Darwin SOS

[ocean2026]

Texas Reb its not a constitutional issue? Just because you are admittedly ignorant about the law doesn't mean that it isn't relevant to the issue of religion in schools.

Horselady - I don't often agree with you but I had already made the same point you made about Hindi howver anything not involving beer goes right by him.

[ocean2026]

Texas Reb if i have to define science -meaning you have no clue what it is ( and can't even use your computer to figure out how to learn the definition) than you will never learn anything.

But here, let's define science in a way maybe even you would understand. Its SCIENCE that determines that by putting a certain percentage of alcohol in what you drink, that you will act even more clueless than you normally do. Now even you are a scientist!

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by ocean2026

Texas Reb if i have to define science -meaning you have no clue what it is ( and can't even use your computer to figure out how to learn the definition) than you will never learn anything.

But here, let's define science in a way maybe even you would understand. Its SCIENCE that determines that by putting a certain percentage of alcohol in what you drink, that you will act even more clueless than you normally do. Now even you are a scientist!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Ocean? The reason I don't usually address your posts and/or replies pretty much boils down to what is obvious to anyone alive and reasonably sentient. You are just not worth the ink!

I don't think I have ever had the dubious pleasure of coming across anyone on any forum who is as obnoxious and superciliously condecending as you. Further, has no credentials to be either.

I used to think it might just be me taking you that way. However, in looking over old threads and all, there seems to be a certain consistency. Which is that you have an inflated opinion of yourself...and a lot of others think you are just a pompous ass.

But it really doesn't make any difference as to what others think. I am not in a popularity contest, myself. The fact I also think you are a pompous ass is incidental to the issue.

Do you REALLY think I need science defined....?

*yawns* As it is, while I go get another beer...if you are capable, please skip your silly asides about the definition of science and address the point. Quit hiding behind what some federal judge ruled. Another can just as easily rule different. The case of the Second Amemdment is a classic example of how it can go.

ALL I am saying, all I have EVER said, is that IF the origin of life is a topic? Then present both sides. What is so hard to understand about that? If the "other side" is uncontitutional? Then the law is an ass.

And by the way? What do you do for a living? Just wondering...

[catman]

TexasReb: I think you pointed out an important trait of science: that it is not set in stone and that its findings change in the light of new evidence. But that is its greatest strength: that it is self-correcting.

As you were...I didn't mean to interrupt the fine discussion that you and ocean2026 were having. (there needs to be an eating-popcorn emoticon)

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by catman

TexasReb: I think you pointed out an important trait of science: that it is not set in stone and that its findings change in the light of new evidence. But that is its greatest strength: that it is self-correcting.

As you were...I didn't mean to interrupt the fine discussion that you and ocean2026 were having. (there needs to be an eating-popcorn emoticon)

LOL Well, hell, I would be eating popcorn too if I wasn't a participant!

But seriously, I agree with all you say, CatMan. That Biology prof I mentioned earlier? He also said, correctly in my humble opinion, that most people do not have the foundation to talk intelligently on the subject of evolution.

I know for sure I don't. And hope I never came across claiming othewise. I DO know that the "missing link" is just that. Missing. Micro, but no Macro evolution...?

It is beyond me. I admit. Like throwing down my sword, in a way. My whole issue is with if the origins of life come up, then present all sides of it. Science and Belief need not at all be exclusive of one another.

BTW -- do you like your popcorn with REAL butter? Oh man, I sure do. That ol' "buttercorn" they used to serve at the Drive-Inns and theatre lobbys. Good, but not nearly enough butter on it! LOL

[BobTex]

Originally Posted by TexasReb

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Ocean? The reason I don't usually address your posts and/or replies pretty much boils down to what is obvious to anyone alive and reasonably sentient. You are just not worth the ink!

I don't think I have ever had the dubious pleasure of coming across anyone on any forum who is as obnoxious and superciliously condecending as you. Further, has no credentials to be either.

I used to think it might just be me taking you that way. However, in looking over old threads and all, there seems to be a certain consistency. Which is that you have an inflated opinion of yourself...and a lot of others think you are just a pompous ass.

But it really doesn't make any difference as to what others think. I am not in a popularity contest, myself. The fact I also think you are a pompous ass is incidental to the issue.

Do you REALLY think I need science defined....?

*yawns* As it is, while I go get another beer...if you are capable, please skip your silly asides about the definition of science and address the point. Quit hiding behind what some federal judge ruled. Another can just as easily rule different. The case of the Second Amemdment is a classic example of how it can go.

ALL I am saying, all I have EVER said, is that IF the origin of life is a topic? Then present both sides. What is so hard to understand about that? If the "other side" is uncontitutional? Then the law is an ass.

And by the way? What do you do for a living? Just wondering...

Thanks Reb ... I know better than get started ... for sure I wouild get the axe from the board here.