Posted on 04/05/2006 10:32:31 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
They did?
I'm unaware of this.
If you are old enough to remember the differences of science and religious were of little concern until the late 70's. Since then with TV and the growth of fundamentalism science has been attacked. Many would discredit it in the schools and restrict knowledge. The number of students studying science has dropped and our world standing of high school performance in math and science has dropped from number one to 24 out of the top 25 countries in the world. We graduate but 70 thousand PH D's in math and science a year and more than half seek opportunity in other countries.
And you blame THIS on Creationism?
HMmmm...
I blame it on our fat, lazy, gimme attitudes instilled in our young, brought on by liberal politicians that almost to a man/woman are Evo's!
Virgin births are a dime a dozen these days. So, what about it?
____________
LOL. Who knew they did in vitro in those days.
And how many E's have?
What DIFFERENCE would it make to fill in the boxes in this poll anyway?
(You JUST wanna get 'em going, dontcha! ;^)
No thanks. I'll leave that to people who indulge sham philosophies as if they are science.
"(You JUST wanna get 'em going, dontcha! ;^)"
who me?? (smiling innocently)
But seriously the agenda on this issue is pretty blatant.
Here is my post:
CG: Nonsense. Nobody is saying that an intelligent designer doesn't exist (man). That in NO way is evidence that Man is the intelligent designer of the universe. There is simply no evidence for a designer of the universe, or of life as we see it on Earth, that isn't easier explained with natural means.
M: He doesn't have to create the Universe ~ just one new lifeform is sufficient, and it doesn't even have to be all that different ...
This appears to be Fester's oft-stated (and oft-denied) formulation that anything anywhere intelligently designed by anyone is evidence that everything everywhere was intelligently designed.
Fester tells me that's not what he means, but his posts can be somewhat murky. Mmuawiyah, on the other hand, seems to mean exactly that. Perhaps they can get together and sort it out for us.
To which, you responded:
That's simple logic.
Claim something less than universality and you're OK.
I certainly never claim universality on anything ~
All that's needed to knock down that argument is to find a single Intelligent Designer who has managed to create only one marginally different lifeform.
ADM qualifies as the Intelligent Designer.
They aren't the only one either, but they exist and do that stuff.
So, cranking that into your dichotomy forces us to believe that ID is correct, or that Occam is wrong.
No doubt you didn't anticipate Occam being at stake in the debate or you wouldn't have done that, but you really have to keep in mind that in an everchanging Universe, with recombinant DNA technology being used and under further development, we cannot fail to INCLUDE the existence of at least one ID in the pot.
He doesn't have to create the Universe ~ just one new lifeform is sufficient, and it doesn't even have to be all that different ~
I didn't interpret your comment that way, no problem.
I'm sure the sun will rise tomorrow, but you couldn't prove it by me, we don't see the sun enough. Ugh.
That's it? Any word if it will make the front page at least 28 times like Abu Ghraib (spelled right?) prison?
Welcome newb. I'm sure your stay will be short.
Who observed it? Obviously no one did, evolution is based on interpretation of available data. Depends on the interpreters agenda.
Obviously ~6.7 billion people observe it every day although you may be the exception. Evolution is defined as on going change Whether by nature or reproduction. Get a picture of your parents , stand in front of a mirror. If there are any differences no matter how small then some change or evolution has occurred. However if you can observe no differences and you are all exactly the same then you are a clone. Its up to you how you interpret the data. A few people still think they are clones but most agree that out 6.7 billion people no two are exactly the same.
Deductive reasoning without a fact of reality results in philosophy.
I don't remember even mentioning creationism or Christians in the post.
Please define philosophies and science.
Hey Coyoteman!
Thanks for the definitions.
My dictionary says that a theory means guesses.
So many dictionaries, so little time. :)
"My dictionary says that a theory means guesses. "
You need to get a real dictionary then.
Science cannot observe anything... Scientist's do the observing.
These same observations that can be obscured to speed processes, altered to fit a hypothesis and help push an agenda.
Science cannot do anything, it's those involved with science that do the work.
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.