Posted on 07/27/2006 3:00:03 PM PDT by BrandtMichaels
That's fine as long as it's not in science class.
So why are they afraid to debate both sides of the issue in a classroom?
Again, if it's so holy and correct, debate it, don't stifle debate.
"That's fine as long as it's not in science class."
No bullshit, that IS the place to debate it.
IN science class
Oh, but then there might just possibly be something to prove them wrong.
Can't have that now can we.
I understand why creationists want this to be debated in science classes; they know their views will never stand up to scientific rigor in an actual research environment so they hope to "poison the well," as it were, early on.
Then you are just as weak in your theory as the rest of them.
If you are afraid of debate, then there's something terribly wrong with your theory.
End of story.
So, God is like Calvin from Calvin and Hobbes? Calvin ocassionally created armies of miniature snowmen just for the pleasure of destroying them in some imaginative way.
Wow. A non-answer. Do you know the definition of a scientific theory? Hint: it does not mean "guess." You don't know enough about this subject to even begin discussing it, let alone be making pronouncements upon it.
Then debate your theory in an open classroom if you are so correct.
Go ahead and ridicule, that's all you have left anyway. People are seeing through your bullshit finally and the "big words" no longer work.
Debate it if you're correct. Defend your position in front of others who can and will debunk your theories.
You won't tho
Why?
Because everyone of the rabid evolutionists are cowards.
Did you not read the post I sent to you this morning? High School biology does not teach enough detail for there to be any form of meaningful debate. Hell, you're a product of high school science classes and you know next to nothing on the subject, or indeed next to nothing about science whatsoever (you still haven't said whether you know what the scientific definition of "theory" is). Debating this subject at the high school level would be like asking the same students to debate the efficacies of various neurosurgical procedures.
Not to prolong this, but no I didn't read the book, I do read her columns and I seriously doubt it's of any higher quality than those. There's a difference between being funny and being a good thinker.
Sure. Just give us a scientific alternative.
Because everyone of the rabid evolutionists are cowards.
Standard CR/Ider fare. I'll toss it onto the stack with the rest of the isults.
I think I'll take a crack at it.
From the prospective of those who support evolution, ID is an end run around the supposed constitutional separation between church and state; and I think it is also. To pretend otherwise only lends suspicion to those who are suspicious. I disagree with that interpretation of the constitution, but that is another discussion. Evos also have a great deal of data that supports their position. This debate is not going to be won with the endless shallow peppered moth finch beak macro/micro discussions when the battle is way down in the trenches of cell structure and mechanics. Based on these things evos have concluded that some IDers are intellectually lazy and dishonest, and frankly, I tend to agree.
Onward to Kansas... From the evo perspective they believe they are being challenged for the minds of America's youth in their area of expertise by a group of zealots who are trying to subvert the system. Is there anyone here on FR who has watched liberals operate that does not understand "successive approximations to an ultimate goal"?
Connect the dots folks. If we Christians have faith is so weak that we cannot enter into honest debate about this issue then the problem doesn't rest with evolution. Is that to say that these "lovely" qualities are not present on both sides? Not at all; we have all read the exchanges here. But if truth does not win the day then we are no better than Pilot, willing to do and believe whatever is convenient for us. That must never be.
Those are some very sweeping claims. Could I have a few examples?
Such is your personal philosophy. The world actually works the way God designed it, and will continue to do so unto the elements dissolve are are reconstituted as He sees fit. This is what science continues to bear out albeit weakly and despite personal philosophies to the contrary. Science gains by leaps and bounds when it does not despise or neglect the Owner's Manual, namely, the biblical texts. It was during the Dark Ages those texts were obsucred. Darwinsim , like the NEA, would like to take us back in that direction. No thanks.
Your story has God moving the goalposts. He sounds like a creationist.
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.