Posted on 01/23/2005 1:11:01 AM PST by rdb3
And it's your magic "Conjecture Sensor" that is able to tell the difference.
Glad to know about the level of confidence I can have about your research into the issue.
Nothing "magic" about it. The only way one can speak of "billions of years" of history is to offer up conjecture. Otherwise, if they/you know these things to be factual from experience and expiriment in the science lab, it would indeed be "magic." In fact, that may be a better way for schools to understand and present the Theory of Evolution.
There's a chemistry one that's pretty funny. Analogous to having Seven Spanish Angels pushing the Planets around the Earth. I did find it though.
"I frankly would not be surprised if you believed me when I tell you the moon really was made of green cheese, billions of years ago, anyway."
I guess you didn't hear we went to the moon and brought back some rocks.
Please name these people, and the institutions at which they teach.
Well, for nearly 150 years the Theory of Evolution has been repeated in the clasroom as if it were an established fact. Goebels might be pleased with the intent and tenacity, but sorely disappointed that so few swallow the story.
The ability to see yourself as that superior to everyone else, is ... scary.
I suppose you could be in more dangerous positions than just in the Evolution busting business.
"So few" as in "virtually everybody in the Western World who is not a religious fundamentalist". That kind of "so few"?
I'll twist your words to take that as what passes for an apology in gobucks land.
Mr. Chugabrew believes the moon missions were a hoax, but that's conjecture.
But ain't it fun to watch them self-destruct when faced with a competing thought?
Oh sure, I heard about that. It's what's on the other side of the moon and deep underneath. The residual elements give a strong indication that indeed, billions of years ago, green cheese RULED.
The Darwinists will never win out because their (religious) argument is baseless and pointless.
Your point being that scientists have been telling a deliberate lie in order to accomplish some agenda.
On the other hand, you have been promoting the story that Evolution is increasingly being rejected by science itself.
So who is really doing the lying? Are scientists lying when they present Evolution, or are they just "wrong"? Or are the ID promoters lying when they say that Evolution is being questioned by scientists themselves?
If it were really the latter, there would be no reason for your creationism institutes, and you would be out of a job. The very fact that there needs to be institutes promoting ID is proof that they are not part of some kind of general rejection of Evolution. The day they actually succeed, is the day they will be dissolved.
None of the above gives indisputable evidence either that the universe is billions of years old, or that all the species present in today's world are derived from a common ancestral life form. To the extent these disciplines arrange the evidence to fit pre-conceived notions of history, damn straight I'll "write them off," and so should any serious student. To the extent they expose even more the order of nature as God established it from the beginning I am happy to let them carry on without even proclaiming the obvious foundation for learning: An ordered universe created by God and given to man for study.
Those who foist the Theory of Evolution upon the science classroom are not to be confused with scientists. "Propagandists" would be a better word.
And tens of thousands of scientists are merely co-conspirators to present this bogus science for some illicit agenda.
I'm waiting for one of them to come back from the dark side and give you folks the illicitly taped confession of the conspiracy.
You know the line about conspiracies. The only conspiracy that can be kept secret is where all but one of the co-conspirators are dead.
Or, maybe you're just imagining the whole thing.
You do have a point. Goebels was able to convince a good many in his day. I'll amend that remark to say he would be disappointed that not everyone believes the lie.
And His universe has been studied. Yet you just write off the results of the study because it disagrees with your peculiar interpretation of Genesis. As it disagreed with your magic internal "Conjecture Sensor", so you just brush it off as irrelevant.
And creationists call us "arrogant".
So you are the sole judge as to who is, and who is not a "scientist".
And creationists call us arrogant.
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.