Ric Ocasek and Paulina, married 1989.
Posted on 12/20/2005 7:54:38 AM PST by snarks_when_bored
Fox News alert a few minutes ago says the Dover School Board lost their bid to have Intelligent Design introduced into high school biology classes. The federal judge ruled that their case was based on the premise that Darwin's Theory of Evolution was incompatible with religion, and that this premise is false.
Isn't good enough for you? Too bad. There is plenty of examples out there for you to chew on.
What are you on about here? Examples of what?
Absolutely, they know what religion is and is not!
On another thread I suggested that fraud charges against the school board and its individual members would also be in order.
They are required by state law to prepare a science curriculum.
They willfully included the pseudoscience of ID in the curriculum.
This constitutes fraud against the people of Dover, and, IMO, is also a high crime warranting impeachment and removal from office by the Pa. Legislature.
But I'm not wrong and you are dodging about where you clearly are. Your hypothesis sucks.
Let me simplify: Life can only originate through intelligent intervention.
How will you exclude all other possibilities?
No need for infinite tests.
It is very, very, far from clear why not. Please stop spewing and pretending you can't see. Deal with the problem. Why can't a creationist have the minimal integrity to confront a problem instead of shucking and jiving and spewing and running and hiding?
It is falsifiable.
Yes, a counterexample could be found any time. However, the lack of one being found by any given time doesn't mean doodle.
It is testable.
By what possible means? Please answer this question. I've asked it in three posts now. Don't just tell me it's testable. That would look very bad if you did that yet again.
Valiant attempt at reaching the unreachable, but as I am sure you've by now surmised, we're dealing with an indvidual who will go unclaimed by creationists, evolutionists, and those who believe that everything exists because the Great Galactic Marshmallow willed it so.
Two thousand years, no Jesus.
Science is not a religion, or an anti-religion, just because a bunch of science cranks with a painfully obvious ax to grind, and an overactive sense of drama say so. Science texts do not represent theories in science as facts, in the sense that they are proven and/or unquestionable--they are just useful ideas, whose utility goes up and down over time--as the history of science makes painfully apparent. Such constructs do not have the capacity to say anything in the least signifcant about God either way.
Last verifiable miracle...the '69 Mets.
"Last verifiable miracle...the '69 Mets."
As a lifelong Mets fan, it pains me, but you're wrong. You forgot the Miracle on Ice (1980). :)
God Lord!
You are correct!
If one could show that DNA could generate viable cells based on other than carbon based chemistry, (say silicon), what would the judges say?
I guess I don't. Are you seriously claiming that public school science teachers are claiming that ToE disproves the God hypothesis? Can you back this up, if it is what you're saying?
I'm college educated so it would be fair to say that I went through my own fair share of biology classes.
Isn't good enough for you? Too bad. There is plenty of examples out there for you to chew on.
Ah, I think I get it. You want to demonstrate to me that the universe is jampacked with biology teachers who routinely teach that Darwin's theory of evolution disproves the existence of God, because that's how you remember interpreting what was said to you. How about, lets say, 3 news stories to that effect, in a well-known, secular newspaper in the last year?
You have a pretty insulated view of the world as it is presently constituted, to imagine that any biology teacher that did that wouldn't be canned before the week was out.
Ric Ocasek and Paulina, married 1989.
Tough.
They are required to learn enough science to pass a standardized test. The ToE is an important part of science.
Christian Scientists (ie members of the Eddy cult) have to learn about the germ theory of disease, and Jehovah's Witnesses need to learn about blood typing and how it impacts on transfusions.
Teetotalers need to learn about fermentation. Vegetarians need to learn the nutritional value of meat and milk.
Do you think Muslims should be excused from art class if they're learning anatomy and drawing faces? Should socialists be excused when the kids are learning about economics? If my dad is a mobster, does that excuse me from civics class? What if he's a Jehovah's witness?
That doesn't count.
That much cash can usually attract that much babe.
That you should win the insensibly complex, unlikely fantasy contest. Wouldn't it be orders of magnetude cheaper and easier for a deity to just show up on 60 Minutes and create life from dirt instantaneously in front of a camera?
Of course you have evidence that the plaintiffs were atheists, don't you?
There is a DNA defect common to all the great apes, including us, that prevents us from making ascorbic acid. The hypothetical designer seems to have a quality control problem.
Not if they wanted either ratings or believability.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.