You could try Divinity school... that's one place. It sort of like studying evolution - you can study bacteria evolving, or you could study humans, and you *might* end up with similar theories, the specifics aren't necessarily the important aspect.
Anyway, this is a dead horse, we all know where we stand already. - Matt ----- Original Message ----- From: "G Money" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Community" <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 10:13 AM Subject: Re: Why doesn't America believe in evolution? > You can't study ID. If you could, it would be science and I wouldn't mind > it > being taught in Biology class. You can't run ID experiments, you can't > test > ID theories, you can't form ID hypothesis and then test them. > > What do you want us to study, Matt? Again I ask the question, what > scientific experiments would you run to prove the existence of an > Intelligent Designer? > > On 8/23/06, Chesty Puller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> And therein lies the problem - your preconcieved notion that it's wrong, >> without having actually studied it. Unless I'm wrong - did you actually >> study ID? Which church/mosque/temple/shrine/Flying Spaghetti Monster >> bowl >> did you study at? >> >> - Matt >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Gruss Gott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "CF-Community" <[email protected]> >> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 9:49 AM >> Subject: Re: Why doesn't America believe in evolution? >> >> >> >> 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:214011 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
