Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Intelligent Design Grounded in Science
CBN ^ | November 2005 | By Gailon Totheroh

Posted on 11/13/2005 6:07:54 AM PST by NYer

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 421-440441-460461-480 ... 621-622 next last
To: Ichneumon
Ad hominem is troll food. You must be a troll.

Stand in awe of a proper citation.

441 posted on 11/14/2005 8:25:11 PM PST by nanomid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon

Your reaction reminds me of the old addage about throwing a rock into a pack and then the one that gets hit is the one that yelps. You drag out the idea that a theory is really a fact in disguise. Get a life bro. You theorize because you don't know the facts not the reverse. Somehow to you a theory is not a theory it is a fact, lol lol lol, the fool saith in his heart, "there is no God."


442 posted on 11/14/2005 8:30:38 PM PST by TrailofTears (."We mock loyalty and are shocked at finding traitors in our midst." CS Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Sun
I don't know why the anti-ID folks are so afraid of something new. Science is always learning something new.

Your entire post seems to be aimed at putting ID on the level of a scientific theory, able to revise, or even replace, current scientific theories. In reality, ID is a religiously-motivated belief spun off from CS in the late 1980s following a US Supreme Court decision outlawing CS in schools.

So, ID is not something new -- it is a repackaged version of CS. It is religion in a Trojan horse, trying to assume the trappings of science to sneak in the back door.

(What's next, trying to convince us of a global flood about 2304 BC ± 11 years?)

443 posted on 11/14/2005 8:32:56 PM PST by Coyoteman (I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 439 | View Replies]

To: elbucko

I love your idea of "scientific theory" verses "religious propaganda." When you call theory fact or give it the same credibility as fact then anything goes. I could say im teaching religious theory not religious propaganda. I prefer to tell you and all the other morons who spout the party line on evolution that you cannot prove anything. YOu are a state monoply on an avenue of propaganda.

You are no different than the powerful catholic church was in the middle ages. Always wrong, but never able to admit it even when it flew in the face of the reality at hand. YOu make something so because you say it is so. At least myself and the other creationists have the gonads to tell the rest of the world that what we believe is what we believe, not what is the fact. You don't have the courage to admit that what you are doing is teaching theory as if it is concrete fact.

Too bad you squander your honesty away on useless and senseless arguments about how is doesn't mean is. YOu are a fraud and you know it. That is why you purjure the arguments that are opposite of what you come up with.


444 posted on 11/14/2005 8:35:25 PM PST by TrailofTears (."We mock loyalty and are shocked at finding traitors in our midst." CS Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: 2ndreconmarine

We don't need to add any fables to the things taught, you already have the government controlled religion and government controlled monopoly on beliefs. You are the ones bringing on the fables and the myths.


445 posted on 11/14/2005 8:41:15 PM PST by TrailofTears (."We mock loyalty and are shocked at finding traitors in our midst." CS Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman

Fact: when an observation is confirmed repeatedly and by many independent and competent observers, it can become a fact.

So you keep mentioning theory there fella. YOu don't seem to mention that evolution is a fact? I guess it is because you don't observe it or see it confirmed repeatedly by independent and competent observers. I guess then evolution is still a supposition based upon something not able to be observed etc. I guess if that is not so then it is your personal level of competence that disables the theory of evolution from being a fact. It gets so so so confusing when you try to parse out words to hide the reality of you not being able to call evolution a fact.

So then what we have is both sides giving theories of origins. The state monopoly has the badge and the gun so they get to be the ones to make the decision. They are typical oppressors, silence the other side lest they be shown to be as stupid as they look. You resent other opinions being said alongside yours. That bothers you because it makes it clear that you are using a theory, not a fact. You can say a theory is not really a theory, but it is more, but you are just lying to yourself. You can call a cow a horse if you want to, but it is still a cow.


446 posted on 11/14/2005 8:46:44 PM PST by TrailofTears (."We mock loyalty and are shocked at finding traitors in our midst." CS Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Sun

Bogus.


447 posted on 11/14/2005 9:03:08 PM PST by edsheppa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 439 | View Replies]

To: TrailofTears
Sorry, but your response is incomprehensible, beyond that you disagree with me somehow.

What I posted was a series of dictionary (google) definitions. I don't see where you can be so upset at those?!?

Take a deep breath, settle down, and try to come up with a logical response.

448 posted on 11/14/2005 9:04:18 PM PST by Coyoteman (I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 446 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman

I see you can't refute the logic in my post.


449 posted on 11/14/2005 10:54:10 PM PST by Sun (Hillary Clinton is pro-ILLEGAL immigration. Don't let her fool you. She has a D- /F immigr. rating.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 443 | View Replies]

To: Redgirl

And gravity is only a "theory" too.
---
I thought it was the law of gravity.


450 posted on 11/15/2005 5:16:18 AM PST by Stark_GOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman

"it is a repackaged version of CS."

No, it is not.

"It is religion in a Trojan horse, trying to assume the trappings of science to sneak in the back door."

And why should religion have to sneak in the back door? That statement reveals the true agenda of those who falsely conflate ID with Biblical literalism.


451 posted on 11/15/2005 5:27:07 AM PST by dsc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 443 | View Replies]

To: Sun
I don't know why the anti-ID folks are so afraid of something new. Science is always learning something new.

Oddly enough, these something news are found by people who conduct research and who understand the existing science -- not by people who are incapable of properly stating existing theory, and who conduct no research.

452 posted on 11/15/2005 5:37:13 AM PST by js1138 (Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 439 | View Replies]

To: Stark_GOP
I thought it was the law of gravity.

Newtons Laws have been superseded by Einstein's theory.

453 posted on 11/15/2005 5:39:19 AM PST by js1138 (Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 450 | View Replies]

To: TrailofTears
That bothers you because it makes it clear that you are using a theory

Funny, I kinda' thought the term "Theory of Evolution" made that pretty clear in and of itself.

454 posted on 11/15/2005 5:59:16 AM PST by RogueIsland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 446 | View Replies]

To: TrailofTears
I guess then evolution is still a supposition based upon something not able to be observed etc.

If evolution were nothing more than supposition then it would not be a "theory". If you don't understand the significance of the word "theory" in a scientific context then you are not qualified to make comments on the issue.

So then what we have is both sides giving theories of origins.

No, we have one side that has a scientific theory and another side that has logical fallacies rooted in mysticism.
455 posted on 11/15/2005 6:32:12 AM PST by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 446 | View Replies]

To: js1138
Hasn't Stark_GOP been told this before? We need to keep track of the names of the creationists who are told the difference between "theory" and "law", especially those who use the term "Law of Gravity" and are corrected on the matter so we can find out who is genuinely ignorant and who is willfully ignorant.
456 posted on 11/15/2005 6:33:14 AM PST by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 453 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio

They are neither genuinely ignorant nor willfully ignorant they are only driven by intelligent design.


457 posted on 11/15/2005 6:59:59 AM PST by MHalblaub (Tell me in four more years (No, I did not vote for Kerry))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 456 | View Replies]

To: js1138

"Newtons Laws have been superseded by Einstein's theory."
---
Poor Sir Issac. His laws have been reduced to a theory.
Next thing you know gravity will be just an unproven hypothesis causing us to be flung off the planet. ;)


458 posted on 11/15/2005 7:42:03 AM PST by Stark_GOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 453 | View Replies]

To: Stark_GOP
His laws have been reduced to a theory.

No, his laws are laws. The theory attempts to explain why the law holds. Well, under certain conditions. Einstein discovered that Newton's laws weren't as universal as previously thought. They're still laws, though, because they're not explanatory.

Theories and laws are two different types of statements. Theories do not become laws and laws cannot be "downgraded" to theory. They are not heirarchical.
459 posted on 11/15/2005 7:54:31 AM PST by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 458 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio

"No, his laws are laws. The theory attempts to explain why the law holds. Well, under certain conditions. Einstein discovered that Newton's laws weren't as universal as previously thought. They're still laws, though, because they're not explanatory.

Theories and laws are two different types of statements. Theories do not become laws and laws cannot be "downgraded" to theory. They are not heirarchical."
---
It was meant as a joke, oh ye of little humor.
Or did the part about being flung off the earth escape you while you were keeping your lists.


460 posted on 11/15/2005 8:11:24 AM PST by Stark_GOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 459 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 421-440441-460461-480 ... 621-622 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson