> Jerry wrote: > I am more than willing to explore alternate viewpoints. Most of which > (in the case of evolution, creation, and ID) do not pass the > scientific smell test.
Back in college I studied a lot of physics. One class was part historical physics and we talked about a South American civilization that believed the Universe was based on the circle. They had advanced astronomy, but, because they believed everything was based on the circle, they couldn't figure out the rotation of the planets (ellipses). So they took circles to the next level: they said that not only did the planets rotate around the sun, but that they themselves moved in small circles. It turns out that their math worked and does to this day. If you look at planetary orbits from that viewpoint, you can indeed define and predict elliptical orbits with small circles. The difference between them and ID is, of course, that their solution was science and predictive while ID is not. So there's plenty of room for other *scientific* viewpoints - I've studied them - it's just that ID is not a scientific viewpoint; it's mythology in a science Halloween costume. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:213998 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
