Why only the US?
Look at some of the old posts on UD and you'll see the inroads that ID is making on a global scale. The primary thinkers behind ID are American, ID is also fairly "new", and as such it's not unexpected for ID to first become popular here.
littlejon, i agree with you. Like you, here in the UK it all looks a bit wacky to me and i presume you.
I have been following, in an amteurish way, the ID movement because i tend to find it's methods of getting into science and schools quite amazing. The methods seem to me at worst decietful, about the true origins and motives, and at best a little bit of comfort for loose thinkers who believe in a God.
I don't see ID as a global movement (a statistically indefensible claim!), in fact like the Anglican Church, most religions outside of the US seem to want to stay away from it. I should imagine this is because of past experiences of trying to get into science that were not very successful. If a religion throws it's weight behind somehting that later gets disproven they're a bit stuck.
Ken Miller summed things up quite well when he said that this sort of attack on science is damaging for science education in America and consequently the economy, quite right, and here in the UK we'll be ready to pick up the gauntlet!
Well that's even weirder. So now we need to know, without citing any religious factors, why only the USA & no other country in the world, has supporters of ID?
Possible, I suppose, that every other country is mistaken, but then why is this? Hard to see the Swedes or Danes embarked on some dastardly plot to hide the truth - why on earth would they?
Support of ID limited to the US ONLY? I'm not sure where you got that idea but I can assure you that it's not so. I've never done an in-depth check into where all ID proponents are located but I've heard of ID proponents being Europeans, South Americans, and people all over the place.
ID in Korea:
http://intelligentdesign.or.kr/
ID in Finland:
http://www.intelligentdesign.fi/
ID in Denmark:
http://www.intelligentdesign.dk/news.php
ID in Australia:
http://www.idnet.com.au/index.php
ID in italy:
http://progettocosmo.altervista.org/
ID in Brazil:
http://pos-darwinista.blogspot.com/
ID in Colombia
http://www.probabilista.blogspot.com/
ID in the UK
http://idintheuk.blogspot.com/
And my own...in which I collaborate with scientists and scholars from (Mexico, Spain, and Colombia):
http://www.ciencia-alternativa.org/
Enjoy!
We really need a sound effect (or animated .gif) of a WWII plane that's been shot down and is plunging toward the Earth in flames.
Speaking of Earth, where on Earth do folks like Littlejon get the idea that ID has NO support in any other country besides the US?
Inquiring minds want to know!
Without being rude, the fact that you "have heard of" anything is not the strongest solciological evidence I've ever seen cited. Yes yes yes you will find one man who runs a website in places like the UK, but no more than, lets be generous, 1% of the population see any problem whatsoever with Darwinism. That of course does not make it true, but nor does the bizarre level of supporters of this idea in one country on the planet make it false
In February of 2006, I debated on Voice of America radio against Dr. Guang Guo of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill on intelligent design and the Dover trial. The debate was broadcast live in China and many people tuned in. Of the callers, only ONE was an evolutionists and the rest were all IDers--professors, academics, common folk, etc.
In addition, there have been many ID conferences abroad in Europe in 2006--all which was received widespread support for intelligent design.
And a great thanks to Mario for the links to worldwide ID blogs and sites. Here's another one by the Director of the IDURC-South America branch:
http://probabilista.blogspot.com/
Sola veritas,
Sam Chen
Littlejon wrote:
"…why only the USA & no other country in the world, has supporters of ID?"
These were your words, Littlejon. You made an implicit claim that no country besides the US has supporters of ID. This is an extremely bold claim, and all we need to do to falsify it is show that ONE country besides the US has at least TWO supporters of ID living in that country.
I would suggest you not state things that are so easy to refute.
As you indicated correctly in your last post, the legitimacy of a given scientific claim ought not be evaluated by how much support it does or does not have. Therefore, the world-wide distribution of ID supporters with respect to nationality and the number of ID supporters as compared to the number of Darwinist supporters cannot be used to argue to validity of either claim.
The claims of Darwinism vs. Intelligent Design should be argued on the basis of the evidence for or against either theory, period.
Personally I think that support of ID may grow more rapidly in the East in comparison to the West. Darwinism is thoroughly embedded in the West and people are dogmatic. I remember hearing of conferences where Chinese teams met with western scientists. The Chinese teams were open to various interpretations of the evidence. They were astonished when instead of discussing the evidence openly the Western scientists spent the whole time doggedly defending their Darwinism, pretty much wasting most of the time available for the conference.
In China we can criticize Darwin but not the government. In America you can criticize the government, but not Darwin. ~ J.Y. Chen
"The claims of Darwinism vs. Intelligent Design should be argued on the basis of the evidence for or against either theory". Yes yes yes but that isn't what the thread is about. I'm interested in a sociological question. Why only the US? Similiarly, why is it only the US where people think they've been abducted by aliens? I don't know, I just thought it worth pondering. Having said that, we could quibble by adding in "the evidence for or against testable hypotheses derived from either theory" but there you go.
You say all you need is one country (non-US) with two ID supporters, well OK, I'll take that. Lets have the names of two people who live in a non-US country & support ID. Now, lets be clear, as ID itself stresses, they must NOT consider their opinion to carry any religious weight or be derived from religious belief, they must know lets say 2 "buzzwords" of the "theory" ("irreducible complexity" & "complex specified information" for example), and they have to be able to give one piece of evidence that supports ID over Natural Selection.
Two names...
Littlejon,
You said "as ID itself stresses, they must NOT consider their opinion to carry any religious weight or be derived from religious belief...." I don't know where you're coming from, but that's just wrong.
ID as a theory does not claim to be religiously driven. That does NOT mean it carries not religious weight. Certainly ID has an effect on the religious scene, as does evolution, as does many other views in different fields not related to origins.
Furthermore, to argue that IDers must know the "buzzwords" is rather silly, too. Certainly, anyone in this debate should know what the concepts you call "buzzwords" are, but it doesn't mean IDers all subscribe to them or only subscribe to them. ID has a very far reach and encompasses many different views. Irreducible complexing, for example, is just one of the many that make up this theory called "intelligent design."
The IDists led by William Dembski made a ghastly error at the very beginning by presenting Intelligent Design for debate. Intelligent Design is manifest in every aspect of the universe and serves as the mandatory starting point for any rational discussion of both ontogeny or phylogeny. It is most certainly not an "inference" and needs no mathematical proof. Leo Berg , referring to ontogeny and phylogeny put it his way 83 years ago -
"Neither in the one nor in the other is there room for chance."
Nomogenesis, page 134.
The moment that a subject is presented for debate, debate teams spring up like mushrooms which is exactly what we have today on internet forums. The truth is not subject to debate, only to discovery and disclosure.
The darwinian fairy tale is the longest standing hoax in the history of science, 149 years of mass hysteria initiated and then perpetuated by legions of "prescribed," "born that way" atheist mentalities that are deaf , like most pure white cats, to what Einstein called "the muisic of the spheres."
So innate is this congenital defect that it is incurable. Like our political preferences and our eye color we are "Born That Way" as Williiam Wright's book so convincingly demonstrates.
For a contemporary demonstration I refer you to alanfox.blogspot.com/ and the thread "John Davison this is for you" which is now at over 300 messages. The Darwinian contingent, largely from Panda's Thumb, are convinced that Martin and I are one and the same person. The sole reason for this is because Martin agrees with me. It is inconceivable to the homozygous atheist mindset that there could exist another human being as deranged as myself.
It is hard to believe isn't it?
I love it so!
HAPPY NEW YEAR
"A past evoluition is undeniable, a present evoluition undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
Schen24: exactly, "should know what the concepts [...] are" - I never mentioned subscribe to them. Quite a while now since I was told rather smartly not to assert claims so "easily refuted" & we're still waiting for those 2 non-US names...
Schen24: exactly, "should know what the concepts [...] are" - I never mentioned subscribe to them. Quite a while now since I was told rather smartly not to assert claims so "easily refuted" & we're still waiting for those 2 non-US names...
You could start by looking the at the links Mario provided. Ciencia Alternativa's contact page lists the nationalities of its principle members, which includes more than 2 non-US citizens. The problem is that many ID proponents don't want their names public for fear of persecution. So I could list more but I'd rather just point to people who've already taken a public stance.
Not a great example to have picked. Let's have a quick look over at Ciencia Alternativa. Every "collaborator" name is US. The blog has one entry of one word with no comments. The messageboard has 4 sections, 3 of which have never had any posts, the other has had one post (no replies) in the last year. They have 8 members. I have been there for about 15 mins, I only have one name of someone who states they support ID. "Members"? I think we need more than that - I am a member of many websites & messageboards I don't necessarily support.
PS I've found another section - another blog under their auspices. Admittedly this one has more than one post, but they are all by one person, a Daniel Andres, and none have any comments.
Look, I honestly didn't mean this to be critical of any scientific position. I'm just claiming that it is of anthropological interest that we have a belief-system prevalent in only one society. Why not answer that rather than deny it?
littlejon in bold:
Not a great example to have picked. Let's have a quick look over at Ciencia Alternativa. Every "collaborator" name is US. The blog has one entry of one word with no comments. The messageboard has 4 sections, 3 of which have never had any posts, the other has had one post (no replies) in the last year. They have 8 members. I have been there for about 15 mins, I only have one name of someone who states they support ID. "Members"? I think we need more than that - I am a member of many websites & messageboards I don't necessarily support.
PS I've found another section - another blog under their auspices. Admittedly this one has more than one post, but they are all by one person, a Daniel Andres, and none have any comments.
Look, I honestly didn't mean this to be critical of any scientific position. I'm just claiming that it is of anthropological interest that we have a belief-system prevalent in only one society. Why not answer that rather than deny it?
Perhaps your spanish isn't so good. Ciencia Alternativa is a new organization. As founder and president, I have personally asked people to not post until our site is complete and we have more material. Our organization intends to supply publications of established ID proponents in spanish. Our plan is to publish our own material as well, but we are doing more translating now than anything else.
Our "Mesa Directiva" (Board of Directors) are all supporters of ID, which include:
Daniel Andrés Díaz - Probability Theorist
Carlos Montes - Materials Scientist
Raúl Leguizamón - Pathologist
Fernando Castro-Chavez - Molecular Biologist
______________________________________
Littlejon, there are many ID supporters outside the U.S. Although you asked for only two names, here are a few:
Giuseppe Sermonti - Geneticist/Italy
John Lennox - Mathematician/Green College, Oxford
Andrew Ruys- Bioceramic Engineering/University of Sydney, Australia
Moshe Koppel - Mathematics/Bar-Ilan University, Israel
Cheers!
Littlejohn, I don't accept your assertion that only a few people in the UK are interested in ID.
I was visiting in London last summer, and the students very VERY interested in ID....they were, however, very reluctant to express it except to other students like myself because they are very aware that voicing such ideas can hurt their University chances, to a much greater degree than would be true here.
http://www.uncommondescent.com/archives/1920
Interestingly enough Antony Flew and others are advocating that ID be taught in the UK. I don't think Flew could be considered a 100% ID proponent but he's open-minded on the subject.
BTW, littlejon, you're the one denying the obvious here. I don't appreciate your actions, which basically amount to calling us liars even after we provided what you asked for. Any more such nonsense and I'll block you permanently (yes, that does mean I've unblocked you...for now).
Part of the sociological explanation has a lot to do with the size, status and wealth of nations.
For one, the US is a big nation so the spotlight is on. Second, there is plenty of money for advocacy groups on both size. In the US, the PR machine has been mastered. Three, the US has been excessively politicized and polarized...it's part of our popular culture that most people choose sides rather than keeping a genuinely open mind.
So, you have a country that's always in the spotlight, partly because of its size and power. Within that country, you have a media machine bigger than all the other media machines in the world, shining a spotlight on any controversial issue. Within that same country you've got billions of dollars dedicated to politization via polarization...
It's in a lot of people's interest to make this a politicized issue. The media loves to tell stories. Advocates need to stay in business. The people gravitate towards controversy and like picking their sides.
Now I'm not saying that none of this goes on in other countries, just not on the same scale as in the US.
But claiming that ID is only a US phenomenon is like claiming that only Americans make blockbuster movies....and then wondering why.
Thank you, this is actually an answer rather than a lot of people from the US insisting this isn't a US issue. For my money I think it's the high status of democracy in the US; here in the UK we're not really democratic & wouldn't dream of having, say, a school board setting what children learnt. We leave that to the "experts" for better or worse. I get the feeling that US citizens expect to be listened to more, thus non-specialist opinions "count" more.
Well I am from the UK (England to be precise) and I support the notion that intelligent design can be indentified in natural organic systems in just the same way it can be indentified in manmade systems.
Certainly to my mind (which may indeed be limited or lacking imagination), complex organic systems cannot evolve gradually through functional intermediates because of the necessity of perfect coadaptation of all their components as a precondition to function - which may go some way to explaining the fossil record's lack of detailed transitions between complex systems and our own conceptual discontinuities in hypothesizing the functional continuum required to make the transition possible.
So I guess that refutes the notion that only the USA has supporters of ID as posted by my fellow countryman?
Nevertheless Littlejon has a point, ID could and I feel must do better in the UK. Although I feel the UK might prove a harder nut to crack than the US. However, it would be great to see more conferences in the UK.
But whether ID (or Darwinism) is believed in every country, or nowhere at all, makes absolutely no difference to the validity of its claims. I am sure Littlejon would agree. A person convinced of his/her own convictions would surely not be swayed by popular sentiment.
If, for example, popular opinion (or even authoritative opinion) believe feathers evolved from scales, those persons not swayed by these opinions would surely have some substantial evidence as a basis for this belief. As clearly direct observation of the process eludes us, the only evidence would therefore be finding a sequence of intergrading forms leading unambiguously from one form to another - or reconstructing the transition hypothetically by providing a plausible genealogy including all the intermediate forms and a thoroughly convincing explanation of how each stage of the transition came about.
Just for the record:
Here are three ID blogs that originate in the UK:
ID in the United Kingdom
The British Center for Science Education: Revealed
Truth in Science News Blog
People all over the world have all different religions. Yet the USA is the only country in the world where ID is taken seriously by a large number of people. Any idea why? I'm in the UK where many people are Christian, but no-one sees a problem for Natural Selection at all. Of course, that doesn't amke the rest of the world right, but it does suggest there may be a problem if only American strudents are taught ID & they ever want to study or work anywhere else...
login or register to post comments | -1 points