The good guys win again

[evmori]

Apparently someone missed

 

Disclaimer: This is a gross generalization of what science is about; science is actually much more complex than how it is described here, but this will give you a basic background if you need it.

 

which is at the very beginning of the article.

 

And what about hypotheses that cannot ever be proved? Are these real science?

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

Happy New Year to all

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Nothing is ever "proved" in science, proofs are for formal systems like mathematics. Theories are models that explain observations and make predictions.

[evmori]

Wasn't the earth proved round? Wasn't the sun proved the center of our universe? Weren't both of these theories at one time?

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

Happy New Year to all

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Ed, nothing is ever "proved" in science. There are still people who seriously believe the earth is flat and/or is the center of the universe, and if you'd like to abandon scientific standards, there's no way to keep them out of science classes, either.

[CA_Scouter]

And so it starts... again.... the Bickersons are back.

 

Honestly, you two would argue for months on the proper way to hang a roll of toilet paper.

 

Merlyn's recent post was insightful, thoughtful and humorous. Ed, to quote something I say to my children now and then, 'Not everything that pops into your head has to shoot out your mouth.' ( or through your keyboard ).

 

Both of you, please don't subject the rest of us to your personal rants. Resist the urge to 'one-up' the other guy. Its pointless. And its un-Scoutlike.

 

Can I get a YO! on that brothers? ( and Sistas! )

 

 

Gotta go now, I've got a gnome in my lower intestine and its pressing on my bladder.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[evmori]

CA,

No one is forcing you to read these posts. If I were you, I would stay out of the Issues & Politics Forum. You don't seem to understand it. Oh yeah, and thanks for contributing to the discussion.

 

Merlyn,

There are still people who believe the Holocaust never happened either but it did! Just because there are people who don't believe in something doesn't means it ain't true! You don't believe in God even though He exists!

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

Happy New Year to all

[OldGreyEagle]

I loved Theodoric of York, he was my kind of guy! Didnt he have a reference book he would consult to answer tough questions? wish I had one, a book that had answers to all questions, they might not be the right answers, but at least just having an answer sometimes helps.

 

I agree with CA_Scouter AND I agree with ED. Merlyn and Ed can be quite tiring to follow, then again no one forces the rest of us to read the exchanges although it would be nice if they would take future exchanges on this topic to the private message route. Then again if they do we would be bereft of the urbane, witty and sophisticated banter which is their trademark

 

We had a poster who would often argue against prohibiting topics or censoring posts because he claimed some people did more damage to their case by their own postings than any argument ever could

 

PS CA, which one do you see as John? Blanche?(This message has been edited by OldGreyEagle)

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

Ed writes:

Just because there are people who don't believe in something doesn't means it ain't true!

 

Ed, lots of people believe lots of nonsense, which is why what's taught in science class shouldn't be decided by people ignorant of what science is, like the former Dover school board.

[CA_Scouter]

Sorry Ed if you don't like my post. I tried to be courteous about it.

 

I understand perfectly well what is going on in this thread. Merlyn makes a post, you find something to disagree with his post, he finds something to disagree with yours, and it goes back and forth and on and on. This is not the first time I've seen this, I have even asked the moderators to close a thread that I had started because you two were starting a flame war and ruining the very insightful and valid discussion on which I had started. Honestly as I see it now, the subject matter is completely irrelvant once you two start going.

 

But you are absolutely right. No one is forcing me to read these posts, just like no one is forcing you or M to one-up each other. I will therefore do my best to do my duty to keep my comments to myself at most times, to sometimes keep myself physically away from my keyboard, and to try to keep mentally awake during these posts. Happy now?

 

I apologize to others that I've taken the thread off subject. It won't happen again.

 

ps OGE - I refuse to answer your question on the grounds that I'll get yelled at again. :-)

 

 

 

[evmori]

CA,

I don't yell. If I had IT WOULD HAVE LOOKED LIKE THIS.

 

The former Dover school boards mistake was they wanted to make ID mandatory. It can still be taught.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

Happy New Year to all

[Scoutndad]

Ed, you are absolutely right that we don't have to read the forum or your postings...however, as much as I admire your stance (and agree with most of what you state), the distraction is still there with the constant bickering.

 

While I may be addressing you directly on this, I am not singling you out. I'm at a loss as to what is won or lost by the "back and forth" mentality.

 

But honestly, CAScouter does have a point....

 

Any reason why we can't have a separate forum TOPIC entitled RELIGION....then you could "duke" it out all day with those who oppose what BSA tries to promote.

 

And finally, my $.02 worth on this thread...

One poorly run proceeding that causes a judge to rule unfavorably, does not mean that the issue is dead. This was a bad case from the start with very poor testimony. This is not dead by a long shot - anyone hear of Roe v Wade (rhetorical)? Politcal careers are won and lost based on this case as I imagine other careers will be determined on their religious value stance.

Faith certainly is not decided in the courtroom...

[firstpusk]

"And finally, my $.02 worth on this thread...

One poorly run proceeding that causes a judge to rule unfavorably, does not mean that the issue is dead. This was a bad case from the start with very poor testimony. This is not dead by a long shot - anyone hear of Roe v Wade (rhetorical)? Politcal careers are won and lost based on this case as I imagine other careers will be determined on their religious value stance.

Faith certainly is not decided in the courtroom..."

 

ID was scientifically DOA when it got to court. I am not sure why you characterize the trial as poorly run. Perhaps you didn't like the outcome. The board and their supporters had ample opportunity to make their case. They could not support the claim that ID was science and not religion. They lied repeated under oath in order to cover their religious motivations. After reading all 139 pages of the opinion, I have tremendous respect for the honesty and competence of Judge John Jones III. I will agree with you that faith is not decided in the courtroom. However, the effort to use government to force religious viewpoints into public school science classrooms got spanked in the Dover trial.

[Scoutndad]

Ahhhh, back to the meat of the issue...

 

I referenced poor testimony (you provided the gory details of the sordid lies and inaccuracies)

I referenced that the judge was only able to draw one logical conclusion based on how the case was presented (and you once again provided the obsequious nature of the ruling).

 

My comment was not directed towards an improper ruling, but towards the very poor work done by the ID crowd...kinda like the OJ prosecution team...doh!

 

And by the way, I will not be as easily drawn into the anti-creationism and anti-Moore rhetoric that others expound upon within this forum for the sake of my last comment from my previous thread. Faith (specifically my faith) will not be decided in the courtroom.

 

I guess my ultimate question would be how do Scoutmasters/adult leaders in BSA that do not believe in God/a Divine entity, provide a well rounded perspective for leadership to the boys within their Troops? I realize ID may have taken a blow with this case, but how would you explain it to the boys you lead without ignoring the respect for the scouts underlying religious values - regardless of your stance on ID?

 

 

[firstpusk]

I will agree with you that the board and their counsel were particularly inept. However, ID doesn't give them much with which to work. The foundation for the poor work of the ID crowd in court was built on nearly two decades of poor (I am being charitible) science.

 

I was not looking to draw you into anything. I simply share the good judge's distaste for hypocracy dressed in religious robes.

 

If you are asking me how I work with scouts and my duty to God, I have no problem. I don't see a conflict between accepting evolution and seeing the gifts that God has given us. My faith is not determined by the outcome of this trial either. I tell my scouts that the beauty of this world and the life on it is an inspiration, that they should be thankful for the gift they have be given. I just don't share the view of some scouters here that I must tell scouts that God created the world in six days a few thousand years ago. I believe He used evolution. That was what I was taught in my church and the schools run by my church. That is what the evidence of science teaches us, also.

[Fishsqueezer]

ScoutnDad

Your quote "I guess my ultimate question would be how do Scoutmasters/adult leaders in BSA that do not believe in God/a Divine entity, provide a well rounded perspective for leadership to the boys within their Troops?"

 

I believe you are approaching this issue with a false dichotomy - either you believe in God or you believe in evolution. There are a lot of people in this world that are much more comfortable with black and white, either/or choices. It makes the world much simpler.

 

Believing in evolution does not automatically negate belief in God. In fact, most major denominations have accepted evolution as an indisputable fact including 2 popes. Evolution, while greatly argued right after Origin of Species, was accepted as mainstream by science, the public, and most religious publications by around 1865. Even strongly Christian scholars like Asa Gray emphasized that evolution was very important to the science of biology. It was not until around 1920 that evolution was strongly portrayed as an enemy of religion.

 

This is not an either/or - but I guess the church is full of either/or things - dunked or sprinkled, baptise children or not, King James or NIV, musical instruments or not, the book of mormon or not, dancing, cards, alcohol, etc or not. That is why we have so many denominations. You are right from your perspective, but your perspective is not the world. I believe God gave us our minds to probe, to think, and to seek. He gave us logic to use and faith to maintain direction. I do not limit how God created.