Comment Re:Strawmen... (Score 1) 361
Look... dude. ID is not a theory, it's a piece of crap. I don't know how to put this in simpler terms to you, but I'll try:
You are misled by the use of the word "theory", which comes from its epistemological meaning. In this sense, a theory would be stating that stepping in front of a moving car will hurt you. If I come an propose a different interpretation that stands to the verification that philosophy requires, let's say that a bunch of invisible gnomes with superpowers come very quickly and beat the shit out of you and trow you away making it look like the car has just hit you, it's called a competing theory. It will have a majority of opponents and one supporter, me. In this case, nobody can disprove me since I am claiming that my theory is supported by evidence that cannot be produced, like an invisible gnome with superpowers. In just the same way ID is a theory.
Calling evolution a theory is like calling gravity a theory, and like calling global warming a theory. Granted, there is a scale of trust that we can place these theories on. But saying that ID is not considered for teaching because people are close minded is like me saying that my gnome theory is not well received because you are close minded.
Once again, ID and all the justifications behind it from a very small and vocal crowd are pieces of crap and this is obvious to anybody who has the knowledge to see it.
You are misled by the use of the word "theory", which comes from its epistemological meaning. In this sense, a theory would be stating that stepping in front of a moving car will hurt you. If I come an propose a different interpretation that stands to the verification that philosophy requires, let's say that a bunch of invisible gnomes with superpowers come very quickly and beat the shit out of you and trow you away making it look like the car has just hit you, it's called a competing theory. It will have a majority of opponents and one supporter, me. In this case, nobody can disprove me since I am claiming that my theory is supported by evidence that cannot be produced, like an invisible gnome with superpowers. In just the same way ID is a theory.
Calling evolution a theory is like calling gravity a theory, and like calling global warming a theory. Granted, there is a scale of trust that we can place these theories on. But saying that ID is not considered for teaching because people are close minded is like me saying that my gnome theory is not well received because you are close minded.
Once again, ID and all the justifications behind it from a very small and vocal crowd are pieces of crap and this is obvious to anybody who has the knowledge to see it.
