The “Scientific dissent from Darwinism” statement merely consists of: "We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged."
I see no problem at all with ‘careful examination of the evidence’ when it comes to most things, do you? Do you have problems with the papers presented at that site? ( http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org/ ) http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?id=118 http://www.discovery.org/articleFiles/PDFs/survivalOfTheFakest.pdf among others… If so, what do you disagree with? And stem, to your specific questions: “If neruoscience and philosophy of mind cannot agree what the "mind" is, or the question of how does consciouness arise, does that mean there is a God?” No. Such apparent disagreement has noting to do with the divine. “Specifically, does that mean there is the traditional monotheistic God whose attributes are Omnipotence (all powerful), Omniscience (all knowing), and Omnibenvolent (all loving)?” Again, no. See above. To even attempt to make the connection is a red herring at best. “Is it "supernatural"? Something else? Or, is this just an arguement from ignorance?”” As stated, the disagreement says noting about the divine, either it’s existence nor it’s attributes. And, to present this as an either/or with the other possibility as being an ‘argument from ignorance’, in my view, stinks. On Nov 9, 10:41 pm, stem cell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If neruoscience and philosophy of mind cannot agree what the "mind" > is, or the question of how does consciouness arise, does that mean > there is a God? Specifically, does that mean there is the traditional > monotheistic God whose attributes are Omnipotence (all powerful), > Omniscience (all knowing), and Omnibenvolent (all loving)? Is it > "supernatural"? Something else? Or, is this just an arguement from > ignorance? > > WHAT SAYS YOU? > > stemcell > > On Nov 9, 11:13 pm, stem cell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20026793.000-creationists-decla... > > On Nov 9, 11:11 pm, stem cell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> Another > > tidbit from New Scientist. http://www.newscientist.com/article/> > > mg20026793.000-creationists-declare-war-over-the-brain.html WHAT SAYS> > > YOU?stemcellOn Nov 9, 10:45 pm, stem cell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > > wrote:> The Intelligent Design folks are attacking the mind/brain> > > issue now> that their fight over getting "equal time" in public> > > shhools has> proved futile. (Fpr a great background on this see> > > "Creationism's> Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intellignet Design" by Dr.> > > Barbara> Forrest. www.creationismstrojanhorse.com) In keeping to > > the> plans> outlined by the "wedge document", they are trying to> > > "overthrow> materialism". In their own words. "The Discovery> > > Institute for the> Renewal of Science and Culture seeks nothing less> > > than the overthrow> of materialism and it's cultural legacies."> >> > > fragments.consc.net/djc/2008/10/the-problem-of-consciousness-meets->> > > intelligent-design.html> >http://fragments.consc.net/djc/2008/10/the- > > problem-of-consciousness-m...>> > > > > > - Hide quoted text -> > - > > Show quoted text -> > > WHAT SAYS YOU?- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
