[Doctor Stochastic]

Mostly the ID'ers just claim that processes that they themselves cannot understand need intelligence. We must assume that the ID'ers cannot grasp these processes because again, they themselves say so.

[f.Christian]

To: f.Christian

Dakmar...

I took a few minutes to decipher that post, and I must say I agree with a lot of what you said.

fC...

These were the Classical liberals...founding fathers-PRINCIPLES---stable/SANE scientific reality/society---industrial progress...moral/social character-values(private/personal) GROWTH(limited NON-intrusive PC Govt/religion---schools)!

Dakmar...

Where you and I diverge is on the Evolution/Communism thing. You seem to view Darwin and evolution as the beginning of the end for enlighted, moral civilization, while I think Marx, class struggle, and the "dictatorship of the proletariat" are the true dangers.

God bless you, I think we both have a common enemy in the BRAVE-NWO.

452 posted on 9/7/02 8:54 PM Pacific by Dakmar

[Axolotl]

Correct, then when you have a perfectly reasonable explanation supported by a wealth of evidence ("see, the eye could evolve like this and in fact has done so more than once?"), they move on...well, then THIS next thing is too complex.

And on it goes 150 years hence.

[Not Insane]

"Mostly the ID'ers just claim that processes that they themselves cannot understand need intelligence. We must assume that the ID'ers cannot grasp these processes because again, they themselves say so. "

In the meantime, so-called evolutionists claim that all can be known and explained therefore it couldn't possibly be just "created."

A question. If we eventually know literally every single thing there is to know about life, right down to how the first strand of DNA came to be, will we have answered this question: Why?

That question is the realm of Christianity. The "how" is just a fun side topic, like trying to figure out the solution to a rubics cube.