Posted on 12/08/2009 8:26:34 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
Thanks for the support.
“Let the free market determine how many scientists we need and which science rises to the top and is most useful. Of course, if this happened, Darwin’s unscientific evo-atheist creation myth would be doomed, and you know it.”
I have no problem with this. The problem you have is that you think that because science fraud is uncovered in places, that all science must be bogus (except if it validates Genesis, of course).
You can’t separate fraud from real science because your own science - “creation science” is a fraud - you do not have the ability to discern the difference.
“Creation Science” is a scandal, just like global warming, and you know it - or at least you would know it if you actually understood scientific concepts.
Oh, by the way, do you care to address the point that opposition to your “creation science” does not equate to opposing folks who choose to believe in “creation”?
You whined the whine - so please, if you would, address my point that you are equating two different things - one is religion, the other fraud.
How about if no legislation gets based on junk science or theory?
How about if no taxpayer money goes to fund grants for scientific research? There's plenty of private money to be raised.
If something is discovered or invented...then that's a different deal, but it still should be developed outside of government.
Let the free market "police" science.
Where do you get that from. I am posting new scientific discoveries all the time, and but for occasional lip service, they virtually all have nothing to do with Darwin's fanciful creation myth. And when it comes to biology, the researchers are virtually always forced to use the language of design and purpose to describe what has been discovered, and yet the evos keep giving the Darwinian notion of nature selecting from among random processes all the credit. Please!
==You can’t separate fraud from real science because your own science - “creation science” is a fraud - you do not have the ability to discern the difference.
As per usual, you have it exactly backwards. Creation/ID is being constantly validated by science, whereas the HMS Beagle is rapidly succumbing to the MASSIVE waves of scientific falsification, and will soon find itself in the company of all the other scientific wrecks that will flank its watery grave.
Amen to that!
Nope, just waiting my turn at the intellectual pinata you have become.
....COGs?, no wonder you have failed commercially. (Besides your mom, how many books did you sell?) Its a stupid name and you haven't figured out the whole truth in advertising aspect.
“Creation/ID is being constantly validated by science,”
Your hallucinations are not real, my friend. There is no validation of creation from science, at least not so far. I don’t fault anyone for trying - as long as they are legit - and none of the outfits you post articles from are legit, scientifically speaking. You know this, but you are uncommonly stubborn and won’t admit it.
“yet the evos keep giving the Darwinian notion of nature selecting from among random processes all the credit.”
As you know, any credit given to Darwin’s theories is backed up by research from his time until now - until and unless it is proven incorrect. Your outfits can’t do it.
“language of design and purpose” is never used as a scientific basis EVER. You mistake your guys that do this for actual researchers.
So do you see the difference between “Creation science” and the religious view of Creation yet? Do you understand how opposing “creation science” is not opposing religion?
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.