Skip to comments.
Scientists shun Kansas evolution hearing
Washington Times (via India) ^
| 08 April 2005
| Staff
Posted on 04/10/2005 3:53:04 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340, 341-360, 361-380 ... 941-946 next last
To: dmanLA
Dr. DumbBleep's $250,000 offer! We are vanquished! Vanquished!!
341
posted on
04/11/2005 7:05:06 PM PDT
by
VadeRetro
(Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
To: BootsOnTheGround
In 1384 97% of people polled believed Earth was flat . . .Where did you get this information?
To: RightWingNilla
If you'd like, I have collected the handful of filks I've written and put them up on my
website.
343
posted on
04/11/2005 7:09:19 PM PDT
by
Junior
(FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC)
To: PatrickHenry
Nevertheless, the biotech industry hires no creationists How do YOU know? The applied science of biotech requires no faith in macroevolution.
344
posted on
04/11/2005 7:10:02 PM PDT
by
HiTech RedNeck
(No wonder the Southern Baptist Church threw Greer out: Only one god per church! [Ann Coulter])
To: Dimensio
No, but information communication implies such.
345
posted on
04/11/2005 7:10:50 PM PDT
by
MacDorcha
("Do you want the e-mail copy or the fax?" "Just the fax, ma'am.")
To: Fester Chugabrew
"Where did you get this information?"
www.pulled_it_out_of_my_***.com
I get a lot of my best information from that site.
346
posted on
04/11/2005 7:10:52 PM PDT
by
BootsOnTheGround
(A free America is the World's last hope.)
To: VadeRetro
They were related to Adam and Eve and deserved the extra punishment. YEAH thats right. They were related. After all thats what evolution sa....oh wait.
To: HiTech RedNeck
The applied science of biotech requires no faith in macroevolution.The bio-tech industry would be stupid to make belief in evolution a prerequisite for employment. As for universities . . . we already know their "wisdom."
To: dmanLA
It seems many of you are absolutely convinced that evolution explains the origin of life. Evolution does not cover the origin of life. It only explains what came after.
BTW, Dr. Dino doesn't have a quarter of a million dollars to give away, so he'll never pay off. Hell, if he had that kind of money the IRS would've seized it by now.
349
posted on
04/11/2005 7:14:08 PM PDT
by
Junior
(FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC)
To: BootsOnTheGround
Dang. I thought I was the only one who knew about that web site.
To: RightWingNilla
They're related by Common Design (creo version) and thus deserved the extra punishment.
351
posted on
04/11/2005 7:16:11 PM PDT
by
VadeRetro
(Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
To: dmanLA
Who is this Dr. Kent Hovind?
He would bet that much of his own money?
Gosh evolution must be false.
To: VadeRetro
They're related by Common Design (creo version) and thus deserved the extra punishment. Thou must obtain exogenous citric acid and eat oranges and/or lemons for all of eternity!!
To: PatrickHenry
What are some documented cases of the type of evolution necessary for Darwinian - even on the microevolution level - in other words where information is added to the DNA sequence through mutations? As opposed to mutations which lose information, which is what evos like to point to as observed cases of evolution?
To: Junior
Dead matter doesn't imply once living, it's just a common term for organic material that isn't "alive"
Not "no longer alive" simply "isn't alive"
355
posted on
04/11/2005 7:22:55 PM PDT
by
MacDorcha
("Do you want the e-mail copy or the fax?" "Just the fax, ma'am.")
To: MacDorcha
Now we're judging people's screen names? let's get back to the subject at hand please!!!
356
posted on
04/11/2005 7:23:04 PM PDT
by
Gava
To: lasereye
What are some documented cases of the type of evolution necessary for Darwinian - even on the microevolution level - in other words where information is added to the DNA sequence through mutations? As opposed to mutations which lose information, which is what evos like to point to as observed cases of evolution? Why do you ask? Is that the only thing holding you back from accepting the theory of evolution? Would evidence of that change your mind?
357
posted on
04/11/2005 7:23:49 PM PDT
by
PatrickHenry
(<-- Click on my name. The List-O-Links for evolution threads is at my freeper homepage.)
To: Junior
Rather have KISS. And considering KISS is like number 8 on my list...
358
posted on
04/11/2005 7:25:13 PM PDT
by
MacDorcha
("Do you want the e-mail copy or the fax?" "Just the fax, ma'am.")
To: MacDorcha
The Bible refers to the "circle" of the Earth.
359
posted on
04/11/2005 7:25:19 PM PDT
by
rwfromkansas
(http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=rwfromkansas)
To: Gava
Just noting the meaning of their names and what it implies. Thats what names are for, expressing to others who we are.
If he establishes himself off the bat as completely opposing Christ (or any religion) how can we trust him to be unbiased in his studies and claims?
360
posted on
04/11/2005 7:28:22 PM PDT
by
MacDorcha
("Do you want the e-mail copy or the fax?" "Just the fax, ma'am.")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340, 341-360, 361-380 ... 941-946 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson