To: caffe
aeronautical engineering and physics
So what, exactly, are his qualifications regarding biology?
but then again, I could just be aware of the guy's existence and am making false claims
No, I'm willing to admit that you are quite likely telling the truth here. But if I want information about evolution, I'm going to take the word of a biologist over a physicist. Even if he's also an aeronautical engineer. Kind of like how if I need work done on my car's engine I take it to an auto mechanic rather than a heart surgeon -- the surgeon may be expertly qualified in his field, but that doesn't mean that he necessarily knows how to change an oil filter.
Just try and use some brains - one does not need to be a believer in darwin to be a great scientist and one can be a believer in biblical creation and be a great scientist.
Oh, I don't doubt it. It's entirely possible to be a skilled chemist or phycisist without having a clue as to the workings of evolution.
1,662 posted on
12/20/2005 9:05:30 PM PST by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: Dimensio
Then perhaps I confused you with someone else who believed that if ID was actually allowed open for discussion in education, the poor children would never be qualified to become scientists. I also hope you agree that one may be a biologist or a physician and still reject Darwin.
Before I had children, I was a Registered Nurse and I don't feel any Doctor or patient had less confidence in me because I am a creationist. Actually, I was never asked. I somehow passed microbiology, anatomy and chemistry without swearing some oath to Darwin. I could even openly embrace the laws of thermodynamics!
Again, I thought you were the one who asserted the sky was falling if students did'nt have a complete Darwin indoctrination. Sorry about that.
1,671 posted on
12/20/2005 9:28:47 PM PST by
caffe
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson