text:
Ten Myths About Dover: #7, "The Dover Case Showed ID Is 'Religious' and a Form of 'Creationism'"
Editor's note: The Kitzmiller v. Dover decision has been the subject of much media attention and many misinterpretations from pro-Darwin lobby groups. With the tenth anniversary of Kitzmiller approaching on December 20, Evolution News offers a series of ten articles debunking common myths about the case. Look here for Myths 8, 9, and 10.
On December 21, 2005, the day after the Dover ruling was issued, The New York Times reported:
A federal judge ruled on Tuesday that it was unconstitutional for a Pennsylvania school district to present intelligent design as an alternative to evolution in high school biology courses because it is a religious viewpoint that advances "a particular version of Christianity."To show this, the article quoted a portion of Judge Jones's ruling. But is ID actually religious? Is it a form of Christianity? We can immediately see that it is not since there are ID proponents who are not Christian or even not religious. How could these individuals unite around intelligent design if it were a "version of Christianity"?
Likewise, we can immediately see that ID arguments are scientific, and not religious, because they use the scientific method to make their claims. The scientific method is often described as a four-step process involving observation, hypothesis, experiment, and conclusion. ID uses this methodology in making its claims:
- Observation: The ways that intelligent agents act can be observed in the natural world and described. When intelligent agents act, it is observed that they produce high levels of "complex-specified information" (CSI). CSI is basically a scenario that is unlikely to happen (making it complex), and that conforms to an independent pattern (making it specified). From our understanding of the world, high levels of CSI are always the product of intelligent design.
- Hypothesis: If an object in the natural world was designed, then we should be able to examine that object and find the same high levels of CSI that we find in human-designed objects.
- Experiment: We can examine biological structures to test whether high CSI exists. For example, when we look at natural objects in biology, we find many machine-like structures that are specified, because they have a particular arrangement of parts that is necessary for them to function, and complex because they have an unlikely arrangement of many interacting parts. These high-CSI biological machines are "irreducibly complex," for any change in the nature or arrangement of their parts would destroy their function. Through experiments we can "reverse engineer" such structures and show that they cease to function if a part is removed, showing they are irreducibly complex.
- Conclusion: Because they exhibit high levels of CSI, a quality known to be produced only by intelligent design, and because there is no other known mechanism to explain the origin of "irreducibly complex" biological structures, we conclude that they were intelligently designed.
This argument for design involves no religious premises and is strictly based upon the scientific method. These very sorts arguments were described to Judge Jones in his courtroom by pro-ID biologists Michael Behe and Scott Minnich who served as expert witnesses in the case. For example, Scott Minnich stated:
Judge Jones was presented with these strictly scientific arguments as well as experimental evidence showing that ID has used this method. He ignored all of this and ruled that ID is religion. Was his reasoning correct?
"The positive argument is that we know when we find irreducible -- irreducibly complex systems or information storage and processing systems, from our own experience of cause and effect, that there is an intelligence associated with it. And so, it is logical to assume, when we find these systems in a cell, if we can -- if the flagellum is irreducibly complex, then, yes, there's an intelligence behind it. That's a uniformitaria[n] deduction from cause and effect that we know from our everyday ... experience." (Scott Minnich, Nov. 4th AM Testimony, p. 57.)
"One mutation, one part knocked out, it can't swim. Put that single gene back in, we restore motility. Same thing over here. We put, knock out one part, put a good copy of the gene back in, and they can swim. By definition the system is irreducibly complex. We've done that with all 35 components of the flagellum, and we get the same effect." (Scott Minnich Testimony, Nov. 3, PM Testimony, pp. 107-108.)
In the 1987 Supreme Court ruling Edwards v. Aguillard, the Court held that creationism is a "religious viewpoint" because it holds that a "supernatural creator" made humankind. Attempting to follow Edwards, Judge Jones claimed that "ID requires supernatural creation" and is therefore a form of creationism. But in fact his claim directly contradicts the testimony that was given to him by pro-ID expert witnesses during the trial. Here's what Scott Minnich testified:
Q. Do you have an opinion as to whether intelligent design requires the action of a supernatural creator?Similarly Michael Behe testified:
A. I do.
Q. What is that opinion?
A. It does not.
Q. Does intelligent design require the action of a supernatural creator acting outside the laws of nature?
A. No.
(Scott Minnich, Nov. 3 PM Testimony, pp. 45-46, 135.)
Q. Do you have an opinion as to whether intelligent design requires the action of a supernatural creator?Behe also testified during the trial:
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And what is that opinion?
A. No, it doesn't.
(Michael Behe, Oct. 17 AM Testimony, p. 86.)
Q: So is it accurate for people to claim or to represent that intelligent design holds that the designer was God?As Behe and Minnich's testimony shows, intelligent design does not invoke a supernatural creator. Instead, intelligent design invokes intelligent causation. This is precisely because ID wants to take a scientific approach to studying origins, and the methods of science cannot get us to the supernatural.
Behe: No, that is completely inaccurate.
Q: Well, people have asked you your opinion as to who you believe the designer is, is that correct?
Behe: That is right.
Q: Has science answered that question?
Behe: No, science has not done so.
Q: And I believe you have answered on occasion that you believe the designer is God, is that correct?
Behe: Yes, that's correct.
Q: Are you making a scientific claim with that answer?
Behe: No, I conclude that based on theological and philosophical and historical factors.
(Michael Behe, October 17 Testimony, AM Session.)
Sure, many ID proponents have their own personal beliefs about who the designer is. But these are their personal religious beliefs and not a conclusion of intelligent design.
ID as a science isn't an argument for God because we don't have observation-based experience with the supernatural. But we do have observation-based experience with intelligent causes. Thus ID can only infer an intelligent cause and cannot argue scientifically for "God." All of this was explained to Judge Jones in an amicus brief filed by Discovery Institute:
The Theory of Intelligent Design Does Not Postulate a Supernatural Creator and Is Distinct from CreationismThese arguments for intelligent design at no point rely on or require a supernatural creator. In contrast, creationism begins with sacred texts and makes claims about the supernatural.
Following Edwards v. Aguillard, plaintiffs argue that, like creationism, the theory of intelligent design is a religious viewpoint because it postulates a "supernatural creator." But the plaintiffs mischaracterize intelligent design, which does not postulate a supernatural creator, but instead infers only an unspecified designing intelligence. Plaintiffs confuse the propositional content of the theory of intelligent design with the personal religious beliefs of some of the scientists who advocate it.
Of course, many advocates of intelligent design do affirm the existence of a supernatural creator as a matter of personal religious belief, as do many evolutionary biologists, including plaintiffs' expert Kenneth Miller. But as intelligent design proponents have consistently maintained, the theory itself says nothing about the identity of the intelligent agent who may be responsible for the complexity of life -- nor can it do so. See Appendix A.
There is a good scientific reason for this. The analytical tools permitting the detection of a prior intelligent cause, and the biological evidence that justifies the inference to such a cause, are insufficient to determine its identity. For this reason, design theorists carefully distinguish the case for intelligent agency (as the best explanation of biological data) from philosophical or theological speculation regarding the identity of the designing intelligence. Just as an archaeologist can infer the action of an intelligent scribe from a hieroglyphic inscription without knowing the scribe's identity, so too can a biologist infer a designing intelligence from the information encoded in DNA without knowing its author. By limiting the scope of design theory, design theorists are not seeking to circumvent Edwards v. Aguillard --a canard repeated frequently in the media and by plaintiffs' experts. Instead, design theorists are merely insisting on scientific rigor by claiming no more than what accepted methods of design detection and the biological evidence can establish. As Michael Behe explains:I myself do believe in a benevolent God . . . But a scientific argument for design in biology does not reach that far. Thus while I argue for design, the question of the identity of the designer is left open. Possible candidates for the role of designer include: the God of Christianity; an angel--fallen or not; Plato's demi-urge; some mystical new age force; space aliens from Alpha Centauri; time travelers; or some utterly unknown intelligent being. Of course, some of these possibilities may seem more plausible than others based on information from fields other than science. Nonetheless, as regards the identity of the designer, modern ID theory happily echoes Isaac Newton's phrase hypothesis non fingo [I will not speculate].
In Traipsing Into Evolution, David DeWolf, John West, Jonathan Witt, and I further explained ID's empirical basis:
As a scientific theory, ID only claims that there is empirical evidence that key features of the universe and living things are the products of an intelligent cause. Whether the intelligent cause involved is inside or outside of nature cannot be decided by empirical evidence alone. That larger question involves philosophy, including metaphysics. ... Intelligent causes can be inferred through confirmable data. The types of information produced by intelligent causes can be observed and then measured. Scientists can use observations and experiments to base their conclusions of intelligent design upon empirical evidence. Intelligent design limits its claims to those which can be established through the data.As Michael Denton rightly stated in Evolution: A Theory in Crisis:
The inference to design is a purely a posteriori induction based on a ruthlessly consistent application of the logic of analogy. The conclusion may have religious implications, but it does not depend on religious presuppositions. (p. 341)For a further discussion of how ID doesn't identify the designer, please see:
- "ID Does Not Address Religious Claims About the Supernatural"
- "Is Intelligent Design Theory Really an Argument for "God"?"
- "Why Doesn't Intelligent Design Identify the Designer?"
- "Straw Men Aside, What Is the Theory of Intelligent Design, Really?"
The plaintiffs in the Dover case tried to tie ID to religious scholars. But contrary to John Haught, expert witness for the plaintiff, the arguments of intelligent design do not stem from William Paley or Thomas Aquinas. Intelligent design traces its roots back to ancient Greece and Rome. As the Roman philosopher Cicero noted:
Can any sane person believe that all this array of stars and this vast celestial adornment could have been created out of atoms rushing to and fro fortuitously and at random? or could any other being devoid of intelligence and reason have created them? Not merely did their creation postulate intelligence, but it is impossible to understand their nature without intelligence of a high order."Likewise, Jonathan Witt writes:
Opponents of the theory often insist that intelligent design emerged as a conspiracy to circumvent the 1987 Supreme Court decision, Edwards vs. Aguillard. There the Court struck down a Louisiana law promoting the teaching of creation science in public school science classes. The theory of intelligent design, critics insist, is merely a clever end-run around this ruling, biblical creationism in disguise.Indeed, the term "intelligent design" has a rich history that is completely separate from Paley and Aquinas. As I explained in "On the Origin of the Term 'Intelligent Design'":
The problem with this claim is that intelligent design predates Edwards vs. Aguillard by many years. Its roots stretch back to design arguments made by Socrates and Plato, and even the term "intelligent design" is more than 100 years old. Oxford scholar F.C.S. Schiller employed it in an 1897 essay, writing that "it will not be possible to rule out the supposition that the process of Evolution may be guided by an intelligent design."
Critics of intelligent design often allege that the term was invented by lawyers to get around the 1987 U.S. Supreme Court ruling Edwards v. Aguillard which struck down the teaching of creationism because it referred to a "supernatural creator." This is plainly wrong, and it can't hurt to explain, not for the first time, why it is wrong.The modern intelligent design movement arose after the discovery of the DNA code in the 1950s and 1960s. It has been invigorated by the discovery that life is fundamentally based upon a language-based digital code and is full of molecular machines inside all living cells. I further wrote:
The terms "intelligent design" and "intelligent designer" have lengthy histories, long predating 1987. Charles Darwin himself referred to "intelligent design" in a 1861 letter:One cannot look at this Universe with all living productions & man without believing that all has been intelligently designed; yet when I look to each individual organism, I can see no evidence of this.
In fact, the term was in use throughout the 19th century. A search of Google books from prior to 1900 confirms this, with multiple instances. Here's one from 1847 in Scientific American:And where must we look for this fountain but to the great store-house of nature -- the innumerable and diversified objects there were presented to our view give evidence of infinite skill and intelligent design in their adaptation to each other and to the nature of man.Oxford scholar F.C.S. Schiller wrote as early as 1897 that "it will not be possible to rule out the supposition that the process of Evolution may be guided by an intelligent design." The term was also used by John Tyndale in 1874 in an address given to the British Association for the Advancement of Science. Prominent 19th-century scientists held similar views, including even Alfred Russel Wallace, the co-developer with Charles Darwin of the theory of evolution by natural selection. By the late nineteenth century, Wallace came to believe that natural selection acting on random variations could not explain a number of things in biology, especially the development of the human brain. He concluded that "a Higher Intelligence" guided the process. In 1892, George John Romanes published his book Darwin After Darwin which stated:
- "I have heard an eminent Professor tell his class that the many instances of mechanical adaptation discovered and described by Darwin as occurring in orchids, seemed to him to furnish better proof of supernatural contrivance than of natural causes; and another eminent Professor has informed me that, although he had read the Origin of Species with care, he could see in it no evidence of natural selection which might not equally well have been adduced in favour of intelligent design. But here we meet with a radical misconception of the whole logical attitude of science. For, be it observed, this exception in limine to the evidence which we are about to consider does not question that natural selection may be able to do all that Darwin ascribes to it. The objection is urged against his interpretation of the facts merely on the ground that these facts might equally be ascribed to intelligent design."
- "Innumerable cases of adaptation of organisms to their environments are the observed facts for which an explanation is required. To supply this explanation, two, and only two, hypotheses are in the field. Of these two hypotheses one is intelligent design manifested directly in special creation; the other is natural causation operating through countless ages of the past."
- "For it is quite inconceivable that any known cause, other than intelligent design, could be competent to turn out instantaneously anyone or these intricate pieces or machinery, already adapted to the performance or its special function."
- "Now the question whether organic evolution has been caused by physical agencies or by intelligent design is in precisely the same predicament."
[T]he research and ideas that ultimately inspired today's ID proponents were conceived in the 1960s and 1970s. Highly influential in this respect was the discovery that life depended upon information, whose structure was not only independent of its physical or chemical form, but whose ordering was not amenable to explanation by physical or chemical laws. As the chemist Michael Polanyi wrote in an article, "Life's Irreducible Structure," published in the journal Science in 1968:Jonathan Witt tells the modern history of ID this way:Suppose that the actual structure of a DNA molecule were due to the fact that the bindings of its bases were much stronger than the bindings would be for any other distribution of bases, then such a DNA molecule would have no information content. Its code-like character would be effaced by an overwhelming redundancy. [...] Whatever may be the origin of a DNA configuration, it can function as a code only if its order is not due to the forces of potential energy. It must be as physically indeterminate as the sequence of words is on a printed page.The term "intelligent design" appears to have been coined in its contemporary scientific usage by the atheist cosmologist Dr. Fred Hoyle. In 1982 he argued that "if one proceeds directly and straightforwardly in this matter, without being deflected by a fear of incurring the wrath of scientific opinion, one arrives at the conclusion that biomaterials with their amazing measure of order must be the outcome of intelligent design." The term "intelligent design" was also used by a non-scientist, James E. Horigan, in his 1979 book Chance or Design? Horigan framed his argument as an empirical one, "without resort to biblical or other religious references," and without investigating questions about "ultimate purpose."
Horigan and Hoyle themselves did not become part of the later ID movement, although their ideas were certainly very influential upon those who did. Thus, in 1984 -- three years before the Edwards ruling -- three scientists who did help found the ID movement published a book, The Mystery of Life's Origin, argued for an "intelligent cause" behind the origin of the information in DNA:We have observational evidence in the present that intelligent investigators can (and do) build contrivances to channel energy down nonrandom chemical pathways to bring about some complex chemical synthesis, even gene building. May not the principle of uniformity then be used in a broader frame of consideration to suggest that DNA had an intelligent cause at the beginning?Those three scientists were Charles Thaxton, Walter Bradley, and Roger Olsen. Soon thereafter, Thaxton, a chemist and academic editor for the textbook Of Pandas and People, adopted the term "intelligent design" after hearing it mentioned by a NASA engineer.
So ID proponents started using the term "intelligent design" for reasons having nothing to do with legal concerns. Nor was the term initiated by lawyers.
In By Design, a history of the current design controversy, journalist Larry Witham traces the roots of the contemporary intelligent design movement in biology to the 1950s and '60s, and the movement itself to the 1970s. Biochemists were unraveling the secret of DNA and discovering that it was part of an elaborate information processing system that included nanotechnology of unparalleled sophistication. One of the first intellectuals to describe the significance of these discoveries was chemist and philosopher Michael Polanyi, who in 1967 argued that "machines are irreducible to physics and chemistry" and that "mechanistic structures of living beings appear to be likewise irreducible."Motive Mongering
Biochemist Michael Behe would later develop Polanyi's insights with his concept of irreducible complexity. And mathematician William Dembski would find Polanyi's work so influential that he would name Baylor University's Michael Polanyi Center after him.
Polanyi's work also influenced the seminal 1984 book The Mystery of Life's Origin by Charles Thaxton (Ph.D., Physical Chemistry, Iowa State University), Walter Bradley (Ph.D., Materials Science, University of Texas, Austin), and Roger Olsen (Ph.D., Geochemistry, Colorado School of Mines). Thaxton and his co-authors argued that matter and energy can accomplish only so much by themselves, and that some things can only "be accomplished through what Michael Polanyi has called 'a profoundly informative intervention.'"
Unable to show that ID's published writings refer to a "supernatural creator," the Dover plaintiffs turned to harping on the motives and religious beliefs of ID proponents. Expert witness for the plaintiffs Barbara Forrest, coauthor of Creationism's Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design, testified extensively about the motives and religious beliefs of ID proponents. While all of this is irrelevant to whether ID is science, Judge Jones claimed that Forrest's testimony provided "a wealth of statements by ID leaders that reveal ID's religious, philosophical, and cultural content." Judge Jones even stated, "It is notable that both Professors Behe and Minnich admitted their personal view is that the designer is God."
But just because some ID proponents happen to be religious doesn't mean that ID is religion. Of course many ID proponents are Christians. But that's irrelevant. After all, there are non-religious ID proponents and sympathizers like Thomas Nagel or Bradley Monton. Moreover, if religious (or anti-religious) beliefs matter, then what do we make of the fact that many evolutionists are atheists? Consider the following:
Many critics of intelligent design (ID) have argued that ID is not science due to the alleged religious motives, beliefs, and affiliations of its proponents. Critics may trot out quotes from ID proponents discussing their own personal religious beliefs, motives, and affiliations, or discussing the larger philosophical implications they draw from ID, to allege that ID is not science, but religion. These common attacks against ID are both logically fallacious and highly hypocritical.
First, in science, the motives or personal religious beliefs of scientists don't matter; only the evidence matters. For example, the great scientists Johannes Kepler and Isaac Newton were inspired to their scientific work by their religious convictions that God would create an orderly, rational universe with comprehensible physical laws that governed the motion of the planets. They turned out to be right--not because of their religious beliefs--but because the scientific evidence validated their hypotheses. (At least, Newton was thought to be right until Einstein came along.) Their personal religious beliefs, motives, or affiliations did nothing to change the fact that their scientific theories had inestimable scientific merit that helped form the foundation for modern science.
Second, ID does not have religious premises. If it did, then the famous (now former) atheist Anthony Flew would not have been able to state, as he announced in 2004, that he was convinced that "the findings of more than fifty years of DNA research have provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design." ... ID is a scientific argument and not a faith-based argument: "nothing critics can say -- whether appealing to politically motivated condemnations of ID issued by pro-Darwin scientific authorities, or harping upon the religious beliefs of ID proponents -- will change the fact that intelligent design is not a 'faith-based' argument."
Third, if critics want to harp upon the religious beliefs, motives, affiliations, and implications associated with ID, then they should realize that what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Leading proponents of neo-Darwinian evolution frequently discuss their views of the cultural and metaphysical implications of neo-Darwinian evolution. Moreover, many of them have expressed anti-religious beliefs and motives for advocating evolution, and have close ties to atheist and secular humanist organizations.
When critics object to ID based upon the alleged religious motives, beliefs, or affiliations of its proponents, they make a highly hypocritical argument, for many leading Darwinists have blatantly anti-religious motives, beliefs, and affiliations. This observation does NOT thereby disqualify evolution from being scientific. Rather, since neo-Darwinism is a bona fide scientific theory, it shows that the religious or anti-religious motives, beliefs, or affiliations of scientists do not disqualify their scientific views from holding scientific merit.
After reviewing just a few examples of the anti-religious affiliations, beliefs, and motives of many leading proponents of neo-Darwinism, it is difficult to seriously maintain that the religious (or anti-religious) motives, beliefs, or affiliations of scientists, or the larger philosophical implications of a scientific theory, can disqualify a theory from being scientific:
Richard Dawkins is Oxford University's Charles Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Science and is probably the most famous evolutionist in the world. Yet Dawkins argues that belief in God is a "delusion" and that "Darwin made it possible to become an intellectually fulfilled atheist." Dawkins has stated his goal is "to kill religion" and has asserted that "faith is one of the world's great evils, comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to eradicate."
America's great champion of evolution, the late Stephen Jay Gould, similarly announced that "[b]efore Darwin, we thought that a benevolent God had created us," but because of Darwin's ideas, "biology took away our status as paragons created in the image of God." Gould repeatedly discussed the "radical philosophical content of Darwin's message" and its denial of purpose in the universe:First, Darwin argues that evolution has no purpose. . . . Second, Darwin maintained that evolution has no direction. . . . Third, Darwin applied a consistent philosophy of materialism to his interpretation of nature. Matter is the ground of all existence; mind, spirit, and God as well, are just words that express the wondrous results of neuronal complexity.Darwinists sometimes like to pretend that Gould and Dawkins are outliers in their views. If only that were so.
A 2007 editorial by the editors of the world's top scientific journal, Nature, stated that "the idea that human minds are the product of evolution" is an "unassailable fact," and thus concluded, "the idea that man was created in the image of God can surely be put aside." A very popular college evolutionary biology textbook (which I used for one of my upper division evolutionary biology courses during my undergraduate studies) declares that "[b]y coupling undirected, purposeless variation to the blind, uncaring process of natural selection, Darwin made theological or spiritual explanations of the life processes superfluous."
Similarly, in the prestigious scientific journal, Proceedings for the National Academy of Sciences, leading evolutionary biologist Francisco Ayala celebrates that "Darwin's greatest accomplishment" was to show that the origin of life's complexity "can be explained as the result of a natural process -- natural selection -- without any need to resort to a Creator or other external agent." Just to make sure that his readers don't try to invoke some kind of "God-guided" evolution, Ayala writes that "[i]n evolution, there is no entity or person who is selecting adaptive combinations."
Cornell University evolutionary biologist William Provine has similarly stated that "belief in modern evolution makes atheists of people" and that "[o]ne can have a religious view that is compatible with evolution only if the religious view is indistinguishable from atheism." Provine states that there are severe philosophical implications of Darwinian biology:Naturalistic evolution has clear consequences that Charles Darwin understood perfectly. 1) No gods worth having exist; 2) no life after death exists; 3) no ultimate foundation for ethics exists; 4) no ultimate meaning in life exists; and 5) human free will is nonexistent.Also noteworthy is the fact that key public defenders of Darwin have strong ties to secular humanist groups. For example, Eugenie Scott is a physical anthropologist who now serves as Executive Director of the National Center for Science Education and was called by the scientific journal Nature "perhaps the nation's most high-profile Darwinist." But Scott is also a public signer of the Third Humanist Manifesto, an aggressive statement of the humanist agenda to create a world "without supernaturalism" based upon the view that "[h]umans are ... the result of unguided evolutionary change" and the universe is "self-existing." Another leading pro-evolution activist, Barbara Forrest, believes that "philosophical naturalism" is "the only reasonable metaphysical conclusion." Dr. Forrest also sits on the Board of Directors of the New Orleans Secular Humanist Association, an associate member of the American Humanist Association, which publishes the Humanist Manifesto III.
Even the widely touted theistic evolutionary biologist Kenneth Miller has claimed in five editions of his highly popular high school biology textbooks that the implication of evolution is that it works "without either plan or purpose" and is "random and undirected." Two other versions of Miller's high school biology textbooks contain a striking discussion of some of the potential philosophical implications of evolution:Darwin knew that accepting his theory required believing in philosophical materialism, the conviction that matter is the stuff of all existence and that all mental and spiritual phenomena are its byproducts. Darwinian evolution was not only purposeless but also heartless....Suddenly, humanity was reduced to just one more species in a world that cared nothing for us. The great human mind was no more than a mass of evolving neurons. Worst of all, there was no divine plan to guide us.Harvard paleontologist and author Richard Lewontin explains how materialism is a key assumption propping Darwinian thought:[W]e have a prior commitment ... to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to ... produce material explanations ... [T]hat materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.Finally, leading Darwinian philosopher of science Michael Ruse admits that "for many evolutionists, evolution has functioned ... akin to being a secular religion" whose main doctrine is "a commitment to a kind of naturalism."
It is not possible to seriously dispute the fact that neo-Darwinian evolution is surrounded by a cloud of leading proponents with anti-religious motives, beliefs, and affiliations, who have plainly declared that the theory can have anti-religious implications.
I do not list these examples to argue that one cannot believe in evolution and religion. In fact, I firmly believe that people can accept evolution and religion. Nor do I list the anti-religious affiliations of leading Darwinists in order to contend that the anti-religious beliefs, motives, affiliations, and implications associated with neo-Darwinism make it unscientific. I accept and grant that neo-Darwinian evolution is a scientific theory, and thus I list the anti-religious affiliations associated with the theory to demonstrate that scientific theories must be tested independently of the beliefs, motives, and affiliations of their proponents, or the larger philosophical implications that some draw from the theory. In science, motives don't matter, only the evidence does.
Pro-ID scientists should be able to stake out scientific positions on ID without being judged on the basis of their private religious beliefs, motives, or affiliations. Furthermore, pro-ID scientists should not have their views about ID disqualified from being scientific if people interpret ID's scientific claims to have larger philosophical and metaphysical implications. In fact, three U.S. Supreme Court justices essentially recognized this very point in the 1987 Edwards v. Aguillard ruling, stating that "A decision respecting the subject matter to be taught in public schools does not violate the Establishment Clause simply because the material to be taught 'happens to coincide or harmonize with the tenets of some or all religions.'"
To argue that a concept cannot hold scientific merit simply because of the private religious beliefs, motives, or affiliations of its proponents, or because of its larger philosophical implications, destroys the very concept of First Amendment religious freedom that our country was founded upon.
Unfortunately Judge Jones did not appreciate this logic. He counted the religious motives and beliefs of ID proponents against ID but never considered how that reasoning, if applied fairly, could disqualify Darwinian evolution from being considered science. As we wrote in Montana Law Review:
Judge Jones stated that ID is "an inherently religious view" and no different from creationism. In making this finding, he did not distinguish between the implications of a scientific theory and the science from which the implications are drawn. Moreover, Judge Jones made no effort to examine whether the scientific theory against which ID competes (Darwinian evolution) contains parallel religious (or anti-religious) implications. If Judge Jones's analytical method were sound, it would threaten the constitutionality of teaching about Darwinian evolution itself. Advocates of ID have never denied that the science of ID has implications for religious belief. Indeed, one reason for the intense interest in this area for many people is that the answers to the scientific questions have larger implications for philosophy, theology, and culture. In the same way that the famous British atheist, Anthony Flew, decided to abandon atheism because he was convinced by the argument for (actual) design in biology, Richard Dawkins has declared that "Darwin made it possible to become an intellectually fulfilled atheist." Both Antony Flew and Richard Dawkins have drawn implications for religion from their interpretation of the scientific data. But religious implications drawn from conflicting answers to the scientific question do not render the original question (whether design is actual or illusory) any less scientific. Neither Darwinism nor ID is rendered unscientific because some proponents of each theory passionately advocate philosophical, theological, or cultural positions that are believed to follow from their respective answers to the scientific question.Thus, Judge Jones adopted a fallacious argument claiming that if ID proponents are religious and have religious motives, and if some feel ID has larger religious implications, then ID must be religious. He never recognized that a scientific theory stands or falls apart from the personal religious beliefs of its proponents. He also never recognized that his own logic could be devastating to the teaching of Darwinian evolution, if applied in the same manner.
It is telling that Judge Jones treated statements about the religious implications of design as though they defined the theory, but never treated similar statements by leading advocates of Darwinism about its implications for religion as though they defined Darwinism. This is despite the fact that leading proponents of Darwinian evolution frequently raise the cultural and metaphysical implications of the theory in their writings. [See the documentation above.] ... Whereas the plaintiffs were required to scour addresses by ID advocates to religious groups and confidential documents to "out" the religious agenda of proponents of the theory of ID, the implications for religion from Darwinian evolution could be found in a widely-used high school textbook written by one of the plaintiffs' primary experts. Yet Judge Jones paid attention only to the religious implications of ID (concluding that it was therefore religion, not science) and ignored the implications from Darwinian evolution (which could have led to a parallel conclusion). A more blatant double standard would be hard to imagine.
The ID Textbook in the Dover Case Didn't Advocate Creationism
The Dover plaintiffs argued that the Of Pandas and People textbook shows that ID is religion. This led Judge Jones to state:
In fact, an explicit concession that the intelligent designer works outside the laws of nature and science and a direct reference to religion is Pandas' rhetorical statement, "What kind of intelligent agent was it [the designer]" and answer: "On its own science cannot answer this question. It must leave it to religion and philosophy."But Judge Jones misquoted Pandas, and he ignores the fact that Pandas never tries to answer this question by addressing whether the designer is natural or supernatural. Here is the full quote from the textbook:
If science is based upon experience, then science tells us the message encoded in DNA must have originated from an intelligent cause. But what kind of intelligent agent was it? On its own, science cannot answer this question; it must leave it to religion and philosophy. But that should not prevent science from acknowledging evidences for an intelligent cause origin wherever they may exist.In fact, Pandas even expressly states that science cannot study the supernatural, stating: "scientists ... failed to distinguish between intelligence, which can be recognized by uniform sensory experience, and the supernatural, which cannot." Taking a scientific approach, Pandas never tries to answer that question.
Indeed, Pandas makes it explicit that it is not promoting creationism:
The idea that life had an intelligent source is hardly unique to Christian fundamentalism. Advocates of design have included not only Christians and other religious theists, but pantheists, Greek and Enlightenment philosophers and now include many modern scientists who describe themselves as religiously agnostic. Moreover, the concept of design implies absolutely nothing about beliefs normally associated with Christian fundamentalism, such as a young earth, a global flood, or even the existence of the Christian God. All it implies is that life had an intelligent source. (p. 161)Unable to show that the published version of Pandas promoted creationism, the Dover plaintiffs resorted to digging up prepublication drafts of the textbook. They claimed that this showed ID is religion because some of the early drafts used "creationist" terminology. We'll address this more in a subsequent post, but for now, even the prepublication drafts of Pandas did not violate Edwards v. Aguillard because they did not postulate a supernatural creator.
It is true that some of the drafts used "creationist" language but this is not because the Pandas project was trying to promote creationism. Here is the real history of Pandas:
In the early 1980s, "creationism" -- i.e., Young Earth Creationism -- was really the only game in town as an alternative to evolution. It not only taught that the Earth is only a few thousand years old, but also liberally mixed theology with science, identifying the designer as God and trying to use science to support various interpretations of the Bible. Some theorists wondered if a more scientific approach could be taken -- one that didn't challenge mainstream scientific views on the age of Earth, but instead used a strictly scientific approach to detecting design in nature. This approach would not mix theology with science, and thus would not investigate questions about the identity of the designer or enter into debates about how to interpret the Bible.
Again, up to this point, "creationism" was the only game in town. Sometimes in the earliest days, in fact, ID advocates used that very term. But they clearly meant something different by it than did actual "creationists." Obviously, they could not have anticipated the way Darwin defenders would later seize on the strategy of using ambiguous or multivalent language ("creationism," "evolution") to sow confusion among the public and in the media.
A pre-Edwards draft of Pandas said things like:
Thus, from the observation that human intelligence can communicate by manipulating sequences of alphabetic letters, creationists infer that a similar kind of intelligence was responsible for the message sequences of nucleotide letters in DNA. Some master intellect is the creator of life. But such observable instances of information cannot tell us if the intellect behind them is natural or supernatural. This is not a question that science can answer.Similar passages can be found throughout the pre-publication drafts of Pandas. Though this passage uses the word "creator" and "creationist," you'd never hear a typical "creationist" say that the data "cannot tell us if the intellect behind them is natural or supernatural." Rather, as the U.S. Supreme Court correctly held in Edwards v. Aguillard, creationism always explicitly refers to the supernatural. Thus, even when using language referring to "creation" or derivative terms, the proto-ID project was fundamentally different from creationism because it didn't get into questions about the supernatural.
It's simple to understand why the early ID advocates switched to a different sort of terminology -- referring to intelligent design. Judge Jones claimed that the Pandas textbook adopted "intelligent design" terminology to hide some creationist agenda. To the contrary, the reason "intelligent design" terminology came into widespread use was because ID proponents knew their project was distinct from creationism in important ways. They sought a new term to make clear that fundamental distinction. In other words, "intelligent design" terminology was adopted not to hide some notion that ID is creationism but rather to make it clear that ID is different from creationism in important, substantive ways.
As Jonathan Witt explains it:
The essential difference [between ID and creationism] isn't whether the writer speaks of the "creation of DNA" versus the "intelligent design of DNA." The difference is more substantive than stylistic. Creationism or Creation Science is focused on defending a particular reading of the Genesis account, usually including the creation of the earth by the Biblical God a few thousand years ago. The theory of intelligent design isn't based on religious presuppositions but simply argues that an intelligent cause is the best explanation for certain features of the natural world. Unlike the creationism on trial in Edwards vs. Aguillard, the theory of intelligent design does not consider the identity of the designer nor does it defend the Genesis account (or that of any other sacred text for that matter). This is why a former atheist like British philosopher Antony Flew, who rejects the Judeo-Christian God, can nevertheless embrace the intelligent design argument for the origin of life.Charles Thaxton, the academic editor for Pandas, explained his reason for the vocabulary change: "I wasn't comfortable with the typical vocabulary that for the most part creationists were using because it didn't express what I was trying to do. They were wanting to bring God into the discussion, and I was wanting to stay within the empirical domain and do what you can do legitimately there."
Thaxton, who is a scientist and not a lawyer, adopted the terminology of "intelligent design" out of respect for the limits of scientific inquiry. As he explained:
Unfortunately for Westerners ... anytime you use the word creation it automatically conjures up any of a number of religious discussions. We knew from the beginning of our project, that turned out to be the making of Of Pandas and People, that we wanted to avoid this automatically concluding that what you're talking about was religion because in fact we were dealing with a biological discussion. So we were trying to operate entirely within the empirical domain. And my thought was, how to arrive at a set of terms that would allow us to traffic the literature and the discussion and build an argument without having to use terminology that would automatically bring one into the religious realm?He continues, saying "we did what we could do to stay within the empirical domain and make legitimate inferences." He then explains the terminology that was originally in the early pre-publication drafts of Pandas:
I realize that the charge was that we were trying to just use a substitute word for creation, but that isn't the case at all. In the early days of writing the Pandas book, for example, although we understood what we were doing, most other people who we were talking to didn't know our objectives really. And if you have a whole culture that knows about creation as a term ... So we used that word early on, not for deception so we could later switch on them but because we wanted the materials to be understood that we were focused on. It was always clearly within the empirical domain, even the things that we wrote early on.Thaxton recounts that after speaking widely on the subject of origins, "gradually it became clear that there was a real good way that there was a case we wanted -- completely within the empirical domain -- and we looked for a term that would do this and reading the literature and ah, 'intelligent design,' is the most appropriate term. And that's why we did it."Again, here's a nice explanation by Jonathan Witt:
The fact that intelligent design doesn't identify the source of design is not political calculation but precise thinking, refusing to go beyond what the scientific evidence tells us. Consider intelligent design's most famous design inference, the bacterial flagellum. Michael Behe shows that this microscopic rotary engine, like an automobile engine, needs all of its machinery in place to function at all. The best explanation for this irreducibly complex machine is intelligent design, but there's no inscription on the bushing of this little motor that identifies its maker. To discover the identity of its designer(s), one has to look beyond science.Thus, Thaxton changed the terminology in Pandas not to hide some relationship between ID and creationism but rather to make it clear that his project had fundamental substantive differences from creationism.
The term "intelligent design" was used to communicate this fact. In a recent telephone interview, Charles Thaxton told how, as he explored the idea of intelligent causation in the origin of life, he would sometimes use the term "create." The term has a perfectly neutral dictionary meaning, but he said he became more and more aware that the term was at once too broad and too specific. Search Google Scholar for academic references in biology to "creation," and one gets more than 50,000 hits, often referring merely to biological processes that bring certain structures into being. To create simply means to cause something to exist.
More problematic was that fact that many of Thaxton's listeners would project into any form of the word "create" the Biblical account of creation. Since the evidence he and other design theorists were presenting said nothing about whether the God of the Bible was the source of that design, increasingly they avoided the term.
In the same year The Mystery of Life's Origin appeared, Thaxton met Stephen Meyer, a young geophysicist and future program director of Discovery Institute's Center for Science & Culture, now the institutional home for scientists and scholars around the globe working on the theory of intelligent design. Thaxton, Meyer, and others were by that time (1984) already using terms like creative intelligence, intelligent cause, artificer, and intelligent artificer as they grappled together with questions of design detection in science.
As the academic editor for the Foundation of Thought and Ethics, Thaxton was then serving as the editor for a supplemental science textbook co-authored by Kenyon, named Of Pandas and People: The Central Question of Biological Origins. As it neared completion, Thaxton continued to cast around for a term that was less ponderous and, at the same time, more general, a term to describe a science open to evidence for intelligent causation and free of religious assumptions. He found it in a phrase he picked up from a NASA scientist. "That's just what I need," Thaxton recalls thinking. "It's a good engineering term.... After I first saw it, it seemed to jibe. When I would go to meetings, I noticed it was a phrase that would come up from time to time. And I went back through my old copies of Science magazine and found the term used occasionally." It was soon incorporated into the language of the book.
From the uses Thaxton ran across at conferences and in his back issues of Science, Thaxton saw that intelligent design was already a functioning term in science, and it was just a matter of extending the term to the process of design detection in natural structures.
Science, not Religion
The point of all of this is that ID arguments are based upon science, not religion. Judge Jones ignored ID's arguments and the way that ID proponents have articulated their position. He twisted ID in order to claim that it is a religious viewpoint, the equivalent of creationism.
Intelligent design is about scientifically detecting information in nature that indicates an intelligent cause. It is not, as the New York Times and Judge Jones hold, a re-branding of a type of Christianity. Instead, ID attracts scholars from a variety of religious and non-religious perspectives who see evidence for design in nature. The Dover ruling failed to show that ID is religion because ID isn't religion.
Image: � BillionPhotos.com / Dollar Photo Club.


text:
More Videos...
Scion Racing GReddy 2JZ FR-S Prototype Build
At the 2013 SEMA Show, GReddy Racing officially took the wraps off their new 2JZ powered Scion FR-S prototype. Go behind the build to see how the team prepped it to become the ultimate drift car, and be sure to stay tuned through the end for a sneak peak at what's coming up.
Driven 2 Drift 2012: Road Atlanta - Season 4 Episode 2
In the latest episode of Driven to Drift, we go behind the scenes with Ken Gushi, Fredric Aasbo and Tony Angelo to get a closer look on the specifics of how Formula Drift competitions are judged. Tony Angelo, a former FD judge lends particular insight into sometimes objective and sometimes subjective factors they're scored on, and how it's these factors that set drifting apart from nearly all other forms of motorsports. At Road Atlanta, the judges were on our side. Fredric advanced all the way through, besting some of the top drivers including Rhys Millen and Daigo Saito, and landing in the #2 spot on the podium. Congrats to the Need For Speed team on all their hard work.
Scion Racing GReddy 2JZ FR-S Drift Debut
After a long Formula Drift off season, the new GReddy Racing Scion FR-S is finally ready to launch. Watch the video to see Ken Gushi shakedown the 2JZ powered FR-S as the team gets ready to kick off the new season on the Streets of Long Beach.
Formula DRIFT Atlanta 2015 - Round 2: Gushi Breaks the Curse [S7, Ep 3]
Ken Gushi and the GReddy Racing team returns to Formula Drift Atlanta with fire, literally. Gushi and his Scion FR-S battles against Charles Ng, Chris Forsberg and Odi Bakchis in the Finals and takes 2nd place. Watch D2D Episode 2 - Long Beach: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oe9j-... ----------- Subscribe to Scion Racing for more exclusive videos from your favorite drivers! - http://awe.sm/aKKYl Facebook: http://awe.sm/gJywW Instagram: http://awe.sm/aIyyf Twitter: http://awe.sm/jJeam http://www.scion.com/scionracing/

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Category:Hollister Motorcycle Rally
From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
- The Hollister Motorcycle Rally — an annual motorcycle rally that takes place in Hollister, northern California.
Media in category "Hollister Motorcycle Rally"
The following 8 files are in this category, out of 8 total.
- July 2008 Hollister Rally 4.jpg 1,022 KB


text:
Is Primroses incorrect or missing key business information? Update your Hotfrog listing today.
Contact details
Are these details correct?
Hotfrog NewZealand provides information regarding Primroses in CHRISTCHURCH Canterbury. Primroses is located at 150 Cashmere Road, CHRISTCHURCH Canterbury 8025 and provides Giftware services. Contact them on 064 3 338 2098.
Payment options
Visa, MasterCard, EFTPOS,PersonalCheque,BusinessCheque,
Is Primroses in 150 Cashmere Road, CHRISTCHURCH Canterbury 8025 your business? Claim your listing and attract more leads by adding more content, photos and other business details.
We have more Giftware services in CHRISTCHURCH Canterbury available on Hotfrog NewZealand. You can update your search for CHRISTCHURCH Giftware by location, keyword or service options.
6 Lancaster Street Waltham , Christchurch Canterbury 8011
H P Hanna Co Ltd 222 Memorial Avenue , Christchurch Canterbury 8053
2nd Floor 137 Victoria Street , Christchurch Canterbury 8013
45 Johnson Road West Melton , Christchurch Canterbury 7675
Small Business Hub
Sharing tips, ideas and advice to help grow your small business.
Your profile without ads
Have you considered upgrading to Hotfrog AdVantage? No competitor advertising means exclusive focus on your business. You take centre stage.
Create your free Hotfrog business profile
Follow Hotfrog on:
Share on:
Hotfrog Small Business Hub


text:
Parking in E6 2JA
Driveway on William Morley Close, E6
Driveway on Arragon Road, E6
Driveway on Romford Road, E7
Driveway on Claremont Road, E7
Driveway on Ronnie Lane, E12
Parking Space on Elderberry Way, E6
Driveway on Raymond Road, E13
Driveway on Boleyn Road, E6
Car Park on Highbridge Road, IG11
Information about parking in E6 2JA
Looking for parking in E6 2JA? You've come to the right place! Funnily enough, parking is what we do best - and we've got a sumptuous selection of 250 locations in E6 2JA for you to choose from.
Our parking in E6 2JA is up to 70% cheaper than what you'd usually pay, plus you can book your guaranteed space in advance right here - forget about feeding the parking meter.
No more fumbling for coins and no more circling the block looking for a space. As for parking tickets? You can wave goodbye to them too - if you overstay with us, you just pay for the extra time.
We're taking the pain out of parking for 1 million drivers across the UK. But don't just take our word for it - check out our latest customer reviews for E6 2JA parking below:
"Easy to find, tonnes of room, great communication. Would use again and recommend" — Parking Space on Elderberry Way, E6
"" — Driveway on Romford Road, E7
None of our delicious JustPark spaces tickle your fancy? Don't worry - we've got your back. There are plenty of other parking options available in E6 2JA - here's the best of the rest:
Off-Street Parking
Here's a selection of nearby off-street parking options:
|Madge Gill Way
|London Borough of Newham
|£2.00 / hour
|8am - 6pm,
Mon - Sat
|St Johns Road West
|London Borough of Newham
|£2.00 / hour
|8am - 6pm,
Mon - Sat
|St Johns Road East
|London Borough of Newham
|£2.00 / hour
|8am - 6pm,
Mon - Sat
|Queens Market
|London Borough of Newham
|£2.00 / hour
|6am - 10pm,
Mon - Sat
|Shaftesbury Road
|London Borough of Newham
|£2.00 / hour
|8am - 9pm,
Mon - Sat
On-Street Parking
Here's a selection of nearby on-street parking options:
|Max Stay
|Abbey Ward Area, Barking (On Street)
|£0.90 / 30 minutes
|3 hours
|Audrey Road, Ilford Lane
|£0.00 / 30 minutes
|2 hours
|Ilford Station Car Park, Ilford
|£2.10 / hour
|7 days
|Peachey House, IIford, Walthamstow
|£1.50 / 2 hours
|1 day
|Reads Close, Ilford
|£0.00 / 20 minutes
|2 hours
Rent out a space
Got a spare driveway or garage in E6 2JA? You can list your parking space for free with JustPark. It only takes a few minutes to get up and running, and you could be making money in no time. Find out more here.
Check out the JustPark app
You can now book any one of our 200,000+ JustPark spaces on the move with our mobile app - available for both iPhone and Android. View parking options, pay for a space and get directions - all with just a few taps of your phone.
Nearby Transport
- City Airport 2.57 miles away
- East Ham Station 0.02 miles away
- Upton Park Station 0.75 miles away
- Plaistow Station 1.55 miles away
- Woodgrange Park Station 0.7 miles away
- Manor Park Station 0.9 miles away
- Barking Station 1.26 miles away
Nearby Stadiums
- The Boleyn Ground 0.72 miles away
- Upton Park 0.77 miles away
- ExCeL 2.39 miles away
- Aquatics Centre 2.67 miles away
- Water Polo Arena 2.67 miles away
Nearby Attractions
- The Bobby Moore Statue 0.77 miles away
- The Broadway 1.14 miles away
- Brick Lane Music Hall 2.55 miles away
- Favour Tabernacle 3.02 miles away
- Bow Arts Trust 3.02 miles away
Nearby Hospitals
- Joyce Cambell Clinic 0.67 miles away
- Newham Medical Centre 0.82 miles away
- Claremont Clinic 0.95 miles away
- The Nightingale Clinic 0.97 miles away
- Vicarage Field Health Centre 1.3 miles away


text:
Hotfrog Ads
Is Stratco Australia incorrect or missing key business information? Update your Hotfrog listing today.
Contact details
Are these details correct?
Hotfrog Australia provides information regarding Stratco Australia in Gepps Cross SA. Stratco Australia is located at 59-67 Port Wakefield Rd, Gepps Cross SA 5084 and provides Home Improvement services. Contact them on 08 8349 5559 or by visiting them on their website http://www.stratco.com.au.
Is Stratco Australia in 59-67 Port Wakefield Rd, Gepps Cross SA 5084 your business? Claim your listing and attract more leads by adding more content, photos and other business details.
We have more Home Improvement services in Gepps Cross SA available on Hotfrog Australia. You can update your search for Gepps Cross Home Improvement by location, keyword or service options.
54 Mira St GEPPS CROSS South Australia 5094
587 Grand Junction Road GEPPS CROSS South Australia 5094
GEPPS CROSS South Australia 5094
17 White Rd GEPPS CROSS South Australia 5094
Small Business Hub
Sharing tips, ideas and advice to help grow your small business.
Your profile without ads
Have you considered upgrading to Hotfrog AdVantage? No competitor advertising means exclusive focus on your business. You take centre stage.
Create your free Hotfrog business profile
Follow Hotfrog on:
Share on:
Hotfrog Small Business Hub


text:
Me, that's crowding daylight
The song here is a beautiful hidden track from the end of the Glassjaw album 'Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Silence', it's possibly my favourite song by them. Which is odd as it's not much like any of their other stuff, which I love too aha.
I lost my long skirt so I have to use a dress under tops, and it looks so bad in comparison, grr.
Oh, and as you can tell by the wall, I'M HOME
oh you are in maxi!! great!! and you did your magic with gray top darlin'!! Hyped!!
I just love the straight elegant shape of this,and I am so in love with your vivid hair color <3
hyped! your forehead is amazing it looks heart shaped! and how tall are you? x
how do you keep on wearing amazing outfits, ALL THE TIME?!
I love it, and your hair it's beautiful! <3
this might sound a little weird but.....
i love ur widows peek its so perfect! haha,
same for the outfit love the necklace :)
Amazing Olivia! I love the tank with the skirt :)
Yay, bricks again! I really liked the outside photos, but I have to admit I missed the bricks :)
this is too amazing. you're so stylist. i love you.;p Those outfit make you so tall. you not only just cought my eyes but my heart to you!!
STFU! amazing! you look sooo tal with that maxi dress
Mom's outfit never end ryt, lol


text:
Greetings Guest!!Dismiss Notice
In order to combat SPAM on the forums, all users are required to have a minimum of 2 posts before they can submit links in any post or thread.
EM event cancelled for Sunday Dec. 22nd
Discussion in 'UO Sonoma Events' started by Queen Mum, Dec 22, 2013.


text: PhoneSaber Strikes Back, Returns as LightSaber UnleashedJesus Diaz9/11/08 8:20amFiled to: PhonesaberStar WarsiPhoneipod touchLighsaber unleashediPhone Appiphone application38EditPromoteShare to KinjaToggle Conversation toolsGo to permalink After being voluntarily retired from the iTunes App Store, following a call by THQ Wireless, the most useless yet completely obligatory iPhone app-PhoneSaber-is returning to the store as LightSaber Unleashed. The lightsaber simulator will tie in with the new LucasArts's game, including completely new graphics, "dueling music," and characters from the game: THQ Wireless has the license for all things Star Wars and mobile, which is why the application was pulled in the first place. But don't worry about this becoming a pay application: It will still be free, making it even better than the equally useless Spore for iPhone. As Duncan Stevenson from The Mac Box told me: Advertisement Basically you can expect a much more exciting gameplay. The dueling music is something that were really happy we managed to include - it was a much requested feature and makes it really exciting to play! Hold on... is Duncan actually referring to "exciting to pretend to fight with lightsabers" when he says "exciting to play"? [The Mac Box]Reply38 repliesLeave a reply


text:
Innocent girls making out
Sexy japanese teen with huge boobs licked
A good good lesson
Mom with sweet saggy boobs at stockings & young man
To see my new college counselor
James, you really don't mean it!
Big titted MILF gets her ass fucked
Reviving Brandy's pussy
Tales of a Submissive Housewife
Doctor must take a look at your vagina
My teacher's boobs bounce as she pounds her cunt on my cock
Naive 19Teen DTits Girl Firstime Front of Camera
Blowing his load
In her classroom
Chikita spreading and masturbating. Twistys
Hot meeting with one of the hottest chubby milf
I'm sorry...
Joslyn James gets likes it big
I must look at your vagina
Sweet women with giant boobs & lucky-man!
His treat for her
Banging the boss
TrafficHolder.com - Buy and Sell Adult Traffic|Trafficshop.com - Let your business grow|Contact Us|Webmaster
All content, including images, text, graphics, video and audio content contained in the website is protected under the laws of copyright, owned or under license to company or its designees,and represents proprietary and valuable intellectual property.
Contact Webmaster 18 U.S.C. 2257 Record-Keeping Requirements Compliance Statement
Powered by Stream Rotator


text:
Begin New Search
Refine Last Search
Cemetery Lookup
Add Burial Records
Help with Find A Grave
Top Contributors
Success Stories
Community Forums
Find A Grave Store
Log In
ad feedback
ad feedback
Faith Rutz Lake Cemetery
Also known as: Faith Lutheran Church Cemetery
Carver County
Minnesota USA
Faith Rutz Lake Cemetery:
First Name
Last Name
Cemetery notes and/or description:
History of Faith Lutheran Church Cemetery
Historic Rutz Lake Cemetery was established in 1862.
Zion Methodist Church of Mayer was the earliest church to use Rutz Lake Cemetery for burials. The first of which took place on August 6, 1863 when Theresa Volkenant, daughter of Jacob Volkenant, was buried. She was 2 years, 3 months, and 22 days old.
Sometime later the church began burying it's members in a newly established cemetery North of Mayer. Furthermore some families had their family members moved to other burial sites. This explains why such an old cemetery has so few graves.
As time passed fewer and fewer burials took place and the cemetery was eventually abandoned altogether and fell out of care. In 1989, ownership was passed onto Waconia Township. Faith Lutheran Church of Waconia acquired the cemetery in 1994 Through purchases and gifts, Faith has expanded the site to five acres. There are now 798 burial sites surrounding the historic cemetery which includes 35 monuments representing pioneering families who are well known to the local community.
View all interments
74% photographed.
Add a name to this cemetery
Submit spreadsheet
Added by:
MN Headstone Hunter
Added by:
Colin Colehour
Photos may be scaled.
Click on image for full size.
Privacy Statement
Terms of Service
ad feedback


text:
A Few Months to Live: Different Paths to Life's End
€ 67,49
Bisher € 71,24
Besorgung - Lieferbarkeit unbestimmt
Mai 2001
BeschreibungA Few Months to Live describes what dying is like from the perspectives of nine terminally ill individuals and their caregivers. Documenting a unique study of end-of-life experiences that included detailed conversations in home care settings, the book focuses on how participants lived their daily lives, understood their illnesses, coped with symptoms -- especially pain -- and searched for meaning or spiritual growth in their final months of life. The accounts are presented largely in the participants' own words, illuminating both the medical and non-medical challenges that arose from the time each learned the "bad news" through their final days of life and memorial services.Describing the nationwide crisis that surrounds end-of-life care, the authors contend that informal caregiving by relatives and close friends is an enormous and too-often invisible resource that deserves close and public attention. By incorporating not only the ill person's but also the family's perspective, they portray the nine participants in the contexts of their daily lives and relationships rather than simply as patients. Addressing such issues as palliative care, quality of life, financial hardship, grief and loss, and communications with medical personnel, the authors identify how families, professionals, and communities can respond to the challenges of terminal illness and the need to confront life's end.
Untertitel: New. Sprache: Englisch.
Verlag: GEORGETOWN UNIV PR
Erscheinungsdatum: Mai 2001
Seitenanzahl: 358 Seiten
Format: gebunden
Alle Preise inkl. MwSt., ggf. zzgl. Versandkosten


text:
You might be surprised by the level of boozing accomplished in the presidential office as early as 1797.
Read Whole Story
They stumble around, they smell bad and they probably shouldn't be operating a vehicle. No, we're not talking about zombies. We mean drunk people.
Heavy drinking is costing the U.S. economy more than $200 billion a year, mostly in lost workplace productivity, a U.S. health agency said on Monday.
The tea industry has an ugly history of deforesting, damaging biodiversity, and using pesticides. To promote more enlightened sipping, we asked five experts to name their preferred brew.
Get top stories and blog posts emailed to me each day. Newsletters may offer personalized content or advertisements. Learn more.


text:
Flash Furniture Big & Tall Swivel Task Chair [GO-2073F-GG]Executive/High Back Chairs
29" x 29" x 38.75"-42.75" - 400 lb Weight Capacity - Fabric - Black - View Complete Details
Product Number: FHFGO2073FGG
In Stock - Hurry, only 339 left.
Estimated Delivery - 7 business day(s) - Tue 3/7 8 business days - Wed 3/8
Free Returns - Return this item free of charge. View Details.
Free Shipping - This item qualifies for Free Shipping
- Add to Compare
- Request Quote
- Read Questions & Answers
You May Also Like
Product Details
Flash Furniture Big & Tall Swivel Task Chair [GO-2073F-GG] - Big & Tall office chairs are designed to accommodate larger and taller body types. This chair has been tested to hold a capacity of up to 400 lbs., offering a broader seat and back width. A mid-back office chair offers support to the mid-to-upper back region. This office chair features plenty of thick, plush padding to provide greater support. The waterfall front seat edge removes pressure from the lower legs and improves circulation. Chair easily swivels 360 degrees to get the maximum use of your workspace without strain. The pneumatic adjustment lever will allow you to easily adjust the seat to your desired height. The adjustable armrests take the pressure off the shoulders and the neck, which minimizes the risk of pain. The chrome base adds a stylish look to compliment a contemporary office space.
- Contemporary Big & Tall Office Chair
- 400 lb. Weight Capacity
- Mid-Back Design
Still have a question? Click to ask a Question
ReviewsThere are no Customer Reviews yet.
Help out our customers.
Be the first to write a review.
Question & Answer
No questions have been posted for this product.
Have a question about this product? Please click the button below to get started. Once you have posted your question we will submit it to our community of customers and with our own staff who have recent experience with the same product for their open and honest feedback.Ask a Question


text:
There are many significant dates in the life of a family after pregnancy loss. The day you found out your baby died, the day you miscarried or gave birth to your stillborn, and your due date. For families whose baby's lived for a short time, there is also a birthday to remember.

Birthdays can be a day of joy and of sadness, as families remember the precious time they got to spend with their babies—sometimes only a matter of hours, or even minutes. Each year brings a bittersweet reminder of a young life lost.

As with every aspect of grieving, the decision to remember your baby's birthday is personal. Some people would rather treat it as any other day, while others make an annual tradition of celebrating and remembering. Your own choices about how to handle the day may change over time.

If you do decide to do something special, for your baby's birthday, the possibilities are wide, from cheerful and creative, to quiet and solitary.

Private Celebration Ideas:

Visit your child's grave.

Write a journal entry or letter.

Do a balloon or butterfly release.

Bake a birthday cake, or purchase a special cupcake.

Light a candle.

Create and listen to a special playlist that reminds you of your child.

Go through photos and mementoes of your baby.

Browse for an age-appropriate birthday gift, and consider donating it to charity.

Go shelling at a beach, choose one shell to remember this year's birthday, and write your child's name in the sand.

Turn off your phone and take a break from outside stress so you have time for contemplation and remembering.

Donate blood.

Family Celebration Ideas:

Have a small birthday party, complete with cake and singing.

Visit your child's grave as a family, bring a cake or gift.

Exchange gifts with your family members in your baby's honor.

Plan a balloon release with your entire family, even those who live far away to be done at a specific time of the day.

Take a day trip to somewhere kid friendly, like a zoo or theme park to make the day positive for you and your other children.

Ask friends and family to do a random act of kindness with the money they would have spent on a birthday gift.

Public Ways to Remember:

Place an announcement in your local paper.

Post a remembrance message on Facebook or other social media outlets.

Attach a balloon bouquet to your mailbox or elsewhere in your yard.

Have a large party for everyone important to you.

Go back to the hospital where your child was born for a visit, and bring the staff a treat to thank them for their caring and support.

Make it a birthday party at the cemetery by bringing balloons for all the other babies if your child is buried in a children's area or babyland.


text:
Forever Living Products
beauty treatment, skin care, hair and beauty
Our skin is the front line defense in our daily fight against pollution and other environmental irritants, so we need to protect and reinforce it with extra care. Aloe vera, whose most traditional use as a natural remedy is to soothe the skin, is an ideal defense. We have designed unique and varied products that work naturally by moisturizing and providing essential nutrients and vitamins to the skin. Our skin care products can help protect the skin against the environment's harsh effects, and are reinforced with the International Aloe Science Council Seal of Approval.
Print this page
Create your free Hotfrog business profile
Follow Hotfrog on:
Share on:
Hotfrog Small Business Hub


text:
On Second Thought is a one-hour, daily news talk show that airs at 9 a.m. ET weekdays.
Journey to Palm Springs for vintage and antique finds such as a Roy Lichtenstein screenprint, a NASA archive and a Tiffany Studios mosaic. Monday, February 27 at 8 PM
The GHSA state championships for football are right around the corner. There are 16 teams left on the road to the Georgia Dome and by late Saturday night all eight champions for 2016 will be... MORE
GPB Passport is the new member benefit that provides you with extended access to an on-demand library of quality local and national public television programming, including tens of thousands of hours of your favorite programs.
Thu., November 8, 2012 11:04am
New Programs To Hire Veterans
Governor Deal Thursdayannounced several new programs to help Georgia's returning veterans find jobs. An estimated 80 thousand new vets will enter the state's workforce by 2016.
Full Story


text:
Lessons from the Field
The Lessons from the Field series is a repository of practical ideas for NSSE institutions to improve evidence-based assessment and improvement initiatives.
Lessons from the Field-Volume 3,
Using Data to Catalyze Change on Campus
Volume 3 of Lessons from the Field, released in August 2015, builds on insights from the earlier volumes illustrating the benefits of using NSSE results. Specifically, the 25 highlighted institutional examples predominately feature the use of NSSE's updated measures and redesigned reports introduced with the survey's 14th administration in 2013.
Early lessons about using updated NSSE results indicate that redesigned reports, including the Snapshot, are easy to interpret and share, the new Engagement Indicators provide concise summary measures, and results offer institutions new insights into effective practice and opportunities for improvement. A brief summary highlighting how four institutions used updated NSSE results is described in Lessons from the Field: Transitioning to the Updated NSSE.
Moving from Data to Action: Lessons from the Field - Volume 2 (2011)highlights examples of how institutions are using NSSE data to enhance undergraduate teaching and learning. The stories illustrate the ways assessment can be a worthwhile undertaking when meaningful data are generated and discussed with a wide campus audience and when NSSE results inform efforts to improve educational effectiveness.
Volume 1, Using NSSE to Assess and Improve Undergraduate Education: Lessons from the Field (2009) captured the growing body of collective wisdom and emerging lessons about the use of student engagement results to improve educational quality. These accounts serve as instructive and inspirational examples for institutions seeking to enhance undergraduate teaching and learning.
Understanding how colleges and universities use results and achieve improvements in undergraduate education is important to advancing systemic improvement in higher education. The examples in these volumes encourage institutions to move from collecting data to taking action.
What is your Institution's NSSE Story
We are always looking for fresh institutional examples of NSSE, FSSE and BCSSE use. Please share your story about data use!


text:
Newegg.com - A great place to buy computers, computer parts, electronics, software, accessories, and DVDs online. With great prices, fast shipping, and top-rated customer service - once you know, you Newegg.
If you are reading this message, Please click this link to reload this page.(Do not use your browser's "Refresh" button). Please email us if you're running the latest version of your browser and you still see this message.
Newegg.com - Computer Parts, Laptops, Electronics, HDTVs, Digital Cameras and More!
Showing Results: Most Recent
This review is from: MASSCOOL UHB-2233 Aluminum 2.5" Black SATA I/II USB 3.0 External Enclosure
Pros: Small, ostensibly bus-powered
Cons: Hard drive does not remain mounted, rendering this enclosure uselessREAD FULL REVIEW
This review is from: Mediasonic ProBox H21-SU3 USB 3.0 2.5" SATA HDD / SSD Hard Drive Enclosure - Support SATA III 6.0Gbps HDD & UASP
Pros: Quick to assemble.
Cons: Stops copying after just a few minutes. Impossible to copy large files or large groups of files.READ FULL REVIEW


text:
Top Linksmain detailsbiographyby votesphoto galleryquotes
Filmographiesby yearby typeby ratingsby votesby TV seriesby genreby keyword
Did You Know?photo galleryquotes
Mr. Robinson (Character)
from The Graduate (1967)
|Photos (See all 3 | slideshow)
FilmographyEdit Credits
- The Graduate (1967) Played by Murray Hamilton
Additional Details
Fun Stuff
Benjamin: Listen to me. What happened between Mrs. Robinson and me was nothing. It didn't mean anything. We might just as well have been shaking hands.
Mr. Robinson: Shaking hands? Well, that's not saying much for my wife, is it?
See more »
You may correct errors and omissions on this page directly. Clicking the 'Update' button will take you through a step-by-step process.


text:
Regional North America United States Connecticut Localities H Hartford Society and Culture History Circus Fire 1944
In July 1944, the Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey Circus visited Hartford, Connecticut-- a favorite stop. With waterproofing and fireproofing material scarce on account of the Second World War, the canvas big top tent was coated, as was the industry practice, with a mixture of paraffin and white gasoline. During the July 6 matinee performance, a fire started in a rope seam and quickly consumed the whole tent. Despite the efforts of the bandleader and others, a panic ensued with people crushed against animal chutes or knocked off high bleachers. Of over 8000 in attendance, 167 were burned or trampled to death and 487 were injured. A disproportionate number of these were children and parents. One victim, whose body was relatively unharmed, was not identified, and she was buried as Little Miss 1565. In 1991, Hartford Chief Fire Inspector Lt. Rick Davey's theory, that Little Miss 1565 was an Eleanor Cook, was accepted, corroborated by her living brother Donald Cook. The decision remains controversial. Criminal manslaughter charges were pressed against circus officials, who pleaded no contest; several were imprisoned. The circus also paid restitution of $3.9 million to the survivors and families of the victims.
Related categories 1
Sites 8
1944 Hartford Circus Fire Memorial
Contemporary color photos and information on the memorial established on the site of the 1944 circus fire.
The Day the Clowns Cried
Three-part documentary with photos put together by Dennis House on The Hartfordite.
Find A Grave: Hartford Circus Fire Memorial
Memorial to five unidentified victims killed in the July 6, 1944 Hartford Circus Fire.
Hartford Circus Fire
Information from WikiPedia.
Hartford Circus Fire: A 67-Year-Old Mystery
2011 article by David Lohr in The Huffington Post.
Hartford Circus Fire: Day of Panic, Heroes
July 2, 2014 article by Tom Condon in The Hartford Courant.
Hartford History: The Circus Fire
Photograph and general account of the 1944 big top tent fire, with bibliography.
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: 'The Circus Fire: A True Story' by Stewart O'Nan
Review of a book devoted to the 1944 circus tent fire in Hartford.
Last update:November 7, 2015 at 17:06:36 UTC
All Languages


text:
The U.S. military's sixth generation of combat aircraft may go well beyond even the stealth and other features of the services' fifth generation F-35 Lightnings and F-22 Raptors. Among the capabilities proposed by contractors Boeing and Lockheed Martin are planes with even more advanced stealth capabilities and self-healing skins using a self-deploying and hardening putty. The question now is whether the money will be available.
Full Story:Gizmodo Australia


text:
At Baptist, we respect your thoughts and treatment preferences. Once your doctor has recommended a course of treatment, you can ensure your wishes will be carried out and that your family will not be faced with making difficult decisions. This can be done by advance directive.
Advance Directives are documents written in advance of the time when you are unable to make healthcare decisions for yourself. You have a right to make important legal decisions related to your care, and Baptist can help.
Baptist Health System employees and physicians will abide by your advance directives in accordance with the law. The lack of advance directives will not hamper your access to care.
Types of Advance Directives
Here are four types of advance directives recognized under Texas law:
Additional Information on Advance Directives
Advance Directives can be changed or cancelled at any time. If you wish to create or change an advance directive, ask our staff during your stay.They can provide forms and help explain what you need to do.
Patients and families may face ethical questions that create conflict during the course of care.The Baptist Health System has a formal process in place to address ethical issues and dilemmas in your care. Should you or your family desire an ethics consultation, please ask your nurse to contact the Hospital Ethics Consultation Team.
Helpful Links
Advance Directive Quiz Texas Hospitals Association Texas Department of Aging and Disability Services National Healthcare Decisions Day
How to Deal With An Approaching Death
When a person enters the final stages of the dying process, two different dynamics are at work. On the physical plane, the body begins the final process of shutting down. The other dynamic includes the emotional, spiritual, and mental processes that surround the end of life. Learn the signs and how to deal with an approaching death.
Legal Aspects of Advance Directives
An Advance Directive may be either notarized or appropriately witnessed.Neither this hospital nor your physician may require you to execute an advance directive as a condition for admittance or receiving treatment in this or any other hospital. The fact that you have executed an advance directive will not affect any insurance coverage that you may have.
Surrogate Decision-Maker
If you become unable to make your own health care decisions and do not have a legal guardian or designated agent, then certain family members and others can make medical treatment decisions on your behalf. The State of Texas designates specific persons to act in this capacity and you may seek this specific information from the hospital or from the State of Texas.
Directive to Physicians and Family or Surrogates Living Will and Medical Power of Attorney
Directive to Physicians and Family or Surrogates (Living Will) A "living will" allows you to tell your physician in advance the type of care you desire should you become unable to make your own health care decisions. This may include telling your physician not to use artificial methods to prolong the process of dying if you are terminally ill.
If you sign a directive, ask your physician to make it part of your medical record. If you become unable to sign a written directive, you can issue a directive verbally or by other means of non-written communication, in the presence of your physician.
If you have not issued a Directive to Physicians and become unable to communicate after being diagnosed with a terminal or irreversible condition, your attending physician and legal guardian, or your agent or certain family members in the absence of a legal guardian or agent can make your decisions concerning withdrawing, withholding or providing life-sustaining treatment. Your attending physician and another physician not involved in your care also can make decisions to withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatment if you do not have a legal guardian and certain family members are not available.
A directive becomes effective only after you have been diagnosed with a terminal or irreversible condition.While a woman is pregnant, Texas Law does not allow the provisions of her Directive to Physicians to go into effect.
Medical Power of Attorney A Medical Power of Attorney allows you to designate someone you trust – an agent – to make health care decisions on your behalf should you become unable to make them yourself.
This Power of Attorney is not valid unless it is signed in the presence of two competent adult witnesses or a Notary.
Witnesses CANNOT include:
Your agent:
Download Forms for Medical Power of Attorney & Living Will (En Español)
Declaration for Mental Health Treatment
A Declaration for Mental Health Treatment allows you to tell healthcare providers your choices for mental health treatment in the event that you become incapacitated. It applies to mental hospital treatment only. Unlike the living will and medical power of attorney, which do not expire, the DMHT expires 3 years from the date that you sign it. If you are incapacitated on that date, the document continues in effect until you are again able to make your own decisions.
Download Declaration for Mental Health Treatment
Preparing for your Hospital Visit – Do I need to bring my current Advance Directive?
Yes. If you have already formulated an Advance Directive, be sure to bring a copy with you. A copy of this Advance Directive will be placed in your Medical Record for reference.
Out-of-Hospital Do Not Resuscitate (DNR)
An Out-of-Hospital DNR Order allows you to refuse certain life-sustaining treatments in any setting outside of a hospital. Among these settings are home health, hospice, nursing homes, ambulances, and hospital emergency rooms. This advance directive must be issued in conjunction with your attending physician and signed by two witnesses or a Notary.
Download Out-of-Hospital Do Not Resuscitate
* Required field.
Read our terms and privacy policy.
We can help find a doctor for you and your family.
Keep up with the latest health information. Sign up for our eNewsletter to receive tips on health, hospital updates, healthy recipes, and invitations to our programs & events.


text:
Versatile and classic-looking, these medium plastic buttons feature 4 stitching holes and a subtle tortoise colour effect. They come in a set of 2. Machine wash and dry clean suitable.
Thank you for visiting Medium Tortoise Effect Buttons, 19mm, Brown on shoppingfind.co.uk
We bring the products from many websites to one website for you to search, save and compare.


text:
DAKINE LOW ROLLER 165CM WHEELIE SNOWBOARD BAG - BLACKFeatures:
› Made from 600D polyester
› Fully padded snowboard bag
› Full length two way zipper
› Dual end carry handles
› Lockers zipper cars
› Colour: Black
Size Info:
› Fits max. 165cm (65") board
› Dimensions: 178cm x 30cm x 15cm (70" x 12" x 6")
› Weight: 3kg
About Dakine:
Dakine began manufacturing the Dakine leash in Hawaii in 1979. Now they are one of the leaders in the surf and snow accessory marketplace making quality bags, luggage, leashes, board bags and tailpads for all surf and snow travellers!
Shop Dakine now.


text:
- 1a single thing, person, or group that is complete by itself but can also form part of something larger The cell is the unit of which all living organisms are composed. The basic unit of society is the family.
- 2 (business) a single item of the type of product that a company sells The game's retail price was $15 per unit. What's the unit cost? group of people
- 3a group of people who work or live together, especially for a particular purpose army/military/police units Medical units were operating in the disaster area. measurement
- 4 unit (of something) a fixed quantity, etc. that is used as a standard measurement a unit of time/length/weight a unit of currency, such as the euro or the dollar furniture
- 5 a piece of furniture, especially a cupboard, that fits with and matches others of the same type a custom kitchen with white units floor/wall units bedroom/kitchen/storage units small machine
- 6a small machine that has a particular purpose or is part of a larger machine a waste disposal unit the central processing unit of a computer in textbook
- 7one of the parts into which a textbook or a series of lessons is divided The present perfect is covered in Unit 8. apartment
- 8 one of the parts or sections that a large building is divided into in a hospital
- 9 a department, especially in a hospital, that provides a particular type of care or treatment the intensive care unit a trauma unit number
- 10any whole number from 0 to 9 a column for the tens and a column for the units
single thing
nounjump to other results
Check pronunciation: unit


text:
Is White G Electronics incorrect or missing key business information? Update your Hotfrog listing today.
Contact details
Are these details correct?
Hotfrog Canada provides information regarding White G Electronics in Cambridge ON. White G Electronics is located at 987 Homuth Ave, Cambridge ON N3H 2C6 and provides Computers services. Contact them on (519) 653-4661.
Is White G Electronics in 987 Homuth Ave, Cambridge ON N3H 2C6 your business? Claim your listing and attract more leads by adding more content, photos and other business details.
We have more Computers services in Cambridge ON available on Hotfrog Canada. You can update your search for Cambridge Computers by location, keyword or service options.
6783 Wellingt Rd 34 Rr 22 CAMBRIDGE ONTARIO N3C 2V4
6723 Puslinch Cs 2 CAMBRIDGE ONTARIO N3C 2V4
229 Myers Rd CAMBRIDGE ONTARIO N1R 7H3
Mailing Address18882689733 295 Sheld Drive Mailing Address18882689733 CAMBRIDGE ONTARIO N1T 1A7
Small Business Hub
Sharing tips, ideas and advice to help grow your small business
Your profile without ads
Have you considered upgrading to Hotfrog AdVantage? No competitor advertising means exclusive focus on your business. You take centre stage.
Create your free Hotfrog business profile
Follow Hotfrog on:
Share on:
Hotfrog Small Business Hub


text:
Visa Inc. has announced the completion of its acquisition of Visa Europe Ltd, meaning that the combined, global company will provide digital payment products, services and processing to about 17,100 financial institution clients and partners, 40 million merchant outlets, and 3.0 billion Visa cards worldwide. 268 more words
Tags » Visa Europe
Visa Europe announces Digital Enablement Programme with partners including Android Pay and UK banks
Visa Europe is launching their new Visa Europe Digital Enablement Programme (VEDEP), to 'leverage the power of the Visa network to simplify the implementation of third party mobile wallets.' Launch partners of the programme include Google and its Android Pay platform along with many leading UK banks. 268 more words
Two contactless transactions made every second in Ireland
New analysis from Visa Europe indicates that the increase in the contactless card payment limit in October 2015 has had a transformative effect on consumer spending habits with Visa debit cards in Ireland. 212 more words
The overnight success story 10 years in the making
By Visa Europe.
Did you know that the word "contactless" was one of the Collins Dictionary's words of the year last year? Along with "manspreading", "binge-watching" and "ghosting", this so-called "new" form of payment was finally recognised as a trend. 759 more words
Europeans "touched to pay" three billion times in the last 12 months
Visa Europe has released further numbers confirming the fact that Europe really has accepted contactless payments. The company has announced three billion contactless transactions were made in the last 12 months – nearly tripling that of the same period in the previous year. 391 more words
British pub-goers embrace higher contactless spending limit
Latest figures from Visa Europe show that the UK's decision to increase the contactless spending limit from £20 to £30 six months ago has proved popular, particularly with those customers in the pub. 219 more words
EDITORIAL: Announcing the 2016 CMA Finalists!
This editorial was first released on Monday 14th March. Contactless Intelligence Weekly News Review Editorial – Week 11, 2016:
In a normal week, this editorial looks at a specific pieces of news highlights from the week's headlines. 788 more words


text:
Southwestern Casserole RecipeRead Reviews Be the first to add a review
- 2 cups (8 ounces) uncooked elbow macaroni
- 2 pounds ground beef
- 1 large onion, chopped
- 2 garlic cloves, minced
- 2 cans (14-1/2 ounces each) diced tomatoes, undrained
- 1 can (16 ounces) kidney beans, rinsed and drained
- 1 can (6 ounces) tomato paste
- 1 can (4 ounces) chopped green chilies, drained
- 1-1/2 teaspoons salt
- 1 teaspoon chili powder
- 1/2 teaspoon ground cumin
- 1/2 teaspoon pepper
- 2 cups shredded Monterey Jack cheese
- 2 jalapeno peppers, seeded and chopped
- Cook macaroni according to package directions. Meanwhile, in a large saucepan, cook beef and onion over medium heat, crumbling beef, until meat is no longer pink. Add garlic; cook 1 minute longer. Drain. Stir in next eight ingredients. Bring to a boil. Reduce heat; simmer, uncovered, for 10 minutes. Drain macaroni; stir into beef mixture.
- Preheat oven to 375°. Transfer macaroni mixture to two greased 2-qt. baking dishes. Top with cheese and jalapenos. Cover and bake at 375° for 30 minutes. Uncover; bake until bubbly and heated through, about 10 minutes longer. Serve one casserole. Cool the second; cover and freeze up to 3 months.
- To use frozen casserole: Thaw in refrigerator 8 hours. Preheat oven to 375°. Remove from refrigerator 30 minutes before baking. Cover and bake, increasing time as necessary to heat through and for a thermometer inserted in center to read 165°, 20-25 minutes. Yield: 2 casseroles (6 servings each).
Reviews for Southwestern Casserole
"I made this first as written. It's good but it needed something. I think more chili powder and more cumin. Next time I made this I will add the additions along with pinto beans instead of kidney beans and medium spicy green chili's. Can't really drain the chili's so not sure what that's about. Don't cook the pasta until done like only cook it for 3 - 4 minutes, that way it doesn't become too soft. Or don't cook it at all and add before you put into the oven. Remember to use a good quality pasta too. I think it needed cheese in the dish so I will add most of the cheese the same time I add the pasta. I will probably use a Mexican blend cheese or Taco blend because although I love Monterey Jack it's so mild and probably not right for this dish. Sevrve with sour cream, guacamole, and if you have on hand some chopped cilantro!"
"I didn't think there was anything particularly special about the recipe except that it was budget friendly and filling for a big crowd. Always enjoy experimenting with new recipes but probably won't take the time to make this again."
"This was deliciousl I loved how simple it was to make and the jalape?os really added that extra kick of flavor."
"This recipe was good. The amount of seasoning didn't seem like it would be enough for this large meal. I ended up substituting the chili powder and cumin for 1 1/2 Tbsp. Taco Seasoning."
"Very popular at our house! Because we are from the Northeast and not the Southwest, we opted for fewer jalapeno slices on top, but otherwise found the casserole tasty and spiced just right."
"This just wasn't that flavorful. For the amount of time it takes to bring it all together, I was expecting more."
"Jimmy said I could make this again!! The only thing different to do is stir in the cheese before putting it in the casserole dish. Then add extra cheese on top. We like cheese!"
"Yummy and easy - this one you can put together in a few minutes on a weeknight for sure. I used jarred salsa instead of the canned tomatoes."
"Delicious!! The only changes I made were seasoning the chicken with Southwest Spice, using Fire Roasted Tomatoes (because I had them on hand and like them with these flavors), and for the topping I used Pepper Jack Cheese (because I find it zippier) and combined with crushed Fritos. Not only is it a fabulous dish, It's is a great make ahead weeknight dinner."
"Fabulous! The only thing I did differently was changed the chopped green chilies to a can of the chopped jalapenos to increase the heat factor. Have one in the freezer and DH is already asking for it!"