 | | Re: In the interest of full disclosure...
|
|
(...) I've heard nothing about it in the Pittsburgh area, other than a poorly-written editorial in the Gazette. Be assured I will personally burn every textbook, funded by my tax money, that espouses creationism or intelligent design as viable (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: In the interest of full disclosure...
|
|
(...) The major scientific community? Are you basing this on Behe's statements or maybe the intro to the article? Most of the major scientific community that I know have dismissed Behe-- I know I have. He has flaws in many if his arguments. One of (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: In the interest of full disclosure...
|
|
(...) The article stated: "What distinguishes intelligent design from creationism is that it has won the backing of a minority of scientists" To my way of interpreting things "a minority of scientists" does not imply "the major scientific (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: In the interest of full disclosure...
|
|
(...) Hope away. Since you've demonstrated your inability to understand the processes of science and what science represents, your assessment of the alleged merits of Dr. Behe's theories is meaningless. (...) Yeah--just like begging the question of (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: In the interest of full disclosure...
|
|
(...) I can only hope that you take this as an indicator that the major scientific community does recognize the futility of macro-evolution explanation for how life cameinto existance and 'progressed'. The intelligence often pointed to is often (...) (24 years ago, 8-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
