Renew America has up yet another in their unending series of articles attempting to legitimize intelligent design as ‘science.’ Nothing really noteworthy, other than this picture, which gave me a good giggle:
Heh. I guess the final paragraphs were also worth a chuckle:
Like the theory of evolution, intelligent design science has links to a philosophy, namely the philosophy of Deism and natural law. However, intelligent design science is protected from corruption by its careful adherence to the empirical disciplines of Francis Bacon.
In conclusion, whether one believes in evolution or intelligent design science, one is obliged to consider that at present, the intelligent designers are operating at a higher level of integrity than the evolution establishment.
Not only are those evolutionists wrong, but they don’t have the integrity to admit it! Thank goodness for the Onion:
Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity With New ‘Intelligent Falling’ TheoryKANSAS CITY, KS—As the debate over the teaching of evolution in public schools continues, a new controversy over the science curriculum arose Monday in this embattled Midwestern state. Scientists from the Evangelical Center For Faith-Based Reasoning are now asserting that the long-held “theory of gravity” is flawed, and they have responded to it with a new theory of Intelligent Falling.
“Things fall not because they are acted upon by some gravitational force, but because a higher intelligence, ‘God’ if you will, is pushing them down,” said Gabriel Burdett, who holds degrees in education, applied Scripture, and physics from Oral Roberts University.
Burdett added: “Gravity—which is taught to our children as a law—is founded on great gaps in understanding. The laws predict the mutual force between all bodies of mass, but they cannot explain that force. Isaac Newton himself said, ‘I suspect that my theories may all depend upon a force for which philosophers have searched all of nature in vain.’ Of course, he is alluding to a higher power.”
Founded in 1987, the ECFR is the world’s leading institution of evangelical physics, a branch of physics based on literal interpretation of the Bible.
That is worth two chuckles and one chortle.
TallDave
As someone wth an amateur interest in particle physics, I found this pretty hilarious, esp. with the factual grounding.
Jim Allen
I’ll see your two chuckles and one chortle, and raise you a hearty guffaw. “The Onion” rules!
jg
So as we grow bigger ‘God’ pushes harder? Why?
BinkyBoy
Personally, I thought the first one was a hell of a lot funnier than the onion. How can the onion survive the competition from such professional humor?
Priceless!
tBone
The Onion also has this up:
Why does the Onion hate America?
BinkyBoy
tBone, you owe me a new keyboard.
Marcos
jg Says:
“So as we grow bigger ‘God’ pushes harder? Why?”
Duh, because you have more sins under your belt.
Marcos
That, and God hates fat people.
StupidityRules
The Onion knew long before the rest of us where the country was heading.
Matt
DougJ will be along promptly to condemn you all to the hot place.
SeesThroughIt
What, you mean Texas? Noooooooooo!
tBone
Read the (NOT SAFE FOR WORK) whole thing, and I’ll probably owe you one of each item in your general vicinity. The last two paragraphs are absolutely classic.
(Note: I do not condone the sort of vicious, juvenile, tacky, classless mockery contained in the linked Onion article. Even if it is funnier than hell.)
Boronx
And that, my Liege, is how we know the world to be banana shaped.
Brad R.
As I’ve said before, Renew America is the greatest website anywhere. If only they’d hire Pastor Joseph Grant Swank to write for them, they’d corner the market on every screaming-ass nutcase on the Internets.
Bugboy
I don’t believe in gravity.
Ptolemy
Hoo boy.
So, now ID is Deist? So, God doesn’t interfere in the world at all? Somehow me thinkee that the God’s Circus not mean to go there.
And Bacon is not Empirical. He was Inductive reasoning … start at the conclusion and work your way there. It is flawed logic, as it depends upon finding contrary evidence only.
Jack Shit
There is no gravity, the Earth sucks.
Slartibartfast
And here I thought it was because God was vigorously yanking down on our trousers.
I guess that’s got to be wrong, though, because people in nudist colonies would be flung out into space.
Sarcastro
The theory of evolution is a blend of science and the philosophy of materialism.
And my coffee here is a blend of beans and organic matter.
AvengingAngel
Another take on the intelligent design nonsense:
“The Hitchhiker’s Guide to Intelligent Design.”
Luddite
“tBone, you owe me a new keyboard”.
Lucky for me I had literally just finished my coffee before I read the Onion quote. Otherwise it too would have been sprayed all over my keyboard.
SK
MY MANLY ORGAN IS CURRENTLY NOT UPRIGHT. THERFORE, DOES THAT MEAN GOD IS PUSHING IT DOWN? AND IF SO, WOULD HE PLEASE STOP TOUCHING IT! (one of us might go blind)
Jimmrrr
Renew America certainly has many hypothesis but I fail to see any testing. It’s like putting the guesswork back into theory and throwing out the theory when the guesswork is done.
DougJ
I have never told anyone they would go to hell for believing in evolution. I reject the pseudo-scientific “theory” of evolution, but I do not condemn those who believe it. My point is not that our schools should teach our children that evolution is wrong. I do not think that is something we can prove to the extent that it should be taught as fact. My point is simply that neither is it fact that evolution is true. I believe in pluralism, I believe that ALL approaches to origins of life — both the so-called scientific and the faith-based — should be shown to our children. That is pluralism, that is tolerance. It not fire-and-brimstone dogma.
Redleg
Yes, DougJ, and creation myths should be taught in the home or the church and not in the schools.
Slartibartfast
As opposed to ID, which is pretty much completely anti-science?
Noble of you, Doug.
scs
By the way, can anyone tell me, what exactly is the theory of intelligent design and what is its proponents beef with evolution theory? I will have to hear more about it before I make fun of it.
scs
Hey maybe the New York times read my question as there is a big article on ID today in the front page of the NYT. I read their summary on intelligent design. I would have no problem with it being mentioned in school as it is very thought provoking to have ID criticms of evolution mentioned and then to explain evolutions answers to those questions. It seems to me that evolution has the answers to all the criticisms, so mentioning ID would only strengthen evolution theory.
goonie bird
Hey darwinn was a atheists and a racsis in the big time to why do we have to listen to the leakies rediclous findings evolutionists are cracked urns