[Mamzelle]

re: ID is NOT scientific, never can be, because it's whole PREMISE is nonscientific. GODDIDIT is not a valid premise, because it is nonfalsifiable. )))

Hm. Now I know what ID stands for...

It is thought that we split off from chimps 5-6 M years ago...

There's lots of that nonfalsifying going on out there. And anything that can't be proven or disproven, is not science.

The real difference between the creationist and the evolutionist is that one admits he's not a scientist, and the other pretends he has no faith.

[Aric2000]

It is thought, is a MUCH different statement, then Goddidit.

The real difference between the creationist and the evolutionist is that one admits he's not a scientist, and the other pretends he has no faith.

Ahh, another one of the those, if your not a creationist, you are not a real christian, but if you understand that evolution is the best scientific theory to fit the evidence, then you are an atheist.

I have a little news for you, creationists are a MINORITY within the christian religion, most are in fact theistic evolutionists, but are not adherents to ID, because they understand that god is a faith based principle and is not and cannot be used in science.

I am a theistic evolutionist, I have my faith, but I also understand science.

[Last Visible Dog]

The real difference between the creationist and the evolutionist is that one admits he's not a scientist, and the other pretends he has no faith.

Well put!