“Riiiiiiight. Scientists were the ones that decided to be politically correct in virtually ALL courses from history to science to whatever. Who knew?”
—It is scientists who want evolution taught in science class. I don’t know what your comment is referring to.
“And once again, it’s time for you to get that movie ‘Expelled’. There’s a good segment in there about the Polish scientist that explains it’s a particularly American phenomenon to sue evo-dissenters into silence, and stomp God out of the discussion.”
—I’ve read a transcript of Maciej Giertych’s comments in the film before, and it had nothing to do with my comment.
“All of these were and are utilized in studying space flight and eventually making the entire enterprize possible:...”
—And all of that had what to do with my question?
I can send you 50 pages of similar such comments about evolution from Christians, but I doubt that would prove anything.
“Really?
The Multiverse theory for the universe has been a recently accepted theory that describes the continuous formation of universes...”
—Yes, really. The description of multiverses described there is the Smolin theory I mentioned, where new universes are created via black holes. That conception of a “multiverse” is utterly different than string theory’s conception of a multiverse which has something to do with d-branes. And Everett’s conception of a multiverse, which uses QM, is utterly different than the other two which essentially has an infinite number of “parallel universes” forming each moment.
“Well that’s just it, you did very much imagine it. That’s the point! It shows no such thing!”
—No, I studied bones and casts myself and read the research, and as I said, I couldn’t imagine a better series of intermediate fossils showing human evolution. If you can come up with a hypothetical intermediate fossil better than what we have, I’d be curious to hear about it.
(me)”Those that believe that abiogenesis occurred, believe it did so because of the laws of nature and that it was chemistry – just as with snowflakes, albeit more complicated.”
(you)”No, not more complicated, but with intelligent design from a creator. As with the astronauts this is quite obvious.”
—Are you saying that those that believe abiogenesis occurred believe that life formed from intelligent design and are no more complicated than snowflakes? (I have a feeling I’m wrong again, but again, I don’t know how else to read that).
“For someone that says “no one would be happier if life came from intelligent design” as you put it, you sure have a peculiar way of showing it! Kind of like posting on FR all this tme but oblivious to the fact that the ACLU, NEA, etc. are what they are.”
—I guess I just don’t necessarily think there’s a link between what would make me happy and what is reality - perhaps that does make me peculiar.
As for the NEA and ACLU, sometimes I agree with them and sometimes I don’t. (shrug)
Nice discussion, although there are times I wonder who’s post you are reading when responding to me. :-)
So why doesn't the link merely call it that, as opposed to multiverse theory then? I'm sorry but it clearly says multiverse theory and this site isn't alone and let's not lose site of my point...it's hardly falsifiable, measurable and so on, no matter what you'd prefer to call it.
Nice discussion, although there are times I wonder who’s post you are reading when responding to me. :-)
Well, I suppose this makes up for my being so flabbergasted that you've been on FR as long as you have been and you are so oblivious and clueless about the NEA, ACLU...etc. ;)