Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is about Scientific objections to evolution. Since evolution is unproven, it is in fact a philosophy.
The scientific evidence in support of evolution has often been described by experts as "overwhelming." In fact, I would go so far as to say that any intelligent individual who seriously and unbiasedly investigates the evidence for evolution will become thoroughly convinced.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
And you need to get your money back for the schooling you too, if in fact you took any.
I know you are jealous of my all scientific education. Don't be a sore loser just becasue you are not sophisticated enough to become educated in science.
LOL I make tons of money from my college education.
The scientific evidence in support of evolution has often been described by experts as "overwhelming." In fact, I would go so far as to say that any intelligent individual who seriously and unbiasedly investigates the evidence for evolution will become thoroughly convinced.
I know you are jealous of my all scientific education. Don't be a sore loser just becasue you are not sophisticated enough to become educated in science.
LOL I make tons of money from my college education.
Here, I'll repost this from your collegues:
The evolutionist Dr. Michael Ruse says evolution is a religion.
"Renowned Canadian science philosopher Dr Michael Ruse made astonishing admissions about the religious nature of
evolution at a symposium titled ‘The New Antievolutionism’ (during the 1993 annual meeting of the American Association
for the Advancement of Science.)1 These statements shocked his colleagues because he has written a book, But is it
Science?, denouncing creationism because it is religious and was the last person expected to give the game away."
I thought they weren't supposed to teach religion in public schools. Naturalism is a religion.
From the same link:
"Law professor Phillip Johnson has severely criticized Ruse’s anti-creation testimony at the 1982 Arkansas trial at which the sorts of admissions above failed to surface. Johnson quoted Ruse as stating that it is OK to say different things on this subject to different audiences:"‘I mean I realize that when one is dealing with people, say, at the school level, or these sorts of things, certain sorts of arguments are appropriate. But those of us who are academics … should recognize … that the science side has certain metaphysical assumptions built into doing science, which—it may not be a good thing to admit in a court of law—but I think that in honesty that we should recognize, and that we should be thinking about some of these sorts of things.’"
Oops.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
