Posted on 12/24/2005 6:40:47 AM PST by truthfinder9
The following press release has angered some ID supporters. It's amazing that some ID "guys," after taking so much from Darwin Fundies, can't take criticism from within their own camp. Isn't this one of the ID supporters' complaints against evolutionists? That they ignore criticisms? While ID has accomplished a great deal in showing the flaws with evolution and how to detect design, they have put little emphasis on creating a testable model. In the past they ignored RTB because it’s “too religious.” Now they are mad because RTB has raised the scientific bar. Give me a break.
****
News Advisory, Dec. 20---Proponents of 'intelligent design' were dealt a blow when District Judge John E. Jones III ruled that ID was a religious idea with a covert agenda and therefore unconstitutional.
"Leading proponents of 'intelligent design' claim that judges and justices are motivated by an anti-Christian bias and a misguided application of the United States Constitution," says Dr. Hugh Ross, astronomer, founder and president of the science/faith organization, Reasons To Believe. "In the context of scientific credibility, these court judgments against 'intelligent design' cannot be construed as the audacious judicial moves many people make them out to be."
"As currently formulated, 'intelligent design' is not science," says internationally respected biochemist, Dr. Fazale 'Fuz' Rana. "It is not testable and does not make predictions about future scientific discoveries." Dr. Rana is the Vice President for Science Apologetics at Reasons To Believe and a leading expert in origin of life research.
"At Reasons To Believe, our team of scientists has developed a theory for creation that embraces the latest scientific advances. It is fully testable, falsifiable, and successfully predicts the current discoveries in origin of life research."
Dr. Ross and Dr. Rana present their testable model for creation in The Creator and the Cosmos and their two new books, Origins of Life: Biblical and Evolutionary Models Face Off and Who Was Adam? A Creation Model Approach to the Origin of Man. For the first time in over 80 years, this model catapults the evolution/creation controversy to an all new level-from science vs. religion to science vs. science.
The late Dr. Richard Smalley, Nobel Prize winning chemist, had this to say about Origins of Life and Who Was Adam: "Evolution has just been dealt its death blow. After reading Origins of Life, with my background in chemistry and physics, it is clear evolution could not have occurred. The new book, Who Was Adam, is the silver bullet that puts the evolutionary model to death."
"With the creation model approach every scientific idea is encouraged to participate in this process to see which theory best fits the emerging data," says Dr. Rana. "With this cutting edge program, where advancing scientific discoveries determine which model's predictions are successful, no philosophical or religious perspective is denied access."
"While many scientists are of the opinion that science and faith don't mix," continues Dr. Hugh Ross, "the team of scientists at Reasons To Believe is dedicated to reaching the scientific community with the understanding that science and Scripture firmly support and even help advance one another. After all, science is the search for truth. We must be willing to follow the trail of evidence wherever it leads."
More ACLU allies?
Normally they wouldn't be ACLU allies, but I guess by default they are this time.
He does call himself a progressive creationist, however.
He believes the earth is billions of years old,
True.
and that God used evolution.
False. Where did you get that? Indeed, you refuted it below, perhaps unintentionally.
Please, don't put him in the creationist camp. He doesn't belong there,
False.
and doesn't want to be there.
False.
He does call himself a progressive creationist, however.
Are you familiar with its meaning? It means that God created the species progressively, that is, sequentially. Dr. Ross specifically refutes macro-evolution.
Another lie from the Ken Ham camp. Funny how "Christians" in YECism like to lie about other Christians. Anyone who actually read anything that Ross wrote knows that it's a lie.
Young-earthers are part of the reason that design has faced many roadblocks. Thanks Ken Ham and Co. Thanks for your years of psueudoscience and superficial biblical interpretations.
not a big fan of
http://www.canyonministries.com/
I take it.
ahh bet what better way to use the foolishness to "humble the wise" or to allow "scoffers" to be "willfully ignorant" that the world that was, was destroyed by water. or to fullfill the prophacy of "professing themselves wise, they become fools"
I dare say they make a compelling case that the massextinctions shown in the fossil record has been mis-interpreted as many, when there was only one mass extinction caused by a hydro-tectonic catastrophe written about in many, many different cultures.
lets not forget it was creationist Antonio Snider that proposed this image in 1858 based on geologic features, fossil record(similarities cross oceans), AND his understanding of Genesis 1:9.
http://www.visual-evolution.com/images/geology/tech1.gif
"I dare say they make a compelling case that the massextinctions shown in the fossil record has been mis-interpreted as many, when there was only one mass extinction caused by a hydro-tectonic catastrophe written about in many, many different cultures. "
It's only compelling when you ignore the fact that violent "hydro-tectonic catastrophe" can't create layered formations, seperated species of life, etc. They say, "Oh look, here's one or two examples of different life mixed together, so let's ignore the thousands of examples of life that didn't die that way." YECism is just one fallacy after another.
hahaha, yes you have experience/replicated a global hydrotectonic (and the various mini events embeded in such) catastrophe, to "know" what it can and can't produced and to "know" what types of sorting/settling that occured.
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.
