[zebra 2]

I agree almost completly with Ann's expressed political views. She has a devastating pen and she's almost always right on target. But, she would do herself a favor, along with the rest of us conservatives, if she would steer clear of areas obviously outside her expertise--especially evolution. For the life of me, I can't see why it's on her agenda. It's not a political issue. Well grounded opinions about evolution flow from years of study. Ann's remarks betray her ignorance and make her look like a fool to folks like me who would otherwise be staunch admirers. Worst of all, they give conservatism a black eye amoung educated people of all political stripes.

[7thson]

She states in her book that back in the 80's, the Chinise uncovered fossils before the Cambrian(sp) period that tends to disprove the theory of evolution. When a school teacher brought this up in class - a biology teacher - with no reference to God, the ACLU got involved and the school teacher was fired. What she is stating about evolution, is that the liberals embrace it to such a degree that they will not abide any argument against it in the public school system.

[SampleMan]

I think you are missing the point of people like me (and Ann), who see a difference between accepting scientific thought and accepting secular zealotry, which pushes beyond what is actually known.

A bit off subject, but I see very little difference between a television psychic and an archaeologist that recreates an entire civilization from a few shards of pottery. Have you read my post #31?

Why do your politics demand religious purity (in this case lack of religion)? I don't demand that Conservatives be Christians.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Her erroneous writings on science (not to mention her downright ugliness regarding widowhood) makes me wonder if her politics are really correct. If she cannot even get statements of science correct, why should we believe anything else she has ever said. (Same logic as with Clinton's lying.)

[MEGoody]

It's not a political issue.

Obviously, that's an opinion not shared by some.

Worst of all, they give conservatism a black eye amoung educated biased people of all political stripes.had to fix that. Your bias is shown by your implication that anyone who is educated is going to believe in evolution. You know that isn't the case, but you won't admit that publicly.

[Radix]

"It's not a political issue."

You got that from years of study?

Well grounded opinions about evolution flow from years of study.

No doubt years of study, and observations went into the TOE, but to suggest that the matter is not political? ..Well, you might want to reconsider that notion.

[Liberal Classic]

I agree almost completly with Ann's expressed political views. She has a devastating pen and she's almost always right on target. But, she would do herself a favor, along with the rest of us conservatives, if she would steer clear of areas obviously outside her expertise--especially evolution. For the life of me, I can't see why it's on her agenda. It's not a political issue. Well grounded opinions about evolution flow from years of study. Ann's remarks betray her ignorance and make her look like a fool to folks like me who would otherwise be staunch admirers. Worst of all, they give conservatism a black eye amoung educated people of all political stripes.

Thanks for bringing some sense into this thread.