As js1138 hops and kicks, he cries out that "the Black Knight will insult anyone who dares uses facts to embarass Darwinists!"
Posted on 12/01/2007 12:39:07 PM PST by Alter Kaker
AUSTIN, Tex., Nov. 29 (AP) — The state’s director of science curriculum said she resigned this month under pressure from officials who said she had given the appearance of criticizing the teaching of intelligent design.
The Texas Education Agency put the director, Chris Comer, on 30 days’ paid administrative leave in late October, resulting in what Ms. Comer called a forced resignation.
The move came shortly after she forwarded an e-mail message announcing a presentation by Barbara Forrest, an author of “Creationism’s Trojan Horse.” The book argues that creationist politics are behind the movement to get intelligent design theory taught in public schools. Ms. Comer sent the message to several people and a few online communities.
Ms. Comer, who held her position for nine years, said she believed evolution politics were behind her ousting. “None of the other reasons they gave are, in and of themselves, firing offenses,” she said.
Education agency officials declined to comment Wednesday on the matter. But they explained their recommendation to fire Ms. Comer in documents obtained by The Austin American-Statesman through the Texas Public Information Act.
“Ms. Comer’s e-mail implies endorsement of the speaker and implies that T.E.A. endorses the speaker’s position on a subject on which the agency must remain neutral,” the officials said.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
My nephew is.
Modern fish are not ancestors of humans. We don't have code for intermediaries between corals and humans. Once you figure this out you will understand why there are no Google hits on code skipping.
So why was your comment directed to me, instead of him?
Because you started this thread and are at post #1.
Atheism is a vicious doctrine that offers zero hope.
So? What does this thread have to do with atheism?
If one were to look for the scientific credentials of Barbara Forrest, one would discover that she has none. She is a professor of philosophy at Southeastern Louisiana University. She has absolutely no scientific background has has no business lecturing on any topic related to science.
Forrest is an admitted secular humanist who testified at the Dover trial. See an analysis of her testimony Here
Almost all atheists I know are evolutionists.
Think it might have something to do with Barbara Forrest being a leader in the secular humanist movement and an avowed athiest?
Google is your friend. If Chris Comer had also scheduled a pro-ID speaker at the same time, maybe she wouldn't have been fired. Comer obviously has an agenda to promote a specific political/religious position with no regard for any balance. Fact is, Barbara Forrest won't debate ID v. Evolution with a well qualified opponent. Why do you think she won't?
It’s good to know that this person associates with known atheists.
My point is that almost all atheists I know are evolutionists.
Modern fish. Ancient fish. Doesn't matter. No known Fish has coral/human immune functionality.
Because no known Fish of any Age has that functionality, and because Fish are intermediaries between coral and humans, that means that we have DNA code skipping.
Once you figure that out you'll understand why Evolutionary Theory is living on borrowed time...because code skipping ain't evolution!
The only fish for which we have DNA information are not intermediaries between coral and humans.
Your continuing to assert a falsehood means that you are either dishonest or stupid.
There is no DNA on hand that would support Evolutionary Theory. Not in ancient fish. Not in modern fish. Fish simply don't have the immune system functionality of coral and humans.
Further, the notion that "modern" fish aren't intermediaries between coral and humans is supposition backed by no evidence whatsoever.
In short, Evolution fails when tested by DNA.
We have no DNA for ancient fish. You acknowledge in a previous post that functions can be lost or modified.
Your continuing to assert the falsehood that modern fish are intemediaries between coral and humans is either dishonest or stupid.
As js1138 hops and kicks, he cries out that "the Black Knight will insult anyone who dares uses facts to embarass Darwinists!"
You’ve lost the debate. You can’t carry on without (the same incorrect and yet repeated) insults.
That doesn't help your lost cause. To save the Theory of Evolution you'd have to show DNA in ancient fish that contradicts everything that we know about all modern Fish.
You can't do it. You've lost. You've been beaten soundly, beaten badly, and repeatedly been beaten to an intellectual pulp.
It's a thorough and complete mind-whipping.
You are left only with repeating insults and pretending that DNA in hand doesn't matter...left with pretending and *hoping* that some day magic DNA will be found in ancient Fish that saves your theory (or gives it even the most feeble of chances of surviving).
Won't happen. Fish that are intermediate to coral and humans simply don't have coral and human immune functionality.
Now I'm waiting for your grand opus as you flee yet another debate from me. And for your friends to pile on me personally rather than deal with the same facts, for that matter.
You're all rather lame and predictable that way.
Scopes willingly put himself forward as a test case, as a tool of the Darwinists.
Later on, Leftists would use the same tactics to generate more phoney cases (Griswold v. Connecticut, used to create a constitutionally non-existent "right to privacy" -which in turn was later used as a basis for Roe v. Wade; and Lawrence v. Texas, used to create a constitutionally non-existent "right to engage in homosexual sex").
The movie "Inherit the Wind" is largely fiction.
On the contrary, you could not be more wrong. Evolution is *not* natural selection, for starters. Natural Selection merely culls an existing population...Natural Selection offers no *new* DNA (and yes, there will be a test if you claim that new DNA has been evolved rather than created).
I recommend that you go study Information Theory and learn how to apply it to DNA programming. It will potentially save you from further embarassment.
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.