Replies

Yawn. You dogmatic Darwinians are a tiresome lot.

Nice cop-out.

I believe that the ToE is a compelling explanation of the development of life.

Indeed it is. It's one of the most comprehensive and well-supported scientific explanations out there.

However, I don't believe it can be elevated to the status of scientific law

That's because theories never become laws. Laws are a completely different kind of statement in science. Theories do not get "elevated" to laws, laws are simply generalizations regarding regularly occuring observations. Laws can be very wrong; Newton's "universal" law of gravitation is wrong. Laws generalize events that occur; theories attempt to explain why those events occur. Claiming that evolution is weak because it is not a law only demonstrates your lack of understanding of scientific terminology.

nor have its adherents answered many of the tough questions that have been proposed of late.

Such as why a string of random characters typed on a screen once is not in any way analagous to an existing population of imperfectly replicating organisms? Or did you have some real questioss in mind?

When you have to depend on men in robes to enforce your scientific orthodoxy, something is deeply wrong.

We're not the ones trying to dishonestly shove a non-scientific piece of conjecture into public school science classrooms despite a total lack of any peer reviewed research on the subject.

We're not the ones trying to dishonestly shove a non-scientific piece of conjecture into public school science classrooms despite a total lack of any peer reviewed research on the subject.

No, you're the ones trying to prevent ANY questioning of the ToE from going on without a storm of personal attacks and immediate insinuations that the individual doing the questioning is a "creationist."

A true scientist welcomes challenges to their pet theories--indeed, they should be challenging those theories themselves, rather than attacking those who do. That's how scientific knowledge moves forward.