Posted on 01/16/2006 8:32:58 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
Darwinists must be an endangered species. How else to explain their 80-year need for court protection to ensure their survival?
In 1925, an ACLU-driven defense team in the Scopes-Monkey Trial wanted a court to declare that laws forbidding the teaching of evolution were unconstitutional. In recent weeks, in a courtroom in Dover, Pa., the same organization applauded a judge’s ruling that the teaching of ideas contrary to evolution, in this case Intelligent Design, were unconstitutional.
The same ACLU that once advocated for free and open discussion in schools is working to see it stifled today.
Its website boasts, “Intelligent Design is a religious view, not a scientific theory, according to U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III in his historic decision in Kitzmiller v. Dover. The decision is a victory not only for the ACLU, who led the legal challenge, but for all who believe it is inappropriate, and unconstitutional, to advance a particular religious belief at the expense of our children's education.”
Science involves observing nature and producing hypotheses which explain the data -- and of discrediting theories which don’t fit new observations. Having judges decide what constitutes science is as nonsensical as scientists issuing judicial decisions.
And the irreligious left, perpetually misusing the First Amendment, can’t identify which religion is being established. Is it that of the Jehovah’s Witnesses or of Catholicism? Perhaps Mormonism or Orthodox Judaism? Among many others, these disparate faiths all claim as canon the book of Genesis, where the religious version of creation is found.
But ironically, while no particular religion is being promoted by the teaching of Intelligent Design, there’s a belief system, which has established “churches” in several states, that is being favored by ACLU-- and court-imposed censorship: atheism, whose worldview promotes moral relativism and secular humanism.
The left maintains that Intelligent Design is merely creationism -- a literal reading of the Bible’s account of creation -- camouflaged in scientific language. But even a casual perusal of ID demonstrates there is no dependence on Genesis for any of its arguments, nor does it teach any biblical doctrine. It merely demands an examination of the evidence -- or lack thereof -- that uncountable species arose from primordial soup, or that they evolved over time from one to another.
To support Darwin’s theory, the earth should be teeming with myriad transitional specimens, but they are noteworthy, despite incessant extrapolation, only by their absence.
Other modern observations are daunting for Darwinists: digital information -- universally a mark of design -- in the genetic code and irreducibly complex structures such as miniature molecular machines within the cell which Darwin could hardly begin to imagine. Using the eye as an example, he coined the phrase, “organs of extreme perfection and complication” and recognized his theory’s inability to explain them. New discoveries only exacerbate these shortcomings.
And despite frequent references to “organic chemicals” present on the formative earth, neither Darwin nor modern scientists can demonstrate how to get from these compounds to just a single-cell living organism, or even a virus -- let alone the complex life forms. The search for that initial “spark” of life, or an explanation of why it is no longer in evidence, has been forever elusive.
Ironically, the scientific community, which anxiously tries to find evidence of other intelligent life in the universe, blatantly turns its back on the one intelligence we have the most indication of: a creator; a master chemist for whom the DNA code -- a puzzle which even our terrestrial species is just starting to grasp -- is a simple blueprint.
Even though ID relies not at all on the Bible, it does leave open the conclusion that the designer is the biblical God and this implication of God is what the Darwinists seem to fear.
So there may yet be hope for these folks since the Psalmist says, “The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom.” Let’s hope they eventually wise up.
You're trying to trick me, aren't you? Gee, quite clever.....
Using Scripture to support Creationism..how creative.
Right here:
Index to Creationist Claims: Claim CC200: There are no transitional fossils.Taxonomy, Transitional Forms, and the Fossil Record
On Creation Science and "Transitional Fossils"
The Fossil Record: Evolution or "Scientific Creation"
No transitional fossils? Here's a challenge...
Paleontology: The Fossil Record of Life
What Is A Transitional Fossil?
More Evidence for Transitional Fossils
The Origin of Whales and the Power of Independent Evidence
PALAEOS: The Trace of Life on Earth
Transitional Fossil Species And Modes of Speciation
Evolution and the Fossil Record
Smooth Change in the Fossil Record
Transitional fossil sequence from dinosaur to bird
I presented no hypothesis: I presented a logically and grammatically sound statement of comparison.
you proposed a conclusion that the statement would be useless.
this suggests, if I credit you with thorough diligence, that you have examined all conceivable applications of that statement and found them inutile.
earn that credit: show me your work - show me your null hypothesis.
I'll give you time to look up "null hypothesis".
*yawn*
the rest of the night, in fact.
Greater minds than mine have been unable to answer those questions. I have enough trouble with *outside the universe* and *outside time*.
hey don't?
You're trying to trick me, aren't you? Gee, quite clever.....
AAARRRGH! Read my other posts and see if I'm trying to trick you. No, it's just a simple innocent one-liner. Sorry if you thought it was more, but I haven't evolved to a higher life form yet.
yeah - great things to look forward to when retired
that's a non-sequitor, since after it nothing can be said.
I have enough trouble with *outside the universe* and *outside time*.
I have trouble with just the time one.
It is written: " 'As surely as I live,' says the Lord,
'every knee will bow before me; every tongue will confess to God.' "[a]
So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God.
Romans 14:11,12
you stole the (Kansas Rules) Prime Number
that's a non-sequitor, since after it nothing can be said.
Thank you. That's the goal.
As far as I know, the branching is open ended on the early side.
"NO link?"
No organisms(paths) to link with.
" The fact is that evolution begins where abiogenesis leaves off."
No. Evolution starts with known organisms, or organisms that can be demonstrated. Evolution creates it's own boundaries. If abiogenesis comes up with something, it must then link to one of the paths.
Later read.
you stole the (Kansas Rules) Prime Number
Well then, who was the lead-in? :)
Just in case you haven't seen this. I've just been sneaking a moment or two on FR the last day or two.
Didn't read it yet - bookmarking for later.
You might not even make it that far--
better check that family tree and hold on to the family jewels!
Deuteronomy 23:1-2
"He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD. A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD."
Where ya been lately?
or hath his privy member cut off,
That's painful in Britain.
I am not sure he will approve of this thread. :)
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.