To: Moral Hazard
It's a shame that biologists don't bow to religious orthodoxy apparently
Perhaps so. But perhaps a bigger shame that so many biologists cling so tenaciously to a theory based on Darwin's 19th century understanding of cellular biology...which he himself admitted would completely break down in the event of discovery of irreducible complexity. Thank God medical science didn't stop in 1859.
21 posted on
08/19/2005 10:53:28 AM PDT by
silverleaf
(Fasten your seat belts- it's going to be a BUMPY ride.)
To: silverleaf
"But perhaps a bigger shame that so many biologists cling so tenaciously to a theory based on Darwin's 19th century understanding of cellular biology..."
So they're stupid and you know better than they do?
24 posted on
08/19/2005 11:02:47 AM PDT by
Moral Hazard
("Now therefore kill every male among the little ones" - Numbers 31:17)
To: silverleaf
But perhaps a bigger shame that so many biologists cling so tenaciously to a theory based on Darwin's 19th century understanding of cellular biology...which he himself admitted would completely break down in the event of discovery of irreducible complexity.
What biologists are still doing this, and what's this about "irreducible complexity"?
36 posted on
08/19/2005 12:33:16 PM PDT by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson