I'm from Missouri

This site is named for the famous statement of US Congressman Willard Duncan Vandiver from Missouri : "I`m from Missouri -- you'll have to show me." This site is dedicated to skepticism of official dogma in all subjects. Just-so stories are not accepted here. This is a site where controversial subjects such as evolution theory and the Holocaust may be freely debated.

Location: Los Angeles, California, United States

My biggest motivation for creating my own blogs was to avoid the arbitrary censorship practiced by other blogs and various other Internet forums. Censorship will be avoided in my blogs -- there will be no deletion of comments, no closing of comment threads, no holding up of comments for moderation, and no commenter registration hassles. Comments containing nothing but insults and/or ad hominem attacks are discouraged. My non-response to a particular comment should not be interpreted as agreement, approval, or inability to answer.

Thursday, November 20, 2008

Fatheaded Ed condemns ID'ers for differing in opinion

According to Fatheaded Ed Brayton, if proponents of Intelligent Design don't all think alike, then they are all a bunch of hypocrites. Fatheaded Ed wrote on his blog,

One of the things we hear constantly from the ID crowd is their silly claim that they don't want ID taught in public schools, only the "arguments for and against evolution" taught (silly, of course, because ID is nothing but a list of arguments against evolution). In fact, they feign much outrage whenever we say that they want ID taught in science classrooms. Problem is, they keep letting the cat out of the bag. Like this statement from a recent book:
If future courts recognize the many flaws in the Kitzmiller ruling, it may fare better in the courts and the classrooms. Such a scenario, balancing design and chance rationales for the origins of the universe and life, should be proposed in school boards, taught in public school classrooms, and presented in legislation. For legislators or teachers who are truly not seeking to get the "Bible back into school" but simply want fair representation of all competing scientific theories to be presented to students, intelligent design offers a real possibility to achieve that goal.

This is from an essay called Darwinism and the Law, written by H. Wayne House, a graduate of Pat Robertson's law school, in a book called Intelligent Design 101: Leading Experts Explain the Key Issues.

And it was gullible activist judge "Jackass" Jones whose Kitzmiller v. Dover ruling made Intelligent Design a dirty word. And Judge Jones said in a Dickinson College commencement speech that his Dover decision was based on his cockamamie notion that the Founders based the establishment clause upon a belief that organized religions are not "true" religions.

It's no wonder that Fatheaded Ed arbitrarily censors visitors' comments on his blog.



Blogger Jim Sherwood said...

Those who are skeptical of the conventional theory of evolution, but also skeptical of intelligent design, would certainly like to have the "arguments for and against" the conventional theory of evolution taught in public schools. (For instance, David Berlinski.) And they aren't ID proponents like myself.

Plenty of ID proponents, including myself, don't want ID taught in public schools.

Berlinski's view of how species arose is "Right now, the only reasonable explanation is intelligent uncertainty." In other words, we don't really know what the Hell happened, and especially we don't know what causes brought it about. I think that that's one reasonable position, and at least is more rational than the unverifiable speculations and arbitrary dogmas of the conventional evolutionary biologists.

I have a lot of Berlinski's videos and my page at YouTube.com, which can be accessed via my Blogger profile.

Thursday, November 20, 2008 5:58:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home