Replies

"If you believe that "political bias" exists, then please explain how Intelligent Design qualifies as science, and explain what you believe is political bias regarding the issue."

If evo is such an exacting science you could prove your theory in a classroom experiment by causing something to evolve into something entirely different. I'll wait patiently for the results of your proof.

If there was no political bias against ID you wouldn't have to team up with the leftwing demonrats to prevent it from being taught in schools.

If evo is such an exacting science you could prove your theory in a classroom experiment by causing something to evolve into something entirely different. I'll wait patiently for the results of your proof.

Your statement is not correct, and in fact it is not even logical. Theories in science are not "proven". Moreover, the validity of the theory of evolution does not imply that it should be possible to "cause something to evolve into something entirely different" in a small-scale classroom experiment. In fact, your statement suggests that you do not understand the fundamental attributes of the theory of evolution.

If there was no political bias against ID you wouldn't have to team up with the leftwing demonrats to prevent it from being taught in schools.

I did not claim that there exists absolutely no "political" bias against intelligent design. This does not change the fact that intelligent design is not science, and as such it has no proper place in a science classroom.

Evos have not yet demonstrated in the "fossil record" that one animal "evolved" into a completely different animal. They use guestimate to try to explain what is unexplainable, and miss miserably on demonstrating their claims. Why would we expect them to use a laboratory experiment to provide evidence of their claims when all of their "proof" is nothing more than speculation?