To: Sola Veritas
Scientists can be shockingly dogmatic about pet theories/concepts.
What might be wrong with some science does not make "intelligent design" right. The theory of evolution has held up quite well. And, as a theory, it is not a final answer, it is an evolving (ba-du-bum) concept.
Even the name - "Intelligent design" - assumes a creator. That certainly can't be scientifically proven. ID relies on a religious text to attempt to make a scientific argument.
To: Egregious Philbin
ID relies on a religious text to attempt to make a scientific argument.Eeeeerrrrrnt. Incorrect.
From ARN.org:
What is Intelligent Design?
31 posted on
12/09/2004 10:12:50 AM PST by
Michael_Michaelangelo
(The best theory is not ipso facto a good theory.)
To: Egregious Philbin
as a theory, it is not a final answer, it is an evolving (ba-du-bum) concept. Which "evolving concept" should we teach as fact? I am willing to have evolution taught as an "evolving concept" as long as the evolving concepts of ID are presented as well. That's all we ask. We want a free and open debate.
100 posted on
12/09/2004 12:11:14 PM PST by
Aquinasfan
(Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson