"How can challenging the validity of evolution be the end of science?"
You are challenging science with a leap of faith, with a proposition that is supernatural, untestable, unverifiable.
You are free to criticise TOE. You are free to not believe it. But within science, you must adhere to the rules of science. If the fundamental aspects of the scientific method are abandoned, to a leap of faith, science and Reason itself is in fact undermined.
Would you be against teaching ID in another class?
Do you insist ID is science?
Calling the combined scientific community at Harvard University idiots is an absolute Troll Classic, BTW.
I am sure you will be cut and pasted all over the leftist blogosphere to demonstrate how really stupid freepers are.
Well done.
I still think Mr Robinson should have vaporized your a$$.
"You are challenging science with a leap of faith, with a proposition that is supernatural, untestable, unverifiable."
** Just like evolution is supernatural, untestable, and unverifiable... :-) But then again, we don't dare talk about the secular fundamentalism of evolution.
"You are free to criticise TOE. You are free to not believe it. But within science, you must adhere to the rules of science. If the fundamental aspects of the scientific method are abandoned, to a leap of faith, science and Reason itself is in fact undermined."
** Again, just like evolution? This isn't just a criticism of an unsupportable theory, but the exposing of a zealous fundamentalist religious belief. It takes TOTAL BLIND FAITH to accept evolution...
**As for calling Harvard Scientists idiots, that was meant as a satirical, scoffing response at all of the evolution geniuses and brilliant minds that dismiss the things they can not support because it proves evolution is a cult-like con. Saying that the genesis of life is not part of evolution is disingenuous at best, but I understand why evolutionists hold this position. It certainly shows how silly evolution is, that it requires complete and total blind faith to believe it.