Re:”The fact that people think evolution has been demonstrated to be true goes to show that evolution is not being taught without bias in the public schools.
IDers (your brothers) say current small scale evolution has been demonstrated. Some creationists do also.
That poster was making some point with that line, not yet sure what it is. He needs to define ‘demonstrated’. I used human evolution as an example.
HA! The 'bias' (it is flat-out jack-boot dogmatism) in all public schools, began decades ago, as I can attest from experiencing high school 'biology class' in 1955 - in two states. I was hit with brainwashing in that direction years prior to that in ALL lower grades.
It's said that the decade from 1936 to 1947 was the scientific highpoint for evolutionist thinking, and I was there from almost the beginning, hearing all the 'evidence' for the reigning paradigm of the 'scientific community.'
The fact is, alternative explanations for all 'evolutionary phenomena' are simply not allowed, particularly if said facts endanger the evolutionary explanation as the only 'scientific' one.
Well, there is honest science, and then there is evolutionary 'science'- the first is nothing at all like the later, which demands allegiance to Father Charlie, 'natural selection' and mandatory vitriolic hatred of any suggestion of intelligent design.
But strict Darwinists are in real trouble with the recent development of Super-resolution microscopy that allows imaging at resolutions of better than 100 nanometers - some down in the 10-20 nm range.
A bacterial flagellum motor is about 60nm in diameter and its tail is 500nm long. ATP synthase is about 10x20 nm. Soon we'll be looking at live complex molecular machines running in real-time 3-D - a sight that will make the phrase 'natural selection' look as silly as the belief in a 'flat earth' during Medieval times.
Speaking of better images, the most recent images from Hubble have become a major problem for astronomers, as photos are another confirmation of the 'lumpiness problem' in cosmology, in which structure appears abruptly as far back as we can see. That is another problem (one of many) for the Big Bang theory.
I'm an 'old fart' (according to some 'lights') and I've studied more scientific literature than most FReepers with degrees have probably seen - and still at work in computer science and a mathematically demanding field (45 yrs) that involves space, satellites - which occasionally brings me into contact with NASA scientists and engineers... several of whom, I'm sure you'll be interested to hear, are in fact what the banned one on this thread referred to as 'YEC's.' I guess he would call me a YECie too. ~grin~
Have a great day, metmom. Methinks many of us are 'sickof libs.' Jim, sick'em - continue to rid this place of needless sickening dross!