Posted on 05/25/2005 3:41:22 AM PDT by billorites
The Greeks could also claim a number of fulfilled prophesies. Does this mean that the Oracle at Delphi was chatting with real gods?
I'm not particularly fond of someone who attempts to impugn my character behind my back. By the way, what on earth do you mean by Sea-Lawyer? (Clarity in your comments seems to be generally lacking.)
You stated:
OTOH creationists look for scientific data which seem to support their theory - i.e. that all species were created as they are and that one species does not develop or arise from another one.
And I asked:
Could you point me in the direction of this research? And what, exactly, would this data look like?
It's a simple question. Where is this research in creationism, and what would the data look like that supports their theory?
Here's two, but you will have to read them, and I think I probably have wasted my time looking for them
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/1351793/posts?page=36
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/backroom/1343600/posts?page=156
see above
Similarly, verification of the many historic events and places detailed in "Gone With the Wind" does not in any way bolster the claim that Rhett Butler and Scarlett O'Hara actually existed.
Authors (of any time period) commonly write their stories and characters amid actual places and events. Historical accuracy of any of these books hardly supports the truth of *all* their contents.
Dear scientist, don’t work on your mysteries. Bring us your mysteries for we can use them. Don’t squander precious ignorance by researching it away. Ignorance is God’s gift to Kansas.
ROFL!
Thanks. I appreciate but I'll be impressed when they do it from scratch.
Most of the regular participants do fine on each other.
Ah, the old Clinton excuse: "Everyone does it!" Sorry, but that hardly excuses your own false slander, which is one of the worst examples I've seen recently, so don't try to play Mr. Innocent here, or try to pretend that you're sitting on any high ground. You made a transparently false and wildly overgeneralized accusation. And you were caught at it. Deal with it.
How many bannings from arrogant know it alls screaming at each other have taken place as a result of these threads? Way too many. Or perhaps not enough in some people's opinion.
The bannings have been almost exclusively on the creationist side, by the way.
It would'nt break my heart to see these threads get killed instantly.
Yes, I'm sure you'd appreciate it if opposing views were silenced.
Horticulture, not Darwinism.
Palies now claim that all living humans have the same DNA as one early ancestor whom they believed came from Africa. Check it out.
Very well said. Science is something which can be proven by fact, data, and tangible evidence. The rest is theory, and in my case, FAITH. JK
Amen!!
So you digested both those threads in one minute? Some kind of record.
Thank you for proving my assessment of creationists. They ask a question. You supply an answer. They ignore it.
I have a cyborg beetle in my bottle. I guess it's time for the stimulus/response routine.
PH - what shall we do with Senor Beetle?
No scientist has ever taken the basic elements and made a human being. They can't even make a simple flower. Manipulating genes to make something 'new' isn't new at all.
Yes, yes, of course, you're absolutely right -- none of the vast amounts of evidence and research supporting evolution means anything at all until they can snap their fingers and create a human from nothing. Got it. Clearly, you've cut to the heart of the matter and invalidated 150 years of science, and shown why you shouldn't have to bother your pretty head actually learning anything about this topic before you form a conclusion about it. How could we all have been so blind?
(Wow, that's *SO* much easier than thinking...)
Don't get all huffy with me. I didn't come on this to debate. I could care less whether you believe in creation or not.
Call me whatever you want. I could give a damn.
"Dawkins isn't religion bashing. He's creationist bashing. There is a big difference."
Not to thin-skinned, easily offended Christians.
That's nice. Now if you're done flinging your feces, are you going to answer my question about your alleged "research", or are you going to again avoid discussing the actual topic?
Here it is again -- ask for help with the big words if you need it:
Okay, I'll bite -- exactly how (in your own words, please) is that actually "ID research" in any way? That is, how in the hell would the results of that research actually support/disprove any particular ID hypothesis, and/or distinguish it from possible alternative hypotheses? We'll wait.
Oh - by the way - did you see the Discovery Institute opened a new field office in DC?
Yes, all the better to force their agenda via lobbying the legislature instead of performing actual research. No surprise there.
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.