutate into a form that would allow it to continue to live?
What are the odds of such survivable life to further mutate into a higher order of life?
What are the odds of such evolved life to further mutate into different domain, kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, and finally, species?
What are the odds of such enourmous variance occurring naturally?
What span of years would it take for such evolution to arise, given the proper environment?
Please account for all of this while explaining the further likelihood of the variance in species color, gender, etc. while also considering that the evolutionary train would have to be unbroken at any point for a speoies to evolve to its current state. This means, over and over and over and over this genetic mutation would have to occur without a species dying off over hundreds of millions, if not billions of years.
Now, statistically, can you explain the odds in all of this occurring over the course of the earth's existance?
And finally, how do we know these statistics are 100% accurate without having other worlds where we have life that arose in a similar manner that we can look at and test to be certain our theory is correct? I am not saying evolution is untrue, nor am i saying that ID is untrue. I am saying that we have no method of verifying our "scientific" finding that life evolved and there was never any ID involved at all. To me, that means the science that is frequently put forward as truth is actually just a theory and not really a fact. This belief of mine is furhter solidified in my mind by the fact that we still cannot create life from lifelessness. We can create synthetic life using building blocks from existing life, but no one, to my knowledge has taking a bunch of inorganic material and make it a living and procreating life-form. Statistically, i believe that such life from lifelessness is very very improbable without some form of ID, somewhere along the line. I also believe evolution occurs without needing ID. That is, once life exists, it evolves to suit its environment, or it dies.
Who Brought the Slaves to America?
Walter White
1968
The story of the slaves in America begins with Christopher Columbus. His voyage to America was not financed by Queen Isabella, but by Luis de Santangelo, who advanced the sum of 17,000 ducats (about 5,000 pounds-today equal to 50,000 pounds) to finance the voyage, which began on August 3,1492.
Columbus was accompanied by five 'maranos' (Jews who had foresworn their religion and supposedly became Catholics), Luis de Torres, interpreter, Marco, the surgeon, Bemal, the physician, Alonzo de la Calle and Gabriel Sanchez. (Ref. The International Jew by Henry Ford)
Gabriel Sanchez, abetted by the other four Jews, sold Columbus on the idea of capturing 500 Indians and selling them as slaves in Seville, Spain, which was done. Columbus did not receive any of the money from the sale of the slaves, but he became the victim of a conspiracy fostered by Bemal, the ship's doctor. He, Columbus, suffered injustice and imprisonment as his reward. Betrayed by the five maranos (baptised Jews) whom he had trusted and helped. This, ironically, was the beginning of slavery in the Americas. (Adventures of an African Slaver by Malcolm Cowley, 1928, p.11)
The Jews were expelled from Spain on August 2, 1492, and from Portugal in 1497. Many of these Jews emigrated to Holland, where they set up the Dutch West Indies Company to exploit the new world.
In 1654, the first Jew, Jacob Barsimson, emigrated from Holland to New Amsterdam (New York) and in the next decade many more followed him, settling along the East Coast, principally in New Amsterdam and Newport, Rhode Island. They were prevented by ordinances issued by Governor Peter Stuyvesant from engaging in the domestic economy, so they quickly discovered that the territory inhabited by the Indians would be a fertile field. There were no laws preventing the Jews from trading with the Indians.
The first Jew to begin trading with the Indians was Hayman Levy, who imported cheap glass beads, textiles, earrings, armbands and other cheap adornments from Holland which were traded for valuable fur pelts. Hayman Levy was soon joined by Jews Nicholas Lowe and Joseph Simon. Lowe conceived the idea of trading rum and whiskey to the Indians and set up a distillery in Newport, where these two liquors were produced. Within a short time there were 22 distilleries in Newport, all of them owned by Jews, manufacturing and distributing 'firewater.' The story of the debauching of the Indians with its resultant massacres of the early settlers, is a dramatic story in itself.
It is essential to comprehend the seaport of Newport. It is important in order to recognize the Jewish share in the Slave commerce. There was a period when it was commonly referred to as 'The Jewish Newport-World center of Slave Commerce.' All together, at this time, there were in North America six Jewish communities: Newport, Charleston, New York, Philadelphia, Richmond, and Savanuah. There were also many other Jews, scattered over the entire East Coast. Although New York held first place in the settlers of Jews in North America, Newport held second place. New York was also the main source of Kosher meat, supplying the North American settlements, then the West Indies and also South America. Now Newport took over! Newport also became the great trade harbour of the East Coast of North America. There, vessels from other ports met, to exchange commodities. Newport, as previously mentioned, represented the foremost place in the commerce of rum, whiskey, and liquor dealings. And to conclude, it finally became the Main Center of Slave dealings. It was from this port that the ships left on their way across the ocean, to gather their black human cargo and then derive great sums of money in exchange for them.
An authentic, contemporary report, based on authority, indicates that of 128 Slave ships, for instance, unloaded in Charleston, within one year, their "Cargo," 120 of these were undersigned by Jews from Newport and Charleston by their own n
"Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
No, it's not an ancient belief. It's roughly 22 years old.
But ID is based on ignorance that is thousands of years old, its just that some people are too fucking stupid/ignorant to accept the fact that a literal interpretation of the creation myth in the Bible is complete idiocy. Only a fucking moron or someone who is self-deluded believes in ID IMHO
"The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
WTF! Seriously. I'm glad I don't live in Queensland. I hope intelligent people are working to put a stop to this absolute fucking garbage! Christian "values" are taking Australia straight to a Authoritarian Theocracy. Americans we have uranium I promise to let you have some if you bring us democracy.
You are joking? Right? Asking Americans for help in this subject?
This is blinging