Not silenced, just concidered of little usefullness.
ID appears to be obsessed with one potential factoid that doesn’t nicely align with the known forces affecting the Model (Evolution) over time. As if somehow that was an important detail.
Yet I have not seen an ID school of Medicin take a substantially differnt form resulting from using ID in place of Evo and more importantly have obtained significanly better results because of it. Probably because even the Anti-Darwin groups admit it’s the right model for changes going forward. It’s only the extension of it to the Past, specifically Darwins “Oragin of the Species” which is being argued.
Not silenced, just concidered of little usefullness.
>>>>Once again, your opinion. There are too many scientists now that disagree.
ID appears to be obsessed with one potential factoid that doesn’t nicely align with the known forces affecting the Model (Evolution) over time. As if somehow that was an important detail.
Yet I have not seen an ID school of Medicin take a substantially differnt form resulting from using ID in place of Evo and more importantly have obtained significanly better results because of it. Probably because even the Anti-Darwin groups admit it’s the right model for changes going forward. It’s only the extension of it to the Past, specifically Darwins “Oragin of the Species” which is being argued.
That’s not true of all scientific disciplines but even if it was, what’s your point? ToE and origins is primarily what I’m interested in.
Godless liberals haven’t been objective about:
journalism
politics
education in general
science (as we now see with banning stickers on books)
law
etc. etc. etc.