Bush Praised for Defending Free Speech on Theory of Life's Origin.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Smidlee

Veteran
May 21, 2004
7,076
749
NC, USA
✟21,162.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
sidiousmax225 said:
Ya, im sure vaccine creation is a worthless science.
No, a lot vaccine are actually created by intelligent design. I would personlly hate to take a vaccine that wasn't. (of course randomness also plays a part in the fact that there's a small chance that it could kill me.)
 
Upvote 0

revolutio

Apatheist Extraordinaire
Aug 3, 2003
5,910
144
R'lyeh
Visit site
✟6,762.00
Faith
Atheist
Smidlee said:
I totally agree that ID is no threat to science but I don't see TOE = science. the parts of evolution that is really science isn't what been debated. It's the part that's beyond the reach of science that's been debated. There is only one alternative to evolution than is creation. Either man evolved or he was created (made). Either it happen without ID or with ID. If you automaticly dismiss creation then there isn't no way to falsify evolution. this is how scientist are programed to think in biology. This isn't having an open mind.
I don't understand what you mean about the non-science part of evolution, or that there only being one alternative to evolution, or that evolution can't be falsified without creation, or how scientists are programmed to think.

You really confused me here could you rephrase that?
here's two examples can't be proven directly by science. (which requires faith)
-man and ape have a common ancestor
- The existance of God
You can look indirect evidence in science of both by the uses of appearance and human reason:
- these bones have similarities of both man and ape . Compare man's to ape's DNA
- The eye and flagellum have similarities with human designed machines.
there is the "information" similarites with both DNA and a complex computer program.
I don't know how you concluded that common ancestory can't be proven, that is a rather broad statement, saying that something can never be proven.
But I have just one thing to say: ERVs.

Personally I would like to see this double standred removed in biology. I still enjoy watching nature programs though. I let the scientist have the bone while I take the meat.
Could you explain the double standard? I understand that you think scientists are biased against creationism but could you explain how this is expressed.
It hard to miss what the scientific community believes , I remember being bombarded with evolution (even at the time i didn't know it) teaching since the first grade. Boy, I surely know this. It almost like without TOE we would still be in the dark ages. I'm sure paleontologist would strongly disagree too since without evolution story then all they are is bone diggers and grave robbers. Evolution does help sell some of the more boring (and the worthless)science.
What do you mean by using evolution to sell things?
 
Upvote 0

the Colonel

STARGATE SG-1!
Oct 1, 2003
3,312
184
51
Michigan
Visit site
✟8,067.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
NCE Rule A.2.
There will be NO Homosexuality; Creation/Evolution; or Abortion topics or debate allowed. Creation/Evolution topics will be deleted or moved to the Creation and Evolution forum if appropriate.

Also, some of this going on (some of which has been removed):
[noflame]
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.