Posted on 09/24/2005 7:20:09 AM PDT by gobucks
Simple one-celled animals are vastly more complex than a Ferrari engine. Evolution works on the same principle as the emperor's new clothing. Once you figure it out, you'll never believe you ever believed in anything that stupid.
Anyone using Bush as a science advisor is in a big, big world of hurt. There's no evidence Bush knows the slightest bit about science.
Simple one-celled animals are vastly more complex than a Ferrari engine. Evolution works on the same principle as the emperor's new clothing. Once you figure it out, you'll never believe you ever believed in anything that stupid.
You apparently don't understand the TOE. I suggest you do some reading.
Well, Australia has never been known for scientific advances anyway. There's no reason to expect them to emerge from the dark ages now.
Wrong! The first criteria of Darwin's Theory is replication. Unless you can show me two Ferrari engines get together and produce a liter of little baby Ferrari engines, you're just blabbering more of the ignorance that's so typical of anti-science myth worshipers.
The more complex a biological system, the more obvious that it could only occur by evolution and not by design.
Well I meant it rather tongue in cheek, but yes, black monoliths teaching apes to pick up clubs or spores from space or divine intervention could be considered intelligent design. I personally like when new theories are introduced, look at "fossil fuel", or cold blooded dinosaurs...both those theories have been pretty much shattered in the last 20 years or so.
A very, very generous metaphor. I don't think I would have been that generous. I think I would have used the Chevy Vega....
I think it has to do w/ the moral license agency monopoly they have enjoyed (by implication, not outright advocacy). And the 'agents' don't want the competition. So, you are dead right about the tone. They sound just like the butch hair cut NEA types when they talk about home schooling and vouchers...
We have a federal system too. And the word 'should' also applies to us as well...
but, funny ....
"Anyone using Bush as a science advisor is in a big, big world of hurt. There's no evidence Bush knows the slightest bit about science."
Riiiiiiiigggggghhhhtttt..... you keep on repeating that. Light some incense sticks too while you are at it....
Not too surprisingly, the Creationists are ignorant of the difference between an automobile engine and a slime mold. Nor can they distinguish between the living and the non-living.
Well I meant it rather tongue in cheek, but yes, black monoliths teaching apes to pick up clubs or spores from space or divine intervention could be considered intelligent design. I personally like when new theories are introduced, look at "fossil fuel", or cold blooded dinosaurs...both those theories have been pretty much shattered in the last 20 years or so.
If ID were a legitimate, testable, falsifiable scientific theory, then it might be something new. But is is a rehash of ideas that have been around a long time.
Did you know that even the primary scientists who advocate this 'theory', Behe, Dembski and Denton, largely accept the TOE (common descent and random mutation). They think it explains most of the mechanisms of the evolution of biological systems. They just don't think it is enough to explain ALL of the complexity of biological systems. So they postulate that at selected points in the tree of life, at certain places in time, etc., that some other mechanism intervened, and that mechanism is the Intelligent Designer. Whatever and whoever that is and whenever and however the 'intervention' is done is unanswered.
Umm he's right Bush is President not Bill Nye the Science Guy. I'm sure if you asked GWB the ins and outs of Thermal Dynamics you'd get a grin and a what the heck are you goin on about boy look.
He's a quick guy but Scientiic Genius uummm no.
Tim Russert, Spring, 2004 ....
"Mr. President, what are your plans if you lose the election?"
Bush, "I don't plan to lose."
I guess this doesn't count that Bush has a good grasp of science. Ok. Fine with me....
Tim Russert, Spring, 2004 ....
"Mr. President, what are your plans if you lose the election?"
Bush, "I don't plan to lose."
I guess this doesn't count that Bush has a good grasp of science.
So your logic is that because Bush didn't plan to loose the election, and he won, that this is solid evidence he has a good grasp of science?
No I didn't. I thought the Theory of Everything (Virtual Chaos) has never been proven (nor disproved), did I miss something?
Good, we agree on something anyway!
No I didn't. I thought the Theory of Everything (Virtual Chaos) has never been proven (nor disproved), did I miss something?
What's the Theory of Everything? Never heard of it.
Also, so scientific theory is ever proven. But a scientific theory can be disproven. This makes scientific theories very vulnerable. Which is why the ones that haven't been disproven are so appealing and often very useful in everyday life.
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.