To: ALS
What do scientists think of all this? We have great problems with the claim that ID is a scientific theory or a science-based alternative to evolutionary theory. We don't question its religious or philosophical underpinnings. That's not our business. But there is no scientific evidence underlying ID theory.
No relevant research has been done; no papers have been published in scientific journals. Because it has no science base, we believe that ID theory should be excluded from science curricula in schools.
Read ALS, the problem will soon be clear, but I see that you did NOT read it, just spouting off again.
Oh well, why am I NOT surprised.
5 posted on
06/22/2003 5:40:45 PM PDT by
Aric2000
(If the history of science shows us anything, it is that we get nowhere by labeling our ignorance god)
To: Aric2000
"we"
You keep spewing like you're a scientist.
You aren't, so get off that rag mop pony.
You fear alternative theories. Evolutionists don't even like scientific criticism of evolution taught in schools, eventhough the criticism is brought forth by fellow scientists.
If your crap theory is so true, what's to fear?
Let the total evidence be the judge. If we wanted totalitarinism to reign free in our schools we'd all be voting for Swillary in 2004.
10 posted on
06/22/2003 5:51:56 PM PDT by
ALS
(http://designeduniverse.conservababes.com)
To: Aric2000
But there is no scientific evidence underlying ID theoryThere's no scientific evidence underlying macro-evolutionary theory. Unless you count Piltdown Man.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson