Non-financial boards have been closed but will continue to be accessible in read-only form. If you're disappointed, we understand. Thank you for being an active participant in this community. We have more community features in development that we look forward to sharing soon.
It took me years to figure out this subtle word game that ID plays, and how it is supposedly different from creationism. And I love reading this stuff every chance I get. How is the average high school teacher, who doesn't even specialize in evolution, supposed to read the minds of the Discovery Institute and give the kind of nuanced ID presentation that is required?I've another question.If evolution is not the absolute best explanation of the data, then where are the non-theistic claims? One could easily become the most important scientist of our time if one could make it clear that there is a better explanation of the data.These Idists like Behe like to say that they are scientists, and perhaps they are, but they are also ALL theists.There is not one atheist that sees any value in ID "theory". If there were something there, any competent scientist would jump at the chance to show it. They don't- not because ID is against their professed lack of a belief in a creator, but because there is nothing there to jump at.k
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |