To: Fuzz
I cite Darwin's book to clarify what I mean by "evolution" (not evolving traits within an animal group (that happens all the time) but the ORIGIN of ALL animal groups requiring transference between major animal groups, of which there is no evidence).
Contrast that with the common sense and overwhelming evidence of intelligent design. People believe myths in the face of contrary evidence way beyond a reasonable doubt because they think it in their best interests to do so.
40 posted on
12/18/2013 11:40:56 AM PST by
PapaNew
To: PapaNew
Actually, there is a great deal of evidence, especially since DNA analysis.
As far as scientific pursuits are concerned, ‘common sense’ isn’t a factor.
“People believe myths in the face of contrary evidence way beyond a reasonable doubt because they think it in their best interests to do so.”
You sure that statement supports the argument you appear to be making?
41 posted on
12/18/2013 11:47:10 AM PST by
Fuzz
To: PapaNew
the common sense and overwhelming evidence of intelligent design.
Please enlighten me as to one bit of this overwhelming evidence. (I'll ignore your "common sense" line of thought, as that is your personal opinion, not shared by the whole of science OR many creationists. Or the Pennsylvania court system, despite it's current major proponents' best efforts. Of course, admitting that "intelligent design" is no more science than astrology didn't help his sad cause.)
47 posted on
12/18/2013 11:53:35 AM PST by
whattajoke
(Let's keep Conservatism real.)
To: PapaNew
overwhelming evidence of intelligent design So is intelligent design based on Jewish myth, Christian myth, Islamic myth, or Hindu myth?
To: PapaNew
Contrast that with the common sense and overwhelming evidence of intelligent design. I loved this sentence from a recent article, discussed elsewhere, supporting intelligent design: "There is no general agreement among advocates of intelligent design as to exactly where, when, or how design was manifested in the history of life." You'd think that with such overwhelming evidence, there'd be some modicum of agreement on those things. And people wonder why ID isn't taken seriously as a scientific theory!
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson