Witness: 'Intelligent Design' doesn't qualify as science [Day 4 of trial in Dover, PA]

Sioux City Journal ^ | 29 September 2005 | Staff

[PatrickHenry]

Thanks.

[Coyoteman]

Thanks for reminding me that a prime is coming up. Prefer tri-tip myself, mesquite smoked. But primes are OK too.

[PatrickHenry]

In this business, you have to take your thrills where you can.

[King Prout]

durn it, you are making me hungry.
I haven't had prime rib au jus in quite a while.

[King Prout]

okers - here's a chestnut for you, then: why does freshly applied polyurethane varnish smell notably like fresh pumpkin guts?

I don't know, and would like to.

[PatrickHenry]

I donno. It's obviously the inscrutable will of the intelligent designer. So stop asking.

[King Prout]

ah... the work of the FSM in His guise as the Great Pumpkin.
I see, I see.

-Ramen-

[connectthedots]

I have been in the molecular biology field for about 15 years, worked in 5 or 6 labs and I have never once come across a creationist.

I suspect most of them couldn't care less about the evolution v. creation/ID debate. If there really are all that many, why have they collectively not been able to fill in the gaps in the ToE?

[Lurking Libertarian]

Sure it does, since Macro evolution had to have a start, and if life cannot come from non-life, there is no Evolution-period.

That's just nonsense. The theory of evolution posits that all life on earth came from a single common ancestor, and that the multitude of species developed through mutation and natural selection. Where that first life came from is not part of the theory. Darwin himself wrote that the first organism from which all others descended was "breathed by the Creator." (Origin of Species, last page.)

[connectthedots]

You said: "predict that various "gaps" in the fossil record will be filled..."

You claim I read:"there were gaps in the ToE..."

You: "discovery of currently unknown fossils..."

You claim I read: "including a lack of a fossil record supporting transitional forms."

If there was ever a distinction without a difference, this is it.

And just how did I misread what you wrote? Seems to me, I simply restated what you wrote and did not change the meaning of anything you wrote.

[King Prout]

I stated there are gaps in the fossil record.
I stated that future discoveries will fill some of the transitional slots predicted by the ToE.
You read that to indicate that there is currently NO fossil evidence supporting evolutionary transition.

again: You must read the statement "I have some gaps in my teeth" as meaning "King Prout HAS NO TEETH."

If you do not, you demonstrate that you are applying arbitrary standards of interpretation on paralell syntactic structures. This would demonstrate that you are aware that you are practicing misrepresentation. This imputes deliberate dishonesty.

The choice of how to proceed out of the hole you have dug for yourself is yours to make.

[RightWingNilla]

I suspect most of them couldn't care less about the evolution v. creation/ID debate.

It is a non-debate among scientists. Biologists take it as a given due to the tremendous amount of data that support it.

why have they collectively not been able to fill in the gaps in the ToE?

What gaps would those be? The fossil record is strong enough to stand on its own. The genetic evidence is so overwhelming one would have to be either wilfully ignorant or a member of the OJ jury to not accept it.

[RightWingNilla]

So stop asking.

Catch phrase of the Discovery Institute.

[connectthedots]

What gaps would those be? The fossil record is strong enough to stand on its own. The genetic evidence is so overwhelming one would have to be either wilfully ignorant...

King Prout: I stated there are gaps in the fossil record.

Have you two met?

Also, Miller, the lead witness for the plaintiff's, admitted there were gaps in the ToE.

[connectthedots]

You are the one digging the hole for yourself.

[King Prout]

I note you have chosen to evade addressing the problem your analytical technique (if I may so improperly dignify it) has set up.

typical.

[connectthedots]

My analytical skill are excellent. Can't say the same about yours.

[King Prout]

either your analytical skill is deeply flawed, or your analytical skills are deeply flawed.

either way, keep shoveling.

[King Prout]

and you *still* have not addressed the problem you created for yourself.

[Liberal Classic]

Here's another example of the kind of scientific scholarship available from Answers In Genesis:

Buddy Davis is nearing the completion of his work on the 40-foot Tyrannosaurus Rex model he is creating for the museum! When you walk into his workshop and come face to face with this beast it inspires frightening memories of movie scenes with people running from the ferocious, apparently starved, giant. However, we know from the Bible that God created all animals, including dinosaurs, to be vegetarians. It was only after sin and the resulting curse were introduced that animals began to eat each other. Before that there would have been no reason to fear a 40’ long, 12’ tall T-Rex!

Here's yet another example of the kind of scientific scholarship available from Answers In Genesis:

Dinosaur “kinds” loaded onto Noah’s Ark: “It’s easy to explain how we fit on the Ark. It was the size of an ocean liner and the average size of dinosaurs were the size of sheep. Even the few ‘big guys’ were most likely young adults (of average dinosaur size) when they boarded the Ark.”