Not in this sense, no:
Posted on 01/20/2005 12:54:58 PM PST by Jay777
ANN ARBOR, MI — The small town of Dover, Pennsylvania today became the first school district in the nation to officially inform students of the theory of Intelligent Design, as an alternative to Darwin’s theory of Evolution. In what has been called a “measured step”, ninth grade biology students in the Dover Area School District were read a four-paragraph statement Tuesday morning explaining that Darwin’s theory is not a fact and continues to be tested. The statement continued, “Intelligent Design is an explanation of the origin of life that differs from Darwin’s view.” Since the late 1950s advances in biochemistry and microbiology, information that Darwin did not have in the 1850s, have revealed that the machine like complexity of living cells - the fundamental unit of life- possessing the ability to store, edit, and transmit and use information to regulate biological systems, suggests the theory of intelligent design as the best explanation for the origin of life and living cells.
Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm representing the school district against an ACLU lawsuit, commented, “Biology students in this small town received perhaps the most balanced science education regarding Darwin’s theory of evolution than any other public school student in the nation. This is not a case of science versus religion, but science versus science, with credible scientists now determining that based upon scientific data, the theory of evolution cannot explain the complexity of living cells.”
“It is ironic that the ACLU after having worked so hard to prevent the suppression of Darwin’s theory in the Scopes trial, is now doing everything it can to suppress any effort to challenge it,” continued Thompson.
(Excerpt) Read more at thomasmore.org ...
I'd give you some null hypotheses for the basic components comprising the theory that mutation and natural selection over time leads to speciation, but, having read enough of your posts to others, I realize this would be a wasted effort.
Mendel was Catholic, by the way. And mention of heritable traits put me in mind of one of the most obvious examples.
the joy of reading
Only if you think you've discovered a way to express yourself when it comes to - the thing, which you loosely label evolution.
The increasingly evident fact that there are no clear-cut quanta (isolated species), but everything, past and present, forms a continuum, is what common descent is all about.
But that's science, you see? You'd know to define what you meant by - sound byte. Then one could answer.
So I take it you're not a creationist.
So I take it you're not an evolutionist.
Yeah, within 6 posts, evolutionists were called psychotic, nazis, and anti-Christian. Physician, heal thyself!!
Evolution is adaptive speciation via natural selection. The scientific evidence to support that principle is overwhelming and comprehensive. What was so difficult about that?
I seriously, seriously doubt that, whether it was intended that way or not ;)
Please explain your non-sequitur.
your proposal was analogous to the following statement:
Because two plus two equals seven is a constant, it is clear that spontaneous generation is indeed the way of the universe.
My rebuttal was analogous to the following:
Well, actually, it is a known, observable, readily demonstrable fact that two like units plus two like units never amount to more or less than four like units. Because the arithmetic of your principal statement is false, the derivative statement -reliant upon that false math- regarding spontaneous generation is automatically made specious.
That is what some people call "critical analysis" or "logic".
so, again, please explain how you managed the leap from "as this tenet of a constant, unchanging, pre-scripted code is the central leg of your proposal, your proposal fails the test of empirically observable fact." to "By your logic I can kick my computer and lessen instances of the "Blue Screen of Death". Then I could load my "new more complex code" onto your hard drive to spread the wealth."
No, because they're samples along the continuum of morphological change, and not being presented as discrete entities.
In fact, it's the anti-evolutionists who commit the fallacy of quantizing the continuum, by trying to assert that these transitionals are all "separate" creatures, and that there exist no further links between them.
They are book burners, or rather more recently, sticker burners too. :-)
I beatcha to it. Nya, nya, nyaaaaa!
But that's - the whole question. That's the sum of the difficulty. What the heck - is it? How do you state it? How do you define it? I don't mean to sound like some bad impression of Fishburn's Morpheus. But c'mon. Science. You know? Definitions. Specifics. Formulas, even?
Science is prety complicated stuff
Revelation is much more so. But Catholics have four principle Creeds, the first three of which are very succinct, and to the point (the fourth's only just a bit longer, and covers more ground). Many statements of scientific theory are similiarly succint, and to the point. There's more to it. Each word or phrase may have a series of books devoted to it. There's FAR MORE to Catholicism beyond the creeds. But there they are. And they exist. And where it this, for evolutionism? Where's that Theory you hear so many talk about?
What caused evolution to happen is a completely different science, abiogenesis
Not what was the first cause for the first creature - but rather do you have any theories to explain this 'fact' of evolution about the speciation and changing species of one, and etc., however it is you define it?
If I get the time I'll reasearch the hoax theory. If someone else has the time, just do a google search. It's there.
Are mutation and natural selection these "basic components" to your particular Theory of Evolution, or did you mean something else?
the theory that genetic mutation and natural selection over time leads to speciation.
simple enough for you?
Not in this sense, no:
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.