(The following is the best excerpt from a long, long post full of fundamentalism)
You are the one redefining my theology, ID is not Creationism because it's not a Christian doctrine. Behe was and is a molecular biologist and professional educator. He knows the difference between a scientific argument and a religious one.
Evolutionists don't.
33 comments
If they know the difference they sure don't show it. the only time they use any sort of "scientific" evidence is when they are trying to debunk evolution. Unfortunately they're grasp of even the most basic concepts of science cause them to spout profoundly erroneous ideas.
@old viking: and a false mustache.
Behe is a Bozo. ID is a farce that demeans science, violates logic, and insults Christianity by making God an incompetent designer who must constantly tinker with his creations(so much for the perfect God of fundies) and therefore destoys one of the core tenets of Judeo-Chrisitanity.
If the design itself were "intelligent" from day Zero, and downplaying the notion of a "designer", evolution would be its best evidence.
But I'm thinking this stipulated biological "intelligence" can better be expressed as simple opportunism, from crystals to polymers to lipids to whatever might happen afterwards, given the proper environment.
My suspicion, though, is that it's a MITOCHONDRIAL CONSPIRACY!!!1!
FWIW, there was a beer volcano in the fridge tonight....
Except ID was invented by a lawyer in order to combat evolution that could get around the Supreme Court decision that deemed creationism to be religion, not science. So it seem you are the one who doesn't know the difference between religion and science. This is not surprising, since the purpose of ID, and scientific creationism before it, was to deceive fundies who don't know any better.
"molecular biologist"
"Behe was and is a molecular biologist and professional educator."
So is Ken Miller, in fact he's a much better one who has won awards for his teaching, as well a written the standard texts for teaching the subject.
"He knows the difference between a scientific argument and a religious one."
Behe admitted, in court and under oath, that under his definition of what is a scientific argument, astrology would qualify as science.
Clearly, Behe has more than a little difficulty separating fact from fantasy. But then as a capricorn, he would!
"Behe was and is a molecular biologist and professional educator."
So is Ken Miller, in fact he's a much better one who has won awards for his teaching, as well a written the standard texts for teaching the subject.
"He knows the difference between a scientific argument and a religious one."
Behe admitted, in court and under oath, that under his definition of what is a scientific argument, astrology would qualify as science.
Clearly, Behe has more than a little difficulty separating fact from fantasy. But then as a capricorn, he would!
Clearly, Behe has more than a little difficulty separating fact from fantasy. But then as a capricorn, he would!
No no no - capricorns are pragmatists . It's pisceans who have problems separating fact from fantasy. Sometimes. Though not when it really counts...
Ironically, the displacement of openly religious creationism by creationism camouflaged as science in the form of ID, in an environment hostile to openly unscientific religious claptrap, is itself a good example of speciation and the evolutionary mechanism.
"Behe was and is a molecular biologist and professional educator. He knows the difference between a scientific argument and a religious one.
Evolutionists don't."
And unfortunately for Behe & Creationists, Judge John E. Jones III didn't either, when he made his decision concerning Kitzmiller vs. Dover.
So if it's anything that's defiining your theology, it's the law .
And said judge who gave that ruling, thus destroying 'Intelligent Design' once and for all? No less than one appointed to that Federal Court position by President George Dumbya Bush, himself a proponent of Creationism/'ID'.
Irony can be such a cruel bitch, eh Mark? Judge Jones' ruling made teaching ID in schools illegal. The precedent has been set.
Creationism/'ID' is bollocks. Evolutionary theory is superior. The law says so.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
