[GodGunsGuts]

ping!

[Erik Latranyi]

Countdown to the Darwin attack..........

[Alter Kaker]

The Science of Intelligent Design is sort of like the Moderate Taliban or the fiscally conservative Democrat — a great hypothesis that happens not to reflect anything close to reality.

[Rudder]

The title is erroneous. Intelligent Design is about supernatural gobbledygook, not science.

[ml/nj]

Darwinists, including Jerry Coyne

Quote from Coyne on old thread!

ML/NJ

[rmh47]

An example is the issue of embryonic homology—the Darwinian claim that embryos in various vertebrates look alike at various stages of development, and that this indicates common ancestry.

Yeah, right. Ontology recapituates phylogeny. Evolutionists rejected that idea a century ago. Sheesh.

[RobbyS]

Evolution could still be true while Darwin is false. The problem then would be that there is no scientific theory to account for it.

[FatherofFive]

I still miss Patrick Henry.

[whattajoke]

Oh, and by the way - this is a small thing, but typical of creationists who love to prop up any little thing. Some call it lying, some exaggerating (like all the fake PhD's many creationists have).

Anyway, in the linked article there is a picture of the Yale Law School with the caption, "In November 2000, Yale Law School was the sight [sic] of the Yale Design Conference, which Woodward points to as a symbolic milestone in history of the Intelligent Design movement."

The conference was sponsored by the Rivendell Institute for for Christian Thought who had no physical building at the time. The Law School always has lent out space for their meetings, which they did in that instance - but had nothing at all to do with the conference. In fact, they made sure that was known at the time.

I know how creationists like to be as factual as possible. I admit, i'm being a bit picayune here, but I can't help it.

[Revolutionary]

Darwinism has so many holes in its theory that calling it a theory gives it too much weight. The problem is that there is no end to end substitute for it. So they will cling to it regardless. Once ID can provide the methodology used and how it progressed, it will have a real shot at sending Darwinism to the dust bin of history.

One key fact: It is not survival of the fittest! It is survival of the sufficient. You must run just fast enough to catch the slowest of the prey. You must be just strong enough to dethrone the weakest leader.

[org.whodat]

ROFLOL, still have that obsession thing going on!!

[count-your-change]

Intelligent Design will be attacked by The Temple of Darwinism using a computer system that designed and built its self.