Who here believes in intelligent design and believes that it should be taught to kids

[jamesmichael7]

Originally Posted by redjako

haha.

I don't know why religious folks can't reconcile themselves by saying "well, God was probably smart enough to setup the universe such that man came about in a scientific fashion."

Oh wow

Many prominent "religious folk" have always held to this. Google the following sometime:
C.S. Lewis
John Polkinghorne
Bernard Ramm
Alister McGrath

ID is inherently an arreligious issue at its core. Only when people attach their religious or antireligious baggage to it does it take on a religious nature.

[baatar]

Originally Posted by Xenu

What is "the old Darwinism"?

The actual theories as put forth by Darwin. Since him, his works have been in constant flux to try to keep up with scientific discoveries. That's why I called Darwinism old.

[bobbylight**]

Originally Posted by RuRu

I am his wife. Husband and wife share everything together. Of course I saw everything you said. But I haven't heard about you after he blocked you months ago on AIM.

You are a sad person. If you spent as much effort in life as you do making a fantasy world online then you would have a better life.

I won't waste more time with people like you. Say what you want to say. I won't worry about the reputation on a website. You know the truth.

LOL. This schism in atheism on sherdog rivals the schism of 1054.

[Xenu**]

Originally Posted by baatar

The actual theories as put forth by Darwin. Since him, his works have been in constant flux to try to keep up with scientific discoveries. That's why I called Darwinism old.

So it's a strawman?

Why not deal with modern evolutionary synthesis?

[bobbylight**]

Originally Posted by Xenu

So it's a strawman?

Why not deal with modern evolutionary synthesis?

Why not deal with sites other than wikipedia.

[Xenu**]

Originally Posted by bobbylight

Why not deal with sites other than wikipedia.

What does wikipedia have to do with the existence of modern evolutionary synthesis, (aside from demonstrating that attacks on a "frozen in time" 150 year old theory is a strawman by showing that modern evolutionary synthesis exists)?

Exactly which part of that article do you find objectionable, fallacy boy?

[bobbylight**]

Originally Posted by Xenu

What does wikipedia have to do with the existence of modern evolutionary synthesis, (aside from demonstrating that attacks on a "frozen in time" 150 year old theory is a strawman by showing that modern evolutionary synthesis exists)?

Exactly which part of that article do you find objectionable, fallacy boy?

All of it. Darwin is the devil.

Seriously though, any website or article I wouldn't be allowed to use in a college paper shouldn't be able to be used in an internet argument.

[baatar]

Xenu,

That's my point: Intelligent Design demands the acceptance of scientific data--not the denial of it. I was just pointing out the difference between ID and Creationism.