To: peyton randolph
" They can...applying scientific methodology. This is different than faith-based belief." Evolution is faith based belief. Why don't you do as do Id'ers do, and apply scientific methodology to it? I guess you just don't get it. This is what Evo's are trying to prevent!!!! ID does NOT rely of faith, it begins with a young earth theory,(which you interpret as God) and uses the same science evo's try use to prove what we (and they) observe. It scares evo's that this SAME SCIENCE fits the young earth theory better. Argue anything, and if you can keep on subject without resorting to insults I can show how SCIENCE gives proof of a young earth. You can leave your fears of God completely out of it.
To: Nathan Zachary
Is there a reason to argue with someone who posts FSM material?
21 posted on
02/15/2006 1:44:09 AM PST by
NapkinUser
(Georgia FReepers: FReepmail me to be on my 'Casey Cagle for Lt. Governor' ping list)
To: Nathan Zachary
If you're interested in discussing the age of the Earth with a scientist, then you should ping coyoteman.
To: Nathan Zachary
Why don't you do as do Id'ers do, and apply scientific methodology to it? I've yet to see scientific methods used to support ID. All arguments ultimately boil down to a creationist view based entirely on faith. Anything inconvenient with creationism is discarded. The best indictment of ID was the recent Dover decision. As noted by the judge, creationists were saying one thing to the press and saying the exact opposite under oath in the courtroom. Trying to back-door Christianity into science class through perjury is just plain wrong.
26 posted on
02/15/2006 1:53:30 AM PST by
peyton randolph
(As long is it does me no harm, I don't care if one worships Elmer Fudd.)
To: Nathan Zachary
ID does NOT rely of faith, it begins with a young earth theory,(which you interpret as God) and uses the same science evo's try use to prove what we (and they) observe. It scares evo's that this SAME SCIENCE fits the young earth theory better. You're wrong. In the Dover hearings Michael Behe explictly acknowledged that the Earth was old and that ID doesn't dispute that fact. ID is not Young Earth Creatonism, however much a lot of biblical literalists want it to be.
To: Nathan Zachary
ID does NOT rely of faith, it begins with a young earth theory Let's see you name one supporter of ID from a scientific position who endoses a Young Earth
63 posted on
02/15/2006 4:27:11 AM PST by
Oztrich Boy
(The Wedge Document ... offers a message of hope for Muslims - Mustafa Akyol)
To: Nathan Zachary
ID does NOT rely of faith, it begins with a young earth theory,(which you interpret as God) and uses the same science evo's try use to prove what we (and they) observe. It scares evo's that this SAME SCIENCE fits the young earth theory better.
I find it amusing that so many who claim to support ID not only demonstrate that they have no understanding of evolution, but they don't even have an understanding of ID! They claim that ID is backed by well-researched science, but how can their claim be trusted when they don't even realise that ID does not claim a young age for the earth?
195 posted on
02/15/2006 9:40:12 AM PST by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson