Posted on 12/13/2004 7:42:25 AM PST by Gritty
the intolerance shown to dissenting voices that question evolutionary theories reveals a dangerous pattern of repression and censorship within the scientific establishment...
Epic poems and Boeing 747s do not come into existence by themselves, no matter how much time is available - and neither do cells, or even proteins...
"For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened" (Romans 1:18-21).Who painted the Mona Lisa? No one! It's the product of blind material forces.
Conservatives, by nature, are more tradition bound and less open to modern ideas.
See how pigeon-holing works? You don't look at the evidence, just categorise what conservatives should think.
Dataman's been a pro for a long time.....
Gentlemen, Gentlemen (and some ladies too). Please remember the following, whatever side you are on:
1. There is no such thing as Darwinism. There used to be Darwinian Evolution, but even that has passed. We are talking about Evolution, pure and simple, attempts to make a whipping boy of Charles Darwin serve no purpose, especially when I doubt few of you have actually read him.
2. For you in the middle, get a backbone. If not, prepare to have your butt chewed on by both sides.
3. There is no such thing as Truth by Consensus. 65%, 80%, 5% are meaningless. A fact is a fact, even if it is in the minority.
4. I too, would like to see Science rescued for the future, but rescued from those who try to force non-science on it and abscond with the term "science" to give an air of validity to garbage.
Damn!. It looks like I killed another thread....Unclean.....unclean...
You and I disagree on the exact meaning of some parts of the Bible. Such disagreements have been going on for millennia.
My translation of Genesis doesn't conflict with science. Your's does. That's a pity, because you're a smart guy and could be doing something proactive for God rather than attempting to tear something down that is irrelevant to Him.
Religious Conservatives are going to need every bit of political capital they can muster in the next few months on things like Surpreme Court nominees and more. It should'nt be squandered for such silly issues as this. Or, perhaps you're a DU troll attempting to distract us from what we should be doing?
Conservatives, by nature, are more tradition bound and less open to modern ideas.
Modern ideas need to be vetted, and conservatives have taken the time to vet. The conclusions disagree with Liberal thought, but as always, agree with truth.
I will stick with the word Truth. Check the link to learn who the vetters are. Truths that are illegal to teach in modern schools.
What advances do you predict ID will produce? In fact, can you name one single medical or biological leap that we might achieve via ID?
What's my translation of Genesis?
Please, they can't even provide a hypothetical falsification criteria. They just assert that evolution has already been disproven, backing up their claims by completely misrepresenting evolution.
Further, how many creationists are being hired by the biotech industry? As businesmen, biotech executives want to produce results. If creationism (or ID, creationism's little sister) were such a splendid "science," the biotech industry should be hiring all the creationists they could get their hands on. And the fruits of "creation science" should be seen in the marketplace.
I have read that some prominent leftists in the social sciences are anti-evolution because it is part of the "establishment". Not because of any evidence, but because of what it might represent.
Nonetheless, I'd love to see if they can dig something up from one of their websites. Or perhaps I'll get no response at all.
Interesting. The definition of "The Theory of Evolution" starts with generalities and winds up with "the theory of evolution." The definition of "theory" under "scientific method" says nothing whatsoever about "falsifiability" being a necessary characteristic of the same. Good thing, because theories of evolution twist the evidence in such a way as to place falsifiability beyond reach.
Thousands are! They are just forced to label themselves Evolutionists because the Cabal Of Evil Scientists wouldn't hire them if they didn't!
I'm sure they do, as a good many creationists know how to set their biases aside and do science without the baggage, not unlike Newton and Galileo.
In Popper's view, any hypothesis that does not make testable predictions is simply not science. Such a hypothesis may be useful or valuable, but it cannot be said to be science.
Wow. That's about the funniest thing I've read all day....
...except for the fact that some people will actually buy into that nonsense.
You bet! I feel personally threatened by all organized attempts to spread lies. It's particularly frustrating to see a movement that specializes in passing these big lies inside slippery, tasty, thin coatings of truth.
Holocaust revisionism, Hollywood-communists denial, FDR hagiography, global warming, creationism. Different lies, and some more evil than others. But all lies, marketed to us "for our own good".
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.