You're the one that brought up Dover. Its your side that claims ID is pure religion. You're the one that continues to fail to present evidence that supports such a claim. All you've done is avoid this matter, while continuing to add to your number of mere assertions that lack supportive explanations or evidence
Like I said... you're long on talk but short on substantiation
I didn't ask you to disprove ID. Your comprehension skills are poor. You agree with the Dover claim of that ID is not science, but religion. I asked you to prove that by finding & presenting at least 1 crumb of religion that you might find within ID scientist's work that they've presented as science. Its easy to simply make such claims but its an entirely different matter to actually back them up with evidence
@Chuichupachichi There is no "cosmological evolution"--yet you continue to mix the two sciences. It's a common mistake by the untutored that causes scientists to face palm.
If you disagree with cosmology or evolution you'd do well to debate them with actual scientists like Hawkings & Meyers. Just prepare to have your arrogance humbled.
Listening to you is like visiting Superman's bizzaro world of opposites where up is down, black is white and reality is the complete opposite of what you believe.
@Chuichupachichi I'm not required to disprove intelligent design, it's your side that has to prove it. But all we get are unwarranted speculations and fallacious assumptions. The abject failure of god theories masquerading as science was nicely demonstrated by the outcome at Dover vs Kitzmiller.
The case for speciation through mutation and natural selection is well understood and demonstrated by those who study the science. So your opinions on the matter cannot be taken seriously.
C'mon, what's the matter? At least reply with a report of what your research has, or hasn't, yielded. You wouldn't want the readers of this thread to reasonably conclude that you're reluctant to address the matter, due to the truth being in conflict with your "deeply rooted evolutionary beliefs"... would you?
Simply the fact that you've already failed to address this most relevant matter, is nothing less than you letting this cat out of the paper bag. You also failed to explain Cosmological Evo
Well, you're long on talk but short on substantiation. Since you continue to speak with great confidence in the validity of your position, then my request should be of no difficulty for you. With great boldness do you merely assert that Intelligent Design is simply "crap spewed". Certainly, such an abrasive assuredness would easily find & present at least an inkling of religion, taken from amongst the abundance of theoretical theology made available by ID scientists
@Chuichupachichi Don't waste your time revealing your transparently obvious bias, your perception of events is distorted by your preconceptions. The only "farce" was the crap spewing from Michael Behe's mouth. Even his own son was embarrassed. You are not convincing in the least and you couldn't prove your way out of a paper bag. If you want to be convincing, take a graduate course in evolutionary biology FIRST and stop pretending you know what you are talking about---you don't.
@Chuichupachichi Despite your intellectual dishonesty and posturing, the real reason you reject evolution is that it conflicts with your deeply rooted god beliefs. You would prefer to reject what science confirms rather than have it clash with a belief system you cling to with emotional vested interest. I dare say that if you had no belief in god you would very likely accept evolution. Fortunately your ignorance is not longer allowed to be taught in place of real science in public schools.
David Barton is a lying POS...
imyyz4u 2 months ago
If your religion needs government to enforce it's religious rites then your religion is crap.
jjason23296 5 months ago
You're the one that brought up Dover. Its your side that claims ID is pure religion. You're the one that continues to fail to present evidence that supports such a claim. All you've done is avoid this matter, while continuing to add to your number of mere assertions that lack supportive explanations or evidence
Like I said... you're long on talk but short on substantiation
Chuichupachichi 6 months ago
@sweetsweatyfeet
I didn't ask you to disprove ID. Your comprehension skills are poor. You agree with the Dover claim of that ID is not science, but religion. I asked you to prove that by finding & presenting at least 1 crumb of religion that you might find within ID scientist's work that they've presented as science. Its easy to simply make such claims but its an entirely different matter to actually back them up with evidence
Chuichupachichi 6 months ago
@Chuichupachichi There is no "cosmological evolution"--yet you continue to mix the two sciences. It's a common mistake by the untutored that causes scientists to face palm.
If you disagree with cosmology or evolution you'd do well to debate them with actual scientists like Hawkings & Meyers. Just prepare to have your arrogance humbled.
Listening to you is like visiting Superman's bizzaro world of opposites where up is down, black is white and reality is the complete opposite of what you believe.
sweetsweatyfeet 6 months ago
@Chuichupachichi I'm not required to disprove intelligent design, it's your side that has to prove it. But all we get are unwarranted speculations and fallacious assumptions. The abject failure of god theories masquerading as science was nicely demonstrated by the outcome at Dover vs Kitzmiller.
The case for speciation through mutation and natural selection is well understood and demonstrated by those who study the science. So your opinions on the matter cannot be taken seriously.
sweetsweatyfeet 6 months ago
C'mon, what's the matter? At least reply with a report of what your research has, or hasn't, yielded. You wouldn't want the readers of this thread to reasonably conclude that you're reluctant to address the matter, due to the truth being in conflict with your "deeply rooted evolutionary beliefs"... would you?
Simply the fact that you've already failed to address this most relevant matter, is nothing less than you letting this cat out of the paper bag. You also failed to explain Cosmological Evo
Chuichupachichi 6 months ago
@sweetsweatyfeet
Well, you're long on talk but short on substantiation. Since you continue to speak with great confidence in the validity of your position, then my request should be of no difficulty for you. With great boldness do you merely assert that Intelligent Design is simply "crap spewed". Certainly, such an abrasive assuredness would easily find & present at least an inkling of religion, taken from amongst the abundance of theoretical theology made available by ID scientists
Chuichupachichi 6 months ago
@Chuichupachichi Don't waste your time revealing your transparently obvious bias, your perception of events is distorted by your preconceptions. The only "farce" was the crap spewing from Michael Behe's mouth. Even his own son was embarrassed. You are not convincing in the least and you couldn't prove your way out of a paper bag. If you want to be convincing, take a graduate course in evolutionary biology FIRST and stop pretending you know what you are talking about---you don't.
sweetsweatyfeet 6 months ago
@Chuichupachichi Despite your intellectual dishonesty and posturing, the real reason you reject evolution is that it conflicts with your deeply rooted god beliefs. You would prefer to reject what science confirms rather than have it clash with a belief system you cling to with emotional vested interest. I dare say that if you had no belief in god you would very likely accept evolution. Fortunately your ignorance is not longer allowed to be taught in place of real science in public schools.
sweetsweatyfeet 6 months ago