"If what you say is true, a great deal of geology and geophysics would be invalid, since we haven't observed one continent crash into another."
No, but we CAN observe the fault lines and use them to predict eathrquakes and volcanoes. We assume that there was a Panacea. The placement of fossiles suggests it. The fact that these fossiles are found where they can be predicted is pretty on the mark as well.
"Likewise, astrophysics would be on very shaky ground since the time over which we have observed the sky is the blink of an eye compared to the age of the universe.
It provides a prediction that is consistantly accurate."
Hate to break it to you, but astro-physics has a "Pardon our Dust" sign over its main lobby. You also don't cover a lot of it in a science class. You cover it in an astro-physics class.
"'Observable' doesn't mean 'observable in real time'."
That wasn't covered in my chem lab. Who told you that? Science requires one to confirm with one's senses. We can visually confirm that gravity affects all large bodies in the universe. We can visually confirm the abiogenesis does not happen. We can visually confirm species mutation... yet we cannot do the same for species changing to another species of its own accord. We can visually confirm our ideas about the stars.
Noone has every "felt" evolution on any medium, excepting their own minds.
Eugenie Scott’s letter of September 30, 2003 to members of the Texas State Board of Education purports to show that intelligent design research is not published in the peer-reviewed literature. But in fact, Scott has purposely failed to disclose certain key items of information which demonstrate that intelligent design research is in fact now part of the mainstream peer-reviewed scientific literature. (taken from "Intelligent Design and Peer Review
A Response to Eugenie Scott and the NCSE")
Here- (to the quote I gave you)
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=1621&program=CRSC+Responses&callingPage=discoMainPage+
Here-
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CI/CI001_4.html
(care to explain the Existance of ISCID as a legit entity?)
Here-
http://www-acs.ucsd.edu/~idea/IDjournals.htm
And that was just a yahoo search and 3 sites on the first page. (of about 278,000 reults.)
You claim ID is not publishing peer-reviewed works? That's called being intellectually dishonest.
Is it more reasonable to think you simply need to sit out for a while on the whole debate and mull over the resources? I do it all the time. Try it.
Panacea=Pangea
Lack of sleep.
This bill pertains to the university environment where astophysics is taught. Based on this, a young earth creationist could sue the school for not teaching creationism in a PhD astrophysics course. Then agein, I doubt if there are that many young earth creationists that would get accepted into an astrophysics graduate program. 'Observable' doesn't mean 'observable in real time'." That wasn't covered in my chem lab. Who told you that? Science requires one to confirm with one's senses.
It is true that observable does not mean observable in real time. Your chem lab must've been a freshman one where they didn't want to confuse you with cutting edge research becasue you lacked the background. Basically, most of modern chemistry is not observable with one's senses. You can't visually see the free induction decay induced in a nuclear magnetic resonance experiment. You can't visually see the infrared absorption used to detect the chemical fingerprint of any substance. You can't directly observe the picosecond laser pulses used in ultrafast kinetics experiments, nor can you see with your senses the results of those experiments. That's not real time. You can't use your senses to measure the diffraction pattern from an x-ray crystallography experiment. Even in astrophysics, it takes hours to collect enough light from a distant astronomical source to form an image. That's not real time. Based on your statement that science dictates you must confirm with your own senses, all of modern science is then rubbish becasue we measure things outside of the range of our senses.