You seem to have a disconnect regarding the content of science in general. It tends to operate with tentative assumptions, one of which happens to be intelligent design. When you open your mouth and say something "is not science," you speak out of ignorance regarding its limitations.
No, the cops have not been knocking at my door. But a certain judge in Dover, PA thinks it is his prerogative to prohibit mention of the idea that intelligent design might better explain the ubiquitous presence of organized matter that performs specific functions.
You do not have a scientific answer to intelligent design. All you have are emotional rants.
Hilarious. Not content with attempting to shove ID into science, now you're asserting it's an assumption of science. You make this stuff up as you go along, don't you?
But a certain judge in Dover, PA thinks it is his prerogative to prohibit mention of the idea that intelligent design might better explain the ubiquitous presence of organized matter that performs specific functions.
"A certain judge in Dover, PA," heard all the evidence and issued a ruling. His ruling even referred to the evidence presented extensive testimony. You're not even capable of holding a thought from one post to the next. Why should I listen to you?
You do not have a scientific answer to intelligent design. All you have are emotional rants.
Fester, do you work in a movie theater? You're great at projection. Many posters have addressed scientific issues on the Theory of Evolution, and they've addressed the reasons ID doesn't measure up. They've told you the way science works, and the tests a theory must pass before it's considered science. You've ignored them all.