To: VadeRetro; Junior; longshadow; RadioAstronomer; Doctor Stochastic; js1138; Shryke; RightWhale; ...
EvolutionPing |
A pro-evolution science list with over 300 names. See the list's explanation at my freeper homepage. Then FReepmail to be added or dropped. |
|
|
|
15 posted on
09/19/2005 6:32:10 PM PDT by
PatrickHenry
(Disclaimer -- this information may be legally false in Kansas.)
To: All
From the article:
When a proposition is empirically false, as both creationism and ID (to the extent that it makes empirical claims) are, you're free to assert its truth; you just can't call it science. The creationists had no problem with this; they just rejected any science that contradicted the Bible. But the IDers aspire to scientific truth. Unfortunately, the only way to claim that something empirically false is scientifically true is to question science's capacity for sorting out truth from falsehood, the same way postmodernists do.
17 posted on
09/19/2005 6:34:56 PM PDT by
PatrickHenry
(Disclaimer -- this information may be legally false in Kansas.)
To: PatrickHenry
To: PatrickHenry
"..Evolution is a law (with several components) that is as well substantiated as any other natural law, whether the law of gravity, the laws of motion or Avogadro's law. Evolution is a fact, disputed only by those who choose to ignore the evidence, put their common sense on hold and believe instead that unchanging knowledge and wisdom can be reached only by revelation." James D. Watson Nobel laureate and discoverer of the DNA Molecule Its a shame we need to kowtow to some so-called christians for their voting block. There are plenty of Christians who believe in God/Christ, but not in Santa Claus
56 posted on
09/20/2005 3:41:08 AM PDT by
Vaquero
("From my dead cold hands")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson