Skip to comments.
"Intelligent design" not science: Vatican paper
Reuters via Yahoo! ^
| 01/19/06
| Tom Heneghan
Posted on 01/19/2006 1:33:32 PM PST by peyton randolph
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220, 221-240, 241-260 ... 601-606 next last
To: DarkSavant; Ichneumon
221
posted on
01/19/2006 5:27:37 PM PST
by
PatrickHenry
(Virtual Ignore for trolls, lunatics, dotards, scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
To: PatrickHenry
I just hate it when ween goes through phases. Ween becomes just too darn unpredictable.
222
posted on
01/19/2006 5:28:28 PM PST
by
b_sharp
(Science adjusts theories to fit evidence, creationism distorts evidence to fit the Bible.)
To: plain talk
To: xmission
That one is definitely borderline. I was directed at those who bash catholics which could be creationists or evos or ...
It wasn't directed at another poster so I'll give it a 1/2 mark.
Evos 1/2
AntiEvos 2
224
posted on
01/19/2006 5:31:37 PM PST
by
b_sharp
(Science adjusts theories to fit evidence, creationism distorts evidence to fit the Bible.)
To: b_sharp
I make one typo in six years, and look at the grief it's causing me. I get no respect.
225
posted on
01/19/2006 5:31:53 PM PST
by
PatrickHenry
(Virtual Ignore for trolls, lunatics, dotards, scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
Another 1/2 attack.
Evos 1
AntiEvos 2
226
posted on
01/19/2006 5:33:07 PM PST
by
b_sharp
(Science adjusts theories to fit evidence, creationism distorts evidence to fit the Bible.)
To: furball4paws
yawn. Demonstrate a single cell creature developing into a human being and perhaps someone may consider your pathetic brainwashed point of view.
Pathos, pathos. My whole life is immersed in pathos - placemarker.
To: b_sharp
Another 1/2 attack.
I'd give number 4 a whole mark. It was directed to payton who looks like a full blown evo from his posts, in anticipation of the creationists showing up.
I can't vouch for the anti-evo posts you are scoring because I have no way of telling which posts you are referring to.
To: furball4paws
1. Best Bond Girl - All of them with long lovely legs.
2. Best Bond movie. - In Her Majesty's Service.
3. Greatest name. - This one makes me tongue tied - Pussy Galore.
230
posted on
01/19/2006 5:36:43 PM PST
by
b_sharp
(Science adjusts theories to fit evidence, creationism distorts evidence to fit the Bible.)
To: furball4paws
"pole = poll "and I'll whack myself over the head with it, too.
Your post subject is quite a jump from the thread topic.
231
posted on
01/19/2006 5:38:29 PM PST
by
b_sharp
(Science adjusts theories to fit evidence, creationism distorts evidence to fit the Bible.)
To: b_sharp
This one makes me tongue tied - Pussy Galore.
I can hear Connery with his accent saying "I must be dreaming" after she told him her name!
To: b_sharp
Think there will be any more?
And why does the juxtaposition of "tongue" and "pussy" cause you so much consternation?
To: b_sharp
comic relief - we need it. Not many bites, though.
To: b_sharp
"2. Best Bond movie. - In Her Majesty's Service."
Spoken like a true colonial.
To: xmission
"I think we agree. If it lasts it could fit in the definition of evolution, if it doesn't it's simply a one time mutation. A good number of mutations are neutral, meaning they are not 'noticed' by selection so really do not contribute to the evolution of the population. Of course that neutral mutation may be noticed by selection later if the environment changes.
236
posted on
01/19/2006 5:42:02 PM PST
by
b_sharp
(Science adjusts theories to fit evidence, creationism distorts evidence to fit the Bible.)
To: DarkSavant
" As for the intro, it was prudent, as he didn't really have the data necessary to prove beyond a doubt what he said."
He still shouldn't have had to fear legal reprisals for daring to challenge accepted views, scientific or religious.
237
posted on
01/19/2006 5:43:26 PM PST
by
CarolinaGuitarman
("There is grandeur in this view of life...")
To: b_sharp
I make a serious post and get called "pathetic brainwashed" but a nitwit.
Bond girls are at least delicious to look at ;)
To: xmission
"Sounds like we are on the same page. I was questioning a post that said basically that the changes in how you look and how your children look is evolution. Maybe I don't understand your point? No, I don't think you missed the point. The problem is in the recognition of the point where the change is not just a few individuals but the population as a whole.
There is a caveat to that though, there are times when small subpopulations start restricting who they interbreed with and can end up evolving in a different direction and at a different rate than the larger population.
239
posted on
01/19/2006 5:48:30 PM PST
by
b_sharp
(Science adjusts theories to fit evidence, creationism distorts evidence to fit the Bible.)
To: xmission
I could see your argument if you were saying that I could see your argument if you were saying that mutations are a step that can lead to evolution instead of saying that they are evolution. Am I wrong? Am I wrong?
I think it is a question of semantics. If the horses were severely mutated and developed six legs most would say that evolution (change) has occurred. If it is a small mutation of a spot that appears and then disappears then change has occurred twice. I don't suppose that it would be incorrect to say mutations are a step that can lead to evolution. I could make a case for the statement. Mutation is change and evolution is change. Therefore change can cause other change. It would depend on the definition of mutation but if change does not occur neither does mutation.
240
posted on
01/19/2006 5:50:32 PM PST
by
jec41
(Screaming Eagle)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220, 221-240, 241-260 ... 601-606 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson