Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Phaedrus
Oh, spare us, elbucko. The scientific basis of Darwinism is at issue, not Creationism. If you can't hold your own here, by all means bow out, but try to do so gracefully.

Not having a real horse to put in to make a race, Phaedrus noted that the evolution horse is "too musclebound."

237 posted on 10/12/2002 6:38:45 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies ]


To: VadeRetro
Not having a real horse to put in to make a race, Phaedrus noted that the evolution horse is "too musclebound."

Well I do beg to differ, Vade. Gertrude Himmelfarb and Phillip Johnson have a relevant thing or two to say about the Evol "horse", all available on this thread, and neither of them promotes "Creationism", an Evol red herring. You all just don't want to discuss what a mess Darwinism is from a scientific point-of-view. I sometimes wonder why that is but I don't worry too much about it. The nice thing about Truth, Vade, is that it is immutable and ridicule won't drive it away. Science itself is a limited form of Truth but even within that limited realm, Darwin doesn't make the grade.

301 posted on 10/13/2002 9:26:26 AM PDT by Phaedrus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson