Posted on 04/15/2006 11:44:16 AM PDT by SirLinksalot
I already pinged him :)
No, I'm not saying that.
By definition, a random mutation is an accident.
But the implication that a cell appeared because of a single accident is absurd.
Yes they are. And the word "selection" is a verb (See #12). Sir Linksalot has entered the world of bizarre self-parody.
Ping received.
Astounding leap of logic.
Well, since 90% of scientists are atheists and since Darwinists believe the scientists would it be that far of a stretch to believe that 90% of Darwinists are also atheists.
No it doesn't, I answered your question. The environment and potential sexual partners each select.
An honest poll of scientists would be limited to those who qualified in areas of biology and biochemistry and have actually studied evolution, or have at least had graduate level classes in population genetics.
An honest poll would limit choices to those being examined by science. That would include the conjectures of Behe, Dembski and Shapiro. I would actually be interested in the results of such a poll. Too bad no one else is.
We the undersigned, Christian clergy from many different traditions, believe that the timeless truths of the Bible and the discoveries of modern science may comfortably coexist. We believe that the theory of evolution is a foundational scientific truth, one that has stood up to rigorous scrutiny and upon which much of human knowledge and achievement rests. To reject this truth or to treat it as “one theory among others” is to deliberately embrace scientific ignorance and transmit such ignorance to our children. We believe that among God’s good gifts are human minds capable of critical thought and that the failure to fully employ this gift is a rejection of the will of our Creator. To argue that God’s loving plan of salvation for humanity precludes the full employment of the God-given faculty of reason is to attempt to limit God, an act of hubris. We urge school board members to preserve the integrity of the science curriculum by affirming the teaching of the theory of evolution as a core component of human knowledge. We ask that science remain science and that religion remain religion, two very different, but complementary, forms of truth.In addition to those 10,000, here is a link to Statements from Religious Organizations, a list of Christian and Jewish denominations, including Roman Catholics, that accept (or at least don't dispute) evolution. There is also the recent statement opposing creationism by the Archbishop of Canterbury, leader of the 70-million-member Anglican Communion.
Clergymen are usually not scientists; therefore their opinions (whether pro or con) have no special significance regarding the scientific validity of evolution. What the above-referenced opinions do indicate is that for all of these clergymen and their denominations, evolution is compatible with religion.
Some religious denominations don't agree with those described above. In addition to those Christian denominations that follow a literal reading of scripture, a partial list of others that reject evolution would include the Unification Church (Rev. Sun Myung Moon): Darwinism: Why I Went for a Second Ph.D., by Jonathan Wells , Islam: Why Muslims Should Support Intelligent Design, By Mustafa Akyol, and the Raelians.
What this tells us is that evolution is a matter of dispute among various religious denominations, not a scientific controversy. Therefore, it is inappropriate for public school science classes to be involved in this issue.
"It's par for the course that "established" scientists hate it when new theories are proposed."
ID is old and fossilized. The theory of evolution is the newer claim.
"Well, since 90% of scientists are atheists and since Darwinists believe the scientists would it be that far of a stretch to believe that 90% of Darwinists are also atheists."
Except for the fact that most people who accept evolution are in the USA are Christian.
Survey shows 2/3 of Scientists Believe in Global Warming
You didn't ask me to undermine ID, you asked me "who selects" according to the theory of evolution, and I gave you the answer.
Christians that have be corrupted by atheists?
"Where, one reader demanded, did I get the information that 10 percent of scientists accept intelligent design? I got it from a National Post (newspaper) article published two years ago, which said that 90 percent of the members of the National Academy of Science "consider themselves atheists." Since if you're not an atheist, you allow for the possibility of a Mind or Intelligence behind nature, this puts 10 percent in the I.D. camp."
Not being an atheist doesn't mean you buy into the ID drivel.
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.