h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

It is now illegal to teach Creationism & ID as Science:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4545822.stm

>>Judge Jones said he had determined that ID was not science and "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents".

In a 139-page written ruling, the judge said: "Our conclusion today is that it is unconstitutional to teach ID as an alternative to evolution in a public school science classroom."<<

And, even better:

>>It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy.<<

Ready to recant yet?

Well it was a 50/50 chance and it was the wrong judge. This is an awful shame and I am disapointed but not too surprised that the naturalist bias of many scientists has silenced people who, although do support teaching exactly what happened (Genesis), did support teaching children the wonderful evidence that we are designed and this could only have been by an Intelligent Designer.

Even though it is now illegal to teach it, this decision will still strenghen the ID movement as cencorship usually has the oppite effect that was intended i.e. people will see this as atheists bullying theists and trying to silence their opponents.

As for some of the nonsense that this Judge said, well it is plain slander.

They can still appeal to the Supreme Court anyway so don't get too pleased.

Exactly which bits were slander?

'Exactly which bits were slander?'


Most of what the Judge said but particularly calling ID advocates 'liars'.

Although slander seems to be acceptable now. I've just watched the last episode of Robert Winston's 'The Story of God' and found it cringing to watch so many misunderstandings and falsehoods being broadcasted to a whole country, which is on the whole ignorant of Creation Science.

I found the part where Winston revealed ignorance of his own religion (as well as Christianity) by asking Ken Ham if he was circumcised particularly revealing.

Asking about circumscision isn't ignorance, it's highlighting a point (although he chose the wrong country to do so).

The bible says that all believers should be circumscised, yet, in this country, the vast majority are not. Most circumscisions are performed for medical reasons. In the US, the majority of men are "roundheads" because it is "the done thing", and nothing to do with religion - it was originally promoted in the states as an measure to prevent masturbation, thereby preserving the health of the boys (since, as we all know, masturbation causes all sorts of mental diseases...)

Ken Ham is probably circumscised, not because of his parents' beliefs, buy because just after he was born the doctor said "when shall I bok him in for circumscision?" I could ask you if you are circumscised, and why, but I don't need to know.

As for the lies, the IDists did lie. They used arguments that were shown long ago to be false, and that they *knew* were false. They said that ID was not linked to Creationism in any way, when it is (What is "creation by a higher intelligence with god-lie powers" if it is not "creation by a god"?)

'The bible says that all believers should be circumscised'

No, the Bible says that decendents of Abraham (Jews) should be circumcised. Non-Jewish Christians do not have to be circumcised. In fact, in Acts 15, some Jewish believers were insisting that Gentile Christians should be circumised and obey the Law of Moses as well but Peter corrected them, saying that they are saved by faith and should not be circumcised (unless they wanted to).

' They used arguments that were shown long ago to be false, and that they *knew* were false.'

No they didn't. They have answered their critics many times but of course, they are ignored.

'They said that ID was not linked to Creationism in any way, when it is (What is "creation by a higher intelligence with god-lie powers" if it is not "creation by a god"?)'

(Young earth) Creationism is the belief that the world was created in 6 24 hour days and that life did not all evolve from a common ancestor. ID teaches that living things are so complex that there must be a Designer. Most ID advocates believe in (God guided) evolution and an old earth so it is not the same as Creationism.

"Most ID advocates believe in (God guided) evolution and an old earth so it is not the same as Creationism."

Yet the ID witnesses at the trial were claiming that ID has nothing to do with god at all, and was a science. Ergo; they lied.

'Yet the ID witnesses at the trial were claiming that ID has nothing to do with god at all, and was a science. Ergo; they lied.'

My mistake. Some do but many don't or are agnostic. But they are united in the belief that an Intelligent Designer (not necesserly a god) must be responsible for design in the universe.