Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

As I know how much everyone on this board cares about this court case, it is wrapping up today.

Be interesting to see if the jury finds discrimination against Coppedge due to his ID views.

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-new ... fired-over" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

LOS ANGELES -- David Coppedge, a former computer specialist with NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, spent much of his free time advocating for the idea that a higher intelligence must have had a hand in creation. Now, a judge will decide if his commitment to that belief has also cost him his job.
Closing arguments in Coppedge's wrongful termination lawsuit against the Pasadena-based JPL begin Monday after a five-week trial that has generated intense interest among proponents of the idea that life is too complex to have evolved through evolution alone. The case will be decided by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Ernest Hiroshige because both sides agreed to forgo a jury.
Coppedge, who worked on NASA's Cassini mission exploring Saturn and its many moons, claims he was demoted -- and then let go -- for promoting his views on intelligent design. The former "team lead" alleges that he was discriminated against because he engaged his co-workers in conversations about the idea and handed out DVDs on the topic while at work.
Coppedge lost his "team lead" title in 2009 and was let go last year after 15 years on the mission.

SeattleGriz wrote:As I know how much everyone on this board cares about this court case, it is wrapping up today.

Be interesting to see if the jury finds discrimination against Coppedge due to his ID views.

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-new ... fired-over" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

LOS ANGELES -- David Coppedge, a former computer specialist with NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, spent much of his free time advocating for the idea that a higher intelligence must have had a hand in creation. Now, a judge will decide if his commitment to that belief has also cost him his job.
Closing arguments in Coppedge's wrongful termination lawsuit against the Pasadena-based JPL begin Monday after a five-week trial that has generated intense interest among proponents of the idea that life is too complex to have evolved through evolution alone. The case will be decided by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Ernest Hiroshige because both sides agreed to forgo a jury.
Coppedge, who worked on NASA's Cassini mission exploring Saturn and its many moons, claims he was demoted -- and then let go -- for promoting his views on intelligent design. The former "team lead" alleges that he was discriminated against because he engaged his co-workers in conversations about the idea and handed out DVDs on the topic while at work.
Coppedge lost his "team lead" title in 2009 and was let go last year after 15 years on the mission.

He deserved to be let go for pushing it on coworkers. Work isn't the place for that shit. CS.com is.

Vidav wrote:

SeattleGriz wrote:As I know how much everyone on this board cares about this court case, it is wrapping up today.

Be interesting to see if the jury finds discrimination against Coppedge due to his ID views.

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-new ... fired-over" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He deserved to be let go for pushing it on coworkers. Work isn't the place for that shit. CS.com is.

I agree that political in nature discussion needs to stay out of the workplace, but it was very interesting to read the case as it unfolded. Essentially this guy had great reviews up until he pissed one guy off who hated ID. In addition, while we agree that political discourse should stay out of the workplace, JPL didn't follow that. Throughout JPL were tons of political cartoons and discussions - just not of ID.

Add to the fact, Coppedge worked when he was supposed to be working and only approached those when he was on break, or done for the day.

Be interesting to see if the jury feels he was discriminated against for his beliefs.

Should have stuck to computers and space shit.

youngterrier wrote:Should have stuck to computers and space shit.

And that is what the jury needs to decide. Did Coppedge overstep his boundries even though pretty much all of JPL displayed and discussed their political beliefs during work hours.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:

I've seen that line of argument before. And my response is: Let's see YOU do it. Let's see mankind's most brilliant scientists do it.

Let's see you build a population of biological machines that is self-sustaining, can fuel itself with materials in the environment around it and replicate itself, and can do what Homo sapiens can do.

Good luck. You'll need it.

JohnStOnge wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:

I've seen that line of argument before. And my response is: Let's see YOU do it. Let's see mankind's most brilliant scientists do it.

Let's see you build a population of biological machines that is self-sustaining, can fuel itself with materials in the environment around it and replicate itself, and can do what Homo sapiens can do.

Good luck. You'll need it.

That is a terrible argument. It's a God of the Gaps argument. Just because we can't *right now* does not mean that it is impossible. An all-powerful God most certainly could. The theory of evolution does not disprove the existence of a God, but I believe every advance in science can disprove this terrible notion of "intelligent design" that says the world was created for us, and that we are perfect biologically, blah blah blah. Every creature is the result of trial and error on the evolutionary scale. Some body parts are not necessary and in fact can be more detrimental than beneficial (if useful at all) to the body.

for instance the appendix, the spleen, gall bladder, etc are not necessary for survival but can kill you in different circumstances.

To answer your question, I would design the human body without at least an appendix. If I was going to evolve a species over billions of years and then reveal myself to them and basically say that everything revolves around them, I'd make sure I did so when such organs had been discarded via evolution.

If the universe, or the human body was indeed created by a designer, I believe an indictment is in order.

JohnStOnge wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:

I've seen that line of argument before. And my response is: Let's see YOU do it. Let's see mankind's most brilliant scientists do it.

Let's see you build a population of biological machines that is self-sustaining, can fuel itself with materials in the environment around it and replicate itself, and can do what Homo sapiens can do.

Good luck. You'll need it.

JohnStOnge wrote:I've seen that line of argument before. And my response is: Let's see YOU do it. Let's see mankind's most brilliant scientists do it.

Let's see you build a population of biological machines that is self-sustaining, can fuel itself with materials in the environment around it and replicate itself, and can do what Homo sapiens can do.

Good luck. You'll need it.

I'm sure we'll eventually have the technology to do it. It won't be in our lifetimes, but with mankind's technological prowess growing exponentially, we'll reach that point sometime.

∞∞∞ wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:I've seen that line of argument before. And my response is: Let's see YOU do it. Let's see mankind's most brilliant scientists do it.

Let's see you build a population of biological machines that is self-sustaining, can fuel itself with materials in the environment around it and replicate itself, and can do what Homo sapiens can do.

Good luck. You'll need it.

I'm sure we'll eventually have the technology to do it. It won't be in our lifetimes, but with mankind's technological prowess growing exponentially, we'll reach that point sometime.

You're right, Infinity3. However, that progress you speak of slows down considerably every time we elect a hardcore Conk.

Okay. So I thought we were going to get a decision on this today, but apparently it is being decided by a judge and the verdict will be a couple weeks away.

∞∞∞ wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:I've seen that line of argument before. And my response is: Let's see YOU do it. Let's see mankind's most brilliant scientists do it.

Let's see you build a population of biological machines that is self-sustaining, can fuel itself with materials in the environment around it and replicate itself, and can do what Homo sapiens can do.

Good luck. You'll need it.

I'm sure we'll eventually have the technology to do it. It won't be in our lifetimes, but with mankind's technological prowess growing exponentially, we'll reach that point sometime.

Now that would be impressive, for I don't think we are even close.

SeattleGriz wrote:Okay. So I thought we were going to get a decision on this today, but apparently it is being decided by a judge and the verdict will be a couple weeks away.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

Thanks for keeping it rollin' Capn.

∞∞∞ wrote: I'm sure we'll eventually have the technology to do it. It won't be in our lifetimes, but with mankind's technological prowess growing exponentially, we'll reach that point sometime.

I'm STILL waiting for the glorious future where computers will replace the entire work force and no one will ever had to work again. And the "intelligent machines" will build even more intelligent machines that will solve all of the world's problems.

Seriously, what's the holdup? We have computers that can do hundreds of trillions of calculations a second and have all kinds of amazing hardware but you can't build computers that can replace accountants and doctors?

Pwns wrote:

∞∞∞ wrote: I'm sure we'll eventually have the technology to do it. It won't be in our lifetimes, but with mankind's technological prowess growing exponentially, we'll reach that point sometime.

I'm STILL waiting for the glorious future where computers will replace the entire work force and no one will ever had to work again. And the "intelligent machines" will build even more intelligent machines that will solve all of the world's problems.

Seriously, what's the holdup? We have computers that can do hundreds of trillions of calculations a second and have all kinds of amazing hardware but you can't build computers that can replace accountants and doctors?

Well for one, computing capability doubles every 18 months or so, and the ability to maximize such computing power using silicon will eventually run out. a more in depth explanation:
[youtube][/youtube]

I can't really tell if you're being facetious or if you're trying to argue a point, either way I don't see this as a valid objection. It's like saying computation capability is impossible because we live in the year 1880.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

This one could easily have religion swapped out with evolution. What do you think many of the Evolutionists believe? Life just spontaneously arose from nothing! Kid you not. Just a pool of warm water and then BAM! Life! Pretty soon we were fish frogs and monkeys.

Abiogenesis.

When I was in Boston a few years back, a former gal and I visited a creationist museum. Here's some pics we took:





Dinosaur's apparently live 4,350 years ago:


Poor dinosaur never made it onto the ark...is now a fossil:


Safety-compliant scaffolding:

∞∞∞ wrote:When I was in Boston a few years back, a former gal and I visited a creationist museum. Here's some pics we took.

The Ark is interesting. Wish we could get a definitive find on that sucker. Have read many believe it is in Turkey and the government there won't allow anyone to search for it. How convenient! No way to find out the truth on that one.