If it's an obvious fraud then you must believe they are liars and hucksters. And don't really believe what they say they believe.
Otherwise you end up with the argument that these very learned and credentialed men are stupid fools.
Posted on 08/31/2007 3:21:59 AM PDT by monomaniac
On the one hand you have "...and then the magic happens." On the other hand you have "...and then a miracle occurs." So if you claim evolution has no scientific basis then how can you say ID does?
LMFAO
The knowledge there is no evidence of the ID god scares them.
The evidence of evolution (macro evolution) is non-existant. What irks the ID crowd is that one theory has become dogma without supporting evidence.
One heck of an engineer.
So your complaint isn't that a theory without supporting evidence has become dogma. It's that your theory without supporing evidence isn't the one.
A rambling wreck from Georgia Tech, no doubt.
The evidence is non-existant to creationists because they absolutely refuse to see it--for religious reasons. Evolutionary scientists have no problem seeing the huge amount of evidence that is out there, with more coming each year.
And to paraphrase your second statement: What irks scientists is that dogma wants to become science without supporting evidence.
And when evolutionists discover that God originated life, then what?
Do they become "creationists"?
Great question. I'll give you the answer: they continue with their work researching how life evolves. What did you think would happen?
Just out of curiousity, but how do you think they’ll “discover” something like that?
If you insist in making religion into science then when science finds evidence which support evolution, what does that say about your religion?
That's because "modern science" precludes the supernatural. It assumes a priori that there is nothing outside the natural. Hence it (modern science) presupposes the philosophy of materialism.
But their Groupies are nevertheless working very hard; that's why you're here, isn't it?
If it's an obvious fraud then you must believe they are liars and hucksters. And don't really believe what they say they believe.
Otherwise you end up with the argument that these very learned and credentialed men are stupid fools.
Go Ben!
Bullshit. Science precludes making assertions about things that cannot be studied by empirical methods.
No phenomenon that can be studied is off limits.
Quantum phenomena are weirder than anything imagined by philosophy, but they are consistent and regular, and lend themselves to observation, experimentation and quantification.
"Evidence" that only supports evolutionary theory if you accept the premise of Darwinism before examining the evidence. So that's exactly how it's done: "Wow, a new bone! We know before we even study it that it supports Darwinism, we just have to decide how!"
You can talk about the huge amount of evidence all you like, but if that evidence were examined in a cold, critical, unabashedly scientific light, it would no more support Darwinism than it would support the notion of the man in the moon. Evolutionary theory is a house of cards held up by circular reasoning.
MM (in TX)
How can this be? Isn’t science our God?
Science and Multiculturalism the religions that aren’t called religions...
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.