Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: eleni121
As such, evolution should be included as theory not fact.

Technically, the law of faunal succession is the fact (basically the restriction of fossils to certain layers, the more modern ones looking more like modern animals), Darwin was the first to come up with a convincing explanation for it, now we include genetics as well.

Other theories should be allowed in the discussion including ID and Creation - Judaeo-Christian Creation.

ID is not a theory - there's no way to test it. Another way to say this is that ID is vacuous; there is no possible observation that can't be "explained" by saying "oh, that's just the way the designer did it."

On the other hand, strict literalist Biblical/Koranic creationism does make definite predictions. It was proven wrong decades before Darwin. (for example, there was no global flood, the order of appearance in Genesis doesn't match the fossil record)

475 posted on 12/16/2005 10:16:43 PM PST by Virginia-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies ]


To: Virginia-American

You obviously haven't kept up with the latest research but here is one link from UNC to help you get a head's up on the very real Biblical flood event.

http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/flood.html

As for the testability of ID, it is impossible to test evolution. A main premise of evolutionists is that a single-cell became a human (accepted theory by mainstream science)... that is untestable and obviously never observed.


491 posted on 12/17/2005 11:45:33 AM PST by eleni121 ('Thou hast conquered, O Galilean!' (Julian the Apostate))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 475 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson