Is there any other motvation?
Just science that shows the pillars of Darwinism to be dead wrong (Miller Urey, the Finches). Oh, and probably the total lack of any evidence of one species turning into another. But that's it.
Sunlight hit some amino acids and created life, and humans and maple trees have a common ancestor. It's rock solid science and questioning it is like questioning heliocentrism.
Owl_Eagle(If what I just wrote makes you sad or angry,
"Just science that shows the pillars of Darwinism"
There are thousands of scientific theories..how man y of these people are also trying to force schools to teach other scientific issues one way or another? Their interest in this issue is that they think it contradicts their religion.
Evolution and Christianity are not in conflict...which makes this particularly sad.
"Sunlight hit some amino acids and created life, and humans and maple trees have a common ancestor."
If common ancestry is a lie, then why are chimps or other great apes genetically very close to humans? And why do all living species share genes? And why are we genetically closer to apes than to, say, trees? And why are their different species and genus to begin with? Why are their fossils showing transitional apes-humans? Why do humans from different parts of the world look different? And why weren't there humans back in the time of dinosaurs?
Evolution/Natural Selection is "just a theory" like the theory of relativity, the quantum theory, and the theory of plate tectonics.
That puts creationism in the company of math, reading and history, and just about any subject that might spark independent thought and a suspicion of socialism.
Pennsylvania public schools are among the worst in the U.S.
Gee, really? I've been studying this subject for thirty years, and haven't seen anything like that yet. Perhaps you could list it for us?
(Miller Urey, the Finches).
How in the hell do those cases allegedly "show the pillars of Darwinism to be dead wrong?" And yes, I've heard the creationist blathering about it, but even if the creationist nonsense on those two cases was correct (and it's not), even *that* wouldn't "show the pillars of Darwinism to be dead wrong", because those cases aren't even "pillars of Darwinism" -- the mountain of 150 years of accumulated evidence, across multiple cross-confirming lines, is the actual "pillar of Darwinism", and you can't make that go away by trying to kick the legs out from any minor side issue.
Are you sure you know what in the heck you're talking about?
Oh, and probably the total lack of any evidence of one species turning into another.
This is, quite simply, complete horse crap. I myself have seen and verified a vast amount of evidence of one species turning into another.
Are you just parroting creationist pamphlets? Because no one who has followed any science journal for the past thirty years could possibly have missed the massive evidence for evolution, which continues to accumulate daily, and then say something as vastly ignorant as you have here.
Look, if you aren't qualified to discuss a topic, do us all a favor and keep your misinformation to yourself.
Sunlight hit some amino acids and created life,
Wow, you've learned your "science" by listening to the creationists' cartoon-version misrepresentation of it. That's like "learning" about geopolitics by raptly listening to Cindy Sheehan.
and humans and maple trees have a common ancestor.
Yes they do, because there's massively overwhelming evidence for that conclusion.
It's rock solid science and questioning it is like questioning heliocentrism.
Indeed, although many people are ignorant enough to try, because they've read a few creationist pamphlets and think, "now I are an expurt".
When ID comes up with some "science that shows the pillars of Darwinism to be dead wrong", let us know. By the way, Miller Urey has nothing to do with the Theory of Evolution, but you knew that already.