God, Darwin, and Design 6 - Ken Miller

Part 6 from Ken Miller's "God, Darwin, and Design- Lessons from the Dover Monkey Trial" lecture at U of Texas- Austin.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• ken
• miller
• evolution
• creationism
• dover
• trial
• intelligent
• design

[foxlake02]

Zheng is not saying the dating method is inaccurate. Just that with caution it works under certain preconditions. He was only describing how to do it right. AIG got ahold of his concerns and tried to make it look like he is saying isochron dating methods do not work. Typical lies and quote mines. “False isochrons can usually be avoided by choosing appropriate samples. The samples must come from an initially homogeneous source and avoiding obvious signs of weathering and metamorphism.”

[blueshowercurtain]

@LoricaLady I'm relieved to find that you're not going to talk about scripture, because such things are far from scientific. Although I find it fascinating that you criticize evolution and yet you believe in creationism, something that is purely based on belief. And please don't tell me that your arguments against evolution - whether they're valid or not - strengthen the argument for creationism, because that is not the case. I've heard the arguments for creationism, and they're all rubbish.

[HimesInu]

My favorite term in Of Pandas and People is "cdesign proponentsists". Look it up people, I can't make this shit up.

[RpgdUd3]

just finished that judgement day - ID on trial, fucking brilliant so hilarious at moments

[LoricaLady]

Cont. Well, I see the remainder of the vid is just more rah-rah-jump-on-the-band-wagon politicing, 0 science. Here we see the evoevangelists fighting hard to stop freedom of speech. They want the state to force their religious system on the populace, complete with little icons to "bow" down to like the bogus "Tiktaalik" replica shown in this series as part of their , as Miller said, "This is as good as it gets" faith based system. The mismatched fossil & replica say it all. Cont. on Vid 7,

[LoricaLady]

8:33 In one of Miller's vid series he made the lofty comment that "Scientists should stay above politics." As is seen here there has not been much on "God, Darwin & Design" but tons of political messages. That is what one would expect from evoevangelists whose real goals are not to prove the scientific "truth" of evolution, but to keep trying to suppress dissenting voices through propaganda and court fights, since, per Miller's own comments, less than 1/2 of Americans accept evoultion. Cont.

[foxlake02]

@LoricaLady So you really think in Epperson v. Arkansas, Segraves v. State of California, McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education, Edwards v. Aguillard, Webster v. New Lenox School District, Peloza v. Capistrano School District, Freiler v. Tangipahoa Parish Board of Education, Rodney LeVake v Independent School District 656, Selman et al. v. Cobb County School District and Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover the judges were all politically motivated and not following the US Constitution hey?

[LoricaLady]

6:00 Lol. "Go to the Nova website...It was great entertainment." He got that right. But really tears are more appropriate than laughter. 6:13 Here, as always in Miller's lectures, is the propaganda technique of ridicule. I have 0 faith in politicians, Rep or Dem & think there is precious little difference between the 2 parties - but what does this pic have to do with science? Nothing of course.

But it's so important in this day & age that "science" talks be "entertainment." Cont.

[LoricaLady]

TO ANYONE: If you see no-reply to some posters, those Miller vid guard dogs (who have tracked me for over a yr on YT) & others know they are on ignore for: personal insults, name calling, gross obscenities, false accusations of lying, campaigning to get my posts hidden, and in the case of Foxlake sexual harrassment & telling a poster who sent me a 0 science porno post Good job! Such behaviors are of course counterproductive to the purposes of science. I will debate with the few who are civil.

[LoricaLady]

Cont. One thing we know for sure, the totally baseless, dataless, anti scientific primal pond theory wasn't invented by creationists! Yet it can still be found defended on Youtube and on the net, on t.v. and in the library books meant for little children, taught to them as "science." Cont.

[LoricaLady]

Cont. Nova should stick to what is observable, repeatable and testable, like the Laws of Gravity. But they use the logical fallacy of equivocation when they call evolutiion a "science" like the opoerational sciences which are NOT based purely on unobservable, untestable and unrepeatable hypotheticals supported by more logical fallacies. Sadly many evolutionists, from Darwin to Nova's, have presupposed that somehow in some conveniently long ago la la scenario, life came from non life. Cont.

[neobiognosis]

@LoricaLady Am I missing something. Evolution has nothing to do with the "Origin of life". My understanding is that it proposes a method by which the diversity of life could be explained. How life originated is a different scientific conundrum.