Posted on 09/24/2005 7:20:09 AM PDT by gobucks
I've always wondered why I found Aussies so likable; but I have another reason to like G.W. Bush - he doesn't just change things for the better here ... he has positive impact everywhere.
ping
Too bad. NS should be taught as a theory with warts and very limited utility.
DK
And many of his critics right here on FR moan regularly that he is not speaking out enough.
Here is an example of the effect one little sentence has made.
Agreed. I don't think this line from the article sufficiently credits Bush, but the connection is unmistakable:
The DVD is distributed in Australia by a Melbourne-based Christian group, Focus on the Family. Its executive director, Colin Bunnett, says until Nelson's comments only 1000 copies had been sold over four years. "But it's taken off. We've sold thousands in the last few weeks," he says.
(I wonder if this is an overseas affiliate of Jame Dobson's outfit.)
ping
Yeah it does. Same scientific core which says that when you look at a Ferrari engine with two rows of double overhead cams and six double barrel downdraft Webber carburators, you figure it was designed and engineered, and didn't just happen somehow or other.
Darwinism is the theory which says that the Ferrari engine just sort of happened. In other words, given enough time, all of that metal and oil and rubber and copper wire and what not will just sort of come together.
I'm with you on Bush's impact in this. He stood for academic freedom instead of the leftist monopoly over education, and it's clearly rippling on the other side of the world.
Using a narrow, post modern definition of science, that is.
You neo-scientists really need to widen your thought processes beyond the narrow corridor of the last 30 years.....
Of late, leading scientists have rebuffed intelligent design.
'Of late'? Now that's an understatement.
Decimation of religion. Is that your goal? If so, why? Forgive me if I don't understand the irrational zealotry of atheism on these threads, but I just can't see the higher calling (as it were) that this attitude serves.
No you are forgetting the core principal of ID. Whereas a scientist would take apart the engine and discover how it works the ID'er would accept the engine exists and ponder the wonder of it.
ID removes all investigation as everything is Gods (lets call it what it is) design, no need to look deeper than that. If you don't understand something blame ID and walk away.
Sad
I would think that it is affiliated with James Dobson. I heard once how many employees worked for FOTF and it sounded like an international coverage size number.
I take it you believe that a Ferrari or Masarati engine could just sort of happen, unassisted by any engineering or design?
RE: ID has no scientific core.
Have you ever studied fractals? Pure mathematics, and the basis of so much that we see in nature. Hard to believe that fractals occur over and over again without some sort of ID.
Religion? bobbdobbs refereed to literal creationism, the playground of fringe groups and charlatans.
No reason for religion to be harmed unless that creationists drag it, and the conservaytive movement, down with them
An intro to fractals: http://math.rice.edu/~lanius/frac/
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.