Replies

science is more then a plausible concept (intelligent design).

doesn't intelligent design assume a creator as it's central premise? science is about supporting or disproving a central premise and since god or an intelligent designer cannot be proven then one needs only reject the unsupported premise to discredit the argument. one can present evidence to support or discredit evolution; it can be "argued" therefore the scientific method can be applied to it. god or an intelligent designer requires faith and cannot be argued in a scientific manner therefore it is religious and not science.

"religious" people need to leave "scientific" people alone and learn to co-exist...

"god or an intelligent designer requires faith and cannot be argued in a scientific manner therefore it is religious and not science."

Untrue. ALL science is founded upon faith. Even pure sciences like algebra are based on faith.

Algebra, for example, is based on eight unprovable axioms which are accepted on the basis of faith. Within an imagined world where these axioms are true then algebraic math is also "true". That is because every equation can be logically proved by working back to the axioms.

I reject evolution as science because, of all the brilliant people who I have had the privilege to debate, none have been able to provide a list of axioms agreed upon for this theory, let alone a logical proof that connects the assertions to these axioms. With the millions of hours devoted to this theory I find it inexcusable that none of the "experts" have taken the time to lay the foundation.

and since god or an intelligent designer cannot be proven then one needs only reject the unsupported premise to discredit the argument.

My understanding is that nothing in science is ever "proven." Therefore I reject science :-)