[RegulatorCountry]

Let me see if I've got this straight: some scientists honestly believe that science cannot be scientific, in the presence of intelligent design, and so they've embraced this odd attempt at end-running an inconvenient conclusion, thereby permitting the continuance of a priori beliefs. And, these scientists see no conflict in doing so, in the name of a science that forbids the exploration of certain possibilities?

This isn't science, it's propaganda.

[AndyTheBear]

...and so they've embraced this odd attempt at end-running an inconvenient conclusion, thereby permitting the continuance of a priori beliefs.

Naturalism therefore Naturalism. Thus evidence is irrelevant except to determine how Naturalism. Oh how smart they are!

They even will occasionally deign to amuse themselves with the ridiculous fantasy notion of something beyond natuarlism. Of coarse, they will do so with great arrogance, blindness, and willful ignorance...just enough to convince themselves they are being honest...before getting back to: Naturalism therefore Naturalism...

I used to be in that trap. But behind it was my unwillingness to face up to my Creator.

Until they have the courage to face it, no amount of evidence will mean anything to them. Even if a man were to rise from the dead.

[tpanther]

Let me see if I've got this straight:

Yup, this was the main reason I posted this article, as if we really needed another example of godless liberal hypocrisy!