Replies

On the contrary, evolution cares nothing for theology, evolution is science, which by definition, cares nothing about theology. Rather, the ONLY people who attack evolution with any vigor, are religious fundamentalists.

You offer "evolution" as an entity. I mentioned "evolution defense", which is a man-made (and faith-based, I might add) process. You're changing the subject. Platitudes and canned buzzwords do not suffice.

evolution is science, which by definition, cares nothing about theology
"Science" may not. But evo-worshipers do. It has become their theology, and they pervert science by supporting it in dogmatic fashion.

If man acepted 'magic' as a scientific explanation for natural phenomena, we'd all still be throwing spears at each other.

non-sequitor. Surely you can do better than that. The subject was ID.

"You offer "evolution" as an entity. "

I offer evolution as a tested scientific theory. The scientific community agrees with me 100%, so what do you base these accusations on?

Here are some bold statements from a good portion of the scientific community:

8
http://www.nationalacademies.org/attic/evolution/
http://www.aaas.org/spp/dser/evolution/perspectives.shtml
http://genetics.faseb.org/genetics/g-gsa/statement_on_evolution.shtml
http://www.botany.org/newsite/announcements/evolution.php
http://www.nabt.org/sub/position_statements/evolution.asp
http://www.geosociety.org/aboutus/position1.htm
http://www.nsta.org/evresources
http://web.sfn.org/content/AboutSfN1/Guidlines/evolution.html
http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/evolution.htm
http://www.unc.edu/depts/msen/statement/evolution.html
http://www.science.org.au/reports/creation.htm
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/9522_statements_from_scientific_and_12_19_2002.asp

Note the first two go so far as to say ID is trash. Also two of the most influential scientific institutions, the NAS and the AAAS.

""Science" may not. But evo-worshipers do. It has become their theology, and they pervert science by supporting it in dogmatic fashion."

This is 100% your opinion. The scientific community has no problem with evolution. Where are your refernces for these outrageous claims?

"non-sequitor. "

How? If we just accepted "god dunnit" as an explanation for all natural phenomena, then science would never progress, since there is nothing to research. Do you know what non-sequitur means?

" The subject was ID."

I'm glad you brought that up. Can you please provide a link to the body of research on ID? You know, peer reviewed papers written on it, data... research and conclusions... I want to learn more about it. I want to learn what ID has tio say about genetics and diversity... Oh wait... there IS no research body on ID. How strange... almost like it's not a real field of study...