It is not the part of a free people to discard matters of reason or faith for the sake of political expedience, or out of a concern for what other people think. If this is the motivation behind those who promote the philosophy of evolution as a necessity in the basic science classroom, then they may kindly take their position next to that of the Taliban.
Meanwhile there is no such thing as a "theory of evolution." There are not enough scientific facts to back it up. What you have is a philosophy couched in scientific terms, for it is nothing more than a hopeful recapitulation of history that is not, and cannot be, the object of empirical science. Even a little child knows that just because two things look the same they do not necessarily have a common source. Evolution, insofar as it attempts to tell history beyond what has been recorded by man, does not deserve to have the word "theory" associated with it.
Educated fools are nothing new. Let them keep their philosphies in a classroom of their own so the curious can partake as they wish, but please do not consider the rest of the world stupid for rejecting the charade.
I heard a speaker, Dr. Jerry Bergman, who pointed out that WWII era Germany had the most PHDs per capita.
Ninety percent of americans are "creationist".
A small minority of 'darwinuts' think they have established religion [and federal grant money]
Educated fools are nothing new. Let them keep their philosphies in a classroom of their own so the curious can partake as they wish, but please do not consider the rest of the world stupid for rejecting the charade.
Woo, boy! You brought the noise with that one. I like it.
They don't realize the widespread understanding of what their scam is, and that no amount of arcane blather means that made-up nonsense is evidence.
It is not the part of a free people to discard matters of reason or faith for the sake of political expedience, or out of a concern for what other people think. If this is the motivation behind those who promote the philosophy of evolution as a necessity in the basic science classroom, then they may kindly take their position next to that of the Taliban.
Meanwhile there is no such thing as a "theory of evolution." There are not enough scientific facts to back it up. What you have is a philosophy couched in scientific terms, for it is nothing more than a hopeful recapitulation of history that is not, and cannot be, the object of empirical science. Even a little child knows that just because two things look the same they do not necessarily have a common source. Evolution, insofar as it attempts to tell history beyond what has been recorded by man, does not deserve to have the word "theory" associated with it.
Educated fools are nothing new. Let them keep their philosphies in a classroom of their own so the curious can partake as they wish, but please do not consider the rest of the world stupid for rejecting the charade. 1
1 Fester Chugabrew 1/30/2005 Freep City
It is not the part of a free people to discard matters of reason or faith for the sake of political expedience, or out of a concern for what other people think.
Nor did I suggest anyone do that. You might want to reread my post for actual content this time, before you go galloping off on that high horse.
Instead, I suggest that some folks drop their more *irrational* public outbursts.
If this is the motivation behind those who promote the philosophy of evolution as a necessity in the basic science classroom, then they may kindly take their position next to that of the Taliban.
Yawn. Nice speech, and I like how you got all self-righteous at the end -- nice touch -- but since that's neither what I'm saying nor what my "motivation" is, feel free to take a chill pill. I know it's all so trendy to feel "persecuted" by us "evilutionists" (see for example the paranoid creationist lie laid bare in post #669), but sheesh, man, relax.
Meanwhile there is no such thing as a "theory of evolution."
Just how impervious to reality *ARE* you?
There are not enough scientific facts to back it up.
Oh. So what's wrong with all the facts in post #158, for example? What, exactly, is wrong with all the DNA studies which produce clear evidence of common descent, and which make no sense whatsoever by any hypothesis which does *not* include common descent? For example, surely you can elucidate for us why the patterns of shared endogenous retroviruses (not to mention LINEs, SINEs, ALUs, etc.) found in DNA do *not* clearly indicate common descent? I mean, unless you're a COMPLETE IDIOT, you wouldn't make a claim like "There are not enough scientific facts to back [evolution] up" unless you were actually FAMILIAR with the amount and nature of the scientific facts which have been accumulated in support of evolutionary theory, RIGHT? So please tell us what's wrong with the DNA data I mention, SPECIFICALLY.
What you have is a philosophy couched in scientific terms, for it is nothing more than a hopeful recapitulation of history that is not, and cannot be, the object of empirical science.
Oh. Then what are the DNA studies, for example, if not "empirical science"? (Make sure you actually know what "empirical science" *is* before you attempt to respond. I've had my fill of stupid posts today.)
Even a little child knows that just because two things look the same they do not necessarily have a common source.
Well sure, which is why evolutionary biologists don't resolve issues like that, UNLIKE the cartoon-version of it the creationist sources like to paint. Are you sure you've ever taken a look at how *real* science is done, instead of the creationist straw-man?
Admit it, son, you don't have a *clue* how evolutionary biology is actually accomplished. If you did, you wouldn't make such goofy claims about it.
Evolution, insofar as it attempts to tell history beyond what has been recorded by man, does not deserve to have the word "theory" associated with it.
Why, because you stamp your feet and say so, while threatening to hold your breath until you turn blue?
Educated fools are nothing new.
As all too many anti-evolutionists are making clear on a regular basis.
Let them keep their philosphies in a classroom of their own so the curious can partake as they wish, but please do not consider the rest of the world stupid for rejecting the charade.
I don't. I do, however, consider some specific people stupid for saying stupid things (like stupidly dismissing an entire field of established science as a "charade"), and for persisting in saying them after the gaping flaws in their stupid proclamations have been pointed out to them. See for example post #158. It's got your name all over it.
Are you *trying* to make Christians and conservatives look like foolish luddites?