(Was Bugs really an evil smoker?)
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.
You seem destined to have an enjoyable life existence.
"So where does the theory of evolution require a constant increase in "complexity"?"
Straw man. I never said that. I said that it requires increases in complexity without intelligent intervention. Otherwise, we'd still be on the level of primordial soup.
You may want to cop to that, but I don't.
1 Cor 15:21-22
For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
(see also Rom 5: 12)
I covered those who want to pick and choose (or twist against the clear intent of the authors) toward the end of my post.
You seem to be defining religion by the traditions of a few. All religion requires faith regardless of any other tradition associated with it. Belief in evolution requires just as much faith as any religion.
The bible says faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not see. (Heb 11:1)
All who believe in evolution hope that it is true and the evidence for it is unseen therefore it is a belief system like any other
"It takes a lot of faith to believe in self-organizing matter. Blind faith, that is."
Huh? Dissolve some salt in warm water. Hang a string in the water and wait. You'll find that the salt self-organizes very nicely. Bad argument.
"athiestic" placemarker.
Some people worship themselves. Talk about false Gods!
What eleni121 might not know is that in those days, books came from the printer sealed (hence "uncut"). The seal was never broken on the copy Marx sent Darwin, so we know for a fact that Darwin never wrote it.
More evidence that creationists choose to ignore....
My source is the theory of evolution. Where do you think the added complexity came from? God?
Do you deny that the theory of evolution has to account for added complexity? That a class of animal must be able to evolve to a more complex class of animal via nothing more than changes in environment and random changes?
I think the theory of evolution can account for increased complexity just fine. I just can't figure out where it is stated that only increased complexity is possible. I don't remember that from my evolution classes, but I did not do advanced biology so I may have missed something.
Why don't you explain your idea, or provide us with a source, and then we can see what to make of it?
"Therefore math is an "athiestic" class subject."
Math was atheistic until I got to my Algebra & Trig final in high school. :)
Evolution is not based on God, allah, buddah, apollo, athena or any one else's supernatural being. Not being based on a supernatural being does make it more scientific than any theory based on a supernatural being.
My source is the theory of evolution. Where do you think the added complexity came from? God?
Do you deny that the theory of evolution has to account for added complexity? That a class of animal must be able to evolve to a more complex class of animal via nothing more than changes in environment and random changes
Are you saying that the ToE states that evolution may result in a more complex species, or are you holding to your claim that it says evolution must result in a more complex species every time? The former would satisfy your demand to account for added complexity, and is consistent with what the ToE does say. If, however, you are contending that it says the latter, please cite your source that says the ToE makes this claim.
Nonsense. Like all scientific theories, there is hard physical evidence to support evolution. You may prefer to believe that there isn't, but reality isn't subject to your personal belief system.
This decision is a travesty for the very open inquiry that science rests upon.
We have a federal judge who has essentially ruled that the theory of evolution -- whose evangelistic proponents haveh has yet to produce a single fact in support of it -- cannot be criticized in the classroom as a matter of law.
The evolutionists are clearly desperate to seek such a ruling rather than to debate the scientific observations. How pathetic.
As Shakespeare said, "The truth will out" -- eventually.
I am so glad there are other "voices of Reason" at Freeperdom! A government school must keep religion OUT. This protects MY freedom of religion. If we go with the ID ( and yes, foks, you can't fool us, it IS Creationism redux) concept in science class, then we must let ALL other religous based notions of "creation of the world" in...whether that is Pagan, Islam, american Indian etc.
But beyond that...it is not science! And also, Catholics ( who are Christians the last time I looked) believe in a God and Jesus Christ AND evolution. How arrogant to assume to KNOW just how God created the world...leave my faith alone and let the scientists do their work.
Yes, we know,
“the whole Communist Humanist Secularist Evolutionist plot to fluoridate the water supply”
Because when we look through a microscope, we see them?
Judaism seems to me to have little evangelical bent. Perhaps that's why (along with Hitler and other anti-Jew pogroms) there are not very many of them.
(Was Bugs really an evil smoker?)
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.