Let Us Test Darwin, Teacher Says (British Teachers Challenge Darwinism)

BBC NEWS ^ | 11/27/2006

[blowfish]

Give it up, doc. You could take ed-surv to any geological formation in the world and he would argue that it was somehow crafted from the floodwaters. He's a lost cause.

[bdfromlv]

But faith as in religious thought is written in stone as the basis for the thought and everything is derived from that. A scientist cannot have anything written as unchangeable and have no other explanation or they will be called a priest or politician. They can have a premise or hypothesis to start with but proven facts that can be changed were not really proven to begin with. No scientist can have a word of god, end of discussion beginning to an investigation or why start looking.

[narby]

despite the lack of evidence...

The ability of the faithful to blind themselves to what is staring in the face is why I stopped arguing on these threads. A human mind is easily able to believe in space aliens behind the comet, or a four thousand year old earth, or 72 virgins, whatever they are told. It's simply amazing.

That human ability to have faith in completely irrational ideas is one of the last true scientific mysteries.

[Sopater]

People aren't against evolution because they don't understand it. People are against evolution because they do understand it and are scared to face reality.

I thought that Darwinism has "passed every single rigorous test without fail". I guess that question wasn't on the test...

Anyway, I'm not against evolution because I'm scared to face reality, I'm against presenting faith as fact and calling it science.

[Sam's Army]

Wow. Someone questions you and they automtaically have "pinko liberal kin" and additionally they get called a "backwards thinking liberal".

Quite a stretch there, but I guess we shouldn't be surprised since no one is here exhorting you to "be nice".

[LiteKeeper]

Your statement indicates your lack of understanding regarding scientists who are also theists/Christians. These scientists believe there is much to be discovered in God's creation. How life works is a big question. But they are guided, as are secular scientists, with certain presuppositions. One of those is that the universe is ordered, consistent, and comprehensible...because a personal Creator created it. And because it is ordered, it can be studied, and figured out.

This doesn't mean that the sole source of knowledge is the Bible...but that the Bible informs us as the the "whys" and "wherefores" of creation.

[razzle]

The reason you are stopping discussions on these threads is a result of your eyes opening to something you don't want to hear i.e. you have been lied to by the darwinists all your life. The Piltdown man, Haeckles phony embryo drawings, peppered moths, phony "transitionals" like the Peiking man, phony mammals to whales transitionals, Miller Urey "primordial soup" experiments, etc. Most of this lies are still in our school textbooks in the effort to fool our children. Why must you and all liberals lie so often to protect your belief systems. And don't talk to me about space aliens, you are the one "believing" in unproven "facts".

[narby]

The reason you are stopping discussions on these threads is a result of your eyes opening ...

In your dreams. I've stopped arguing about science because of the impenetrable nature of the logic/brain barrier in many posters here.

When it becomes impossible to teach the ignorant, the intelligent know when to stop waisting their time.

[Jaguarbhzrd]

In other words, you quit posting because you are afraid of assimilation.

They are the creationists, you will be assimilated.

Or run off the board, whichever they deem necassary for thier rah rah Creationist party.

[editor-surveyor]

"Bla, bla, bla (waves hands) Bla, bla, bla...."

Yes doc, we're listening.

[editor-surveyor]

"...just as your pinko liberal, evolutionist kin would prefer no one ever have to get a job to pay for their welfare but, that's not the way the real world works..."

Anyone ever met a pinko that wasn't an evolutionist?

I didn't think so, carry on.

[bdfromlv]

the basic problem as you state it is not with the search for truth and facts but that there is no real definition of what a scientist is.

[the scotsman]

‘You know what I love about you guys?. You have Charles Darwin on your money. That would never happen in America..’

—US comedian Rich Hall