To: Junior
Not really. It needs to be disproven as valid science before it can be legitimately excluded from science.
To: Fester Chugabrew; Junior
(ID) needs to be disproven as valid science before it can be legitimately excluded from science.Done and done.
Even its main proponent can't justify it as science without redefining the word. That's PC nonsense we wouldn't stand for if a Lib proposed it.
405 posted on
01/04/2006 8:01:46 AM PST by
highball
("I find that the harder I work, the more luck I seem to have." -- Thomas Jefferson)
To: Fester Chugabrew
You're bantering semantics. ID does not rise to the level of a science; even its proponents admit this.
By your lights we should have to prove astrology or necromancy are not sciences, otherwise they should be taught in science class.
406 posted on
01/04/2006 8:04:34 AM PST by
Junior
(Identical fecal matter, alternate diurnal period)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson