> G, we got to the point where we agreed that ID and Evolution each touch > on > the same set of data, that is, the origin of man.
I guess that's true. Evolution takes all that we have learned, the "set of data", and tries to draw testable conclusions from it. Intelligent Design looks at the same set of data and says "welp, this is too complex for us....must be God's work". So, yeah, i guess we agree here. >Since they are > contradictory, shouldn't they both be presented, in whatever class is > being > taught? If they are contradictory, it's because science continues to draw conclusions from the set of data, whereas ID says "stop doing that! Don't you know this is God? Quit drawing conclusions...." >Even more, how can it hurt a learning student to hear all of the > arguments? No one's explained that yet. I've explained it ad nauseum, but i'll do it again. Scientific arguments should be presented and discussed in science class. ID has absolutely no scientific arguments. Ergo, it's discussion belongs elsewhere. In fact, not only doesn't it belong in a science class, it makes absolutely no sense in a science class. It's akin to discussing differential equations in an acting class! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:189621 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
