To: hawkaw
"Well, first off, creation or I.D. should never be taught in science."
Neither should evoluation. It is, after all, only a theory, and as "far-fetched" as some believe I.D. is.
To: MayflowerMadam; PatrickHenry
Neither should evoluation. It is, after all, only a theory, and as "far-fetched" as some believe I.D. is. What do you think PH? Nomination?
289 posted on
12/28/2005 12:32:42 PM PST by
narby
(Hillary! The Wicked Witch of the Left)
To: MayflowerMadam
Neither should evoluation. It is, after all, only a theory, and as "far-fetched" as some believe I.D. is. What do you mean by "only a theory?" Can you tell me what would be better than a theory; that is, what evolution would need to achieve to be worth teaching in science?
303 posted on
12/28/2005 1:05:37 PM PST by
Coyoteman
(I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
To: MayflowerMadam
Wrong it has been tested and tested with multiple peer reviews and continues to be tested in a scientific way. The scientific theories are solid.
391 posted on
12/29/2005 12:26:10 PM PST by
hawkaw
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson