Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: neolib who wrote (183974)	3/23/2006 8:57:33 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

so those young minds can find a refuge in their religious views from the reality of science. Are you saying here that science will negate religion as Dawkins, Provine, and the rest say? The ID people are opposed to philosophical materialism and are trying to promote ID I provided a link before on that. What ID wants is supernatural explanations in science. Thats the antithesis of science. What if a supernatural explanation is the correct explanation for some things? Like for example the origin of the universe or the origin of life. Or the fine tuning of the universe. Your body has an immune system which produces antibodies and the production of antibodies isn't an example of evolution. Which it does by evolving them and selecting the best ones for further evolving. It does not "intelligently design" them. Its a classic "natural selection" process at work. If you find such a system at work in your own body, the idea that your entire organism might be subject to a similar process in its environment might occur to anyone half awake. This is the first time I've seen anyone refer to the operation of the immune system within an organism as an example of evolution in action. Everyone else I've seen says evolution is a process of change over many generations. Can you provide a link of someone else using evolution to describe the normal production of antibodies? I've read books by evolutionists Dawkins, Margulis, Dennett, Miller and have never seen this usage. Not sure why anyone would think that - especially as you agreed with "People who believe God created the universe can explore it just as well as those opposed to the idea of a god." Many people who believe in God, still follow scientific methods when doing science. I know many of them. Sure I realize not every scientist is a philosophical materialist. You do realize that philosophical materialism is by definition atheist, don't you? As the link I provided before shows, it was developed by Christians who thought that Gods Universe should be explained by laws, not miracles. So, no, you are incorrect. Science was developed by Christians but they continued to attribute the universe to God, so they weren't philosophical materialists. Yes, most people don't realize the implications of evolution. They think it can be directed or guided. But the evolution the real authorities on evolution teach is not consistent with a belief in God. This is glossed over: OK, if I understand you: 1) You acknowledge that common descent is evolution 2) You claim to accept common descent 3) You claim that evolution implies atheism 4) You are therefore an atheist? I'm missing something!<?i> Yep. I do accept common descent (have you reconsidered your opposition to this in an earlier post, btw?) and I accept an evolution that does not preclude divine activity in the natural world. I can see the reason for confusion - the type of evolution I accept is different from the type taught by the deans of science - as previously discussed.