While Galileo’s evidence for heliocentrism is less-than-conclusive by our standards, I’d say his observation of the cycle of phases of Venus was a discovery which was compelling in its support for Copernicus’ theory…far more compelling than his tidal theories, anyway. But, historically, you’re quite correct–it was not until the 19th Century that the argument for the solar system was complete beyond reasonable reproach.

I’ll have to disagree that Christianity is not hierarchical fundamentally. I do understand your point, but both Christianity and Islam are fundamentally hierarchical. “I am the way;” “There is no God but God and Mohammed is his prophet.” I understand each of those statements to define a hierarchy. Perhaps I misinterpret?

Thanks very much for your input! I learned something this morning. :-)

Another minor point: You said that Galileo had “conclusive evidence” for heliocentricity. Actually, the conclusive experiments were not performed until 250 years later, in the 1850s (stellar parallax, Foucault pendulum). The relevance to ID is that during Galileo’s lifetime, almost everyone accepted heliocentricity, even though it had _not_ been conculsively demonstrated.
In biology, genetic mechanisms that could drive evolution were not discovered until 90 years after Darwin published his theory, and more mechanisms are still being discovered. Irf we compare Darwin to Galileo, we stll have over 100 years to go for the slam-dunk evidence :-)

Under_the_mercy, lying about one’s self isn’t a principle, it’s an act. To the best of my somewhat limited knowledge in the area, Jesus never condoned lying in any way in his messages, although it is arguable whether his answer to the Sanhedrin “If you say so” was a ’soft’ form of what Muslims would call taqqiyya or dissimulation. I’m not sure if there’s an Old Testament precedent for that.

I am also interested in the recent Spanish/American publication on a western fruit fly whose genes appear to be (relatively) quickly adapting to allow the species to adjust to warmer temperatures, possibly in response to global warming, since the changes appear to have happened over roughly the past 40 years. If the study is correct in its findings it’s a great discovery for evolutionary science, but couldn’t it also be twisted into an ID issue? Interesting times, for sure.

http://samgail.blogspot.com/2006/09/pope-prepares-to-embrace-theory-of.html

Gracie

I have recently read that the Catholic Church does not enforce creationist beliefs. This is exactly what I am talking about when I mention Sagan’s point about selective interpretation of the Bible. “Well, we can skip this verse…and that one—OH, NOT THAT ONE—but, yeah, this one can go…” It’s just capitally silly.

All modes of monotheism are–guess what–based on creationism. Not necessarily the ID kind of creationism, but, at least in my woefully simpleminded view, it’s pretty rootin’-tootin’ hard to accept on faith the word of the Holy Bible if one has serious issues with the first chapter. You know, the one where everything starts to exist.

I am not a Christian. I do believe that Jesus Christ, if he walked the Earth or even if he is only a character of folklore, taught a beautiful way of life and sound moral principles. Why can’t organized Christianity stop there? Could it be because Christ only taught morality and justice, and not fear? Could it be because we are a part of a culture dominated by Pharisees every bit as much as the Judaea of Christ’s time? Just food for thought.

I also believe that people have the right to believe as they choose, but not regardless of the consequences. The “debate” over the validity of the empirical evidence for life being derived from previous life—evolution, if you will (there is no such debate in the scientific community, only in the pulpit, in the press, and on TV-$$$) and the debate over empirical evidence for drastically aggravated global warming (also, none in the scientific community, just in the pulpit, in the press, and on TV-$$$) are strolling hand in hand and stopping to kiss every now and then. Bank accounts grow and the Earth languishes. People die of hunger while the US spends four hundred fifty billion dollars per annum on defense, more than the rest of the nations of the world combined. Again, just food for thought.

What would Jesus do with all that money? I won’t speak for him, but I have a few good ideas, and I’d bet you do too, and I bet yours don’t involve cruise missles or space-based nuke platforms. I’ll shutup now—dinner’s calling.