[numberonepal]

Does nobody see G_d in Darwin's work except me? Can't we just all get along?

[aliquando]

I have no problem with G_d and Darwin co-existing. Neither view contradicts the other in my opinion. The only time Christians get in trouble is when the view the Old Testament as a textbook and not a guide for living. I'm sure I pissed off some people with that last statement.

[MillerCreek]

Darwin and Darwinites don't.

THAT's the thing, right there. Many of us of faith do perceive God in all things, including the use of evolution over time to accomplish what He works. Even creating Darwin.

The problem is that Darwinites don't, can't, won't. Thus, they force a limitation to the understanding and definition of what is "science" just as this judge has...his entire argument rests upon him saying that ID "isn't 'science'" while, what IS "science" is theory when and if it includes Darwin's theory of evolution.

It's all theory. Science is nothing more than postulations that a number of people agree upon as representing accuracy, and thus, "scientific fact" is "proven." There's a more complex process involved in that, and I realize I simplify here, but, in essence, nothing is ever proven as 'fact' until and unless there's acceptance of the results proving that which is postulized.

It's a case today of human limitations determined among those limiting 'science' to mere evolution that 'science' exclude other possibilities. Darwin cannot explain and doesn't account for how life came to be, and beyond that, how the Big Bang was created and begun in and of itself.

The judge, this ruling of late, seems very limited in intellect.

[July4th64]

Well of course! All we have to do to do that is to acknowledge the facts... Fact#1) Evolution is a theory...no one was there to see what happened in the beginning...evolution is one interpretation of the evidence which exists. Because it is only a theory, it requires that you have faith in the interpretations of fallible human scientists. Fact#2) Intelligent Design, creationisim or whatever, is another theory which interprets the evidence in a totally different way. It requires a faith in some sort of supreme designer/creater. All people need to do is recognize the fact that both Creationisim/ID AND darwinisim require faith.

[Antoninus]

Does nobody see G_d in Darwin's work except me? Can't we just all get along?

Me too. Both religion and science seach for the truth using different means. When sincerely pursued, they can not contradict each other.