Replies

To paraphrase Berlinski; if we were to replace the word evolution with ‘allah’ and the label of creationist with ‘infidel’ - I don’t think these discussions would read significantly different.

ROFL!!! Hardly. It's the evolutionists, not the creationists, who very routinely get accused of being atheists, infidels, blasphemers, anti-God, God-haters, unChristian, heretics, blah blah blah -- even when they're Christians! Just today, we had creationist "nmh" claim that Catholics aren't "really" Christians because he didn't like that the Catholic church has stated that it finds no contradiction between God and evolutionary biology.

Pull the other leg now.

But hey, let's try out your test, shall we? Here's the last reply I've made to one of your own posts which contains both the word "evolution" and "creationis[t/m]", with the edits you suggest:

So again, can there be any connection into the ‘real world’ with any intelligent design in physical science -including/extending into biology?
If the hypothesis is drawn specifically enough and in a way which allows testable predictions to be made and those predictions are subsequently matched by the totality of the evidence, yes.
As it stands today, though, the "ID movement" has neither a specific hypothesis, testable predictions, nor positive evidence. It hasn't even conducted any original research. Nor does it seem likely to -- the "ID movement" is characterized by its affection for press releases and mass-market books, and by its aversion for making any testable hypotheses, much less actually testing them or doing research.
It's an anti-Allah infidel PR campaign dishonestly masquerading as a science.

Wow, doesn't *that* sound stupid... No, contrary to your false claim, it *does* "read significantly different [sic]".

You throw around the label creationist all the time - in fact, it’s rare not to see it in one of your posts before you even discover what the individual you are posting to actually believes.

You responded to my post but you did not address this topic. --- I believe we are more than chemicals acting upon each other for no higher reason than any other chemical reaction. So what label should science don me with to make me into a ‘convicted felon‘?

BTW, show the actual link to the post…

But hey, here is the last conversation we had:

Ichneumon: If you mean does it explain all morality, no, because some morality is based not on our biological imperatives, but are the result of culture and/or human thought. But yes, some of our instincts and drives due to our biology shape our notions of morality.

Heartlander: ‘Human thought’, according to current science, is ‘ultimately’ void of any intelligent design. IOW, our human intellect and morality is ultimately the result of mindless events that unfolded without reason or purpose. To say ‘culture’ and ‘human thought’ adds to an equation void of design and is mindless says nothing as to how these anomalies actually exist as a result of and within a universe that is lacking any design or intelligence.

Link