-----Original message----- From: "mex sara" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:23:16 -0800 To: [email protected] Subject: [Stratalist-ot] Re: "Expelled, No Intelligence Allowed"
> > On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 12:45 AM, Francis Drouillard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > On Nov 17, 2008, at 12:32 PM, richardsan san wrote: > > > > > >> > >> When they get to define ID, they get to knock it around any way they want. > > > > and you still haven't answered my question about why YOU think ID is > > intelligent... > > > > I think it's a stupid question, that's why. > > You might have asked "what is ID?" A: My understanding is that ID presumes > > intelligent causes are needed to explain the complexity of living organisms. > > Then you might ask next "do you think ID has any merit?" A: Not necessarily. > > They haven't proven anything yet. But until Darwinists explain the origins > > of life -- which they have yet to do -- they have no business dictating the > > terms under which that discovery will be made. That was the main lesson to > > be drawn from the movie "Expelled." > > Having extraordinary contempt for religion and the religious, you might then > > ask "do you think ID proves the existence of God?" A: Not necessarily. > > Or, you could ask: "should Darwinism be taught in out schools?" Yes. > > "Should ID be taught in our schools?" Not necessarily. > > "Should ID be excluded from the classroom?" No. Inasmuch as there isn't a > > whole lot to it yet, they shouldn't dwell on it, either. > > Does that clear things up for you, richardsan? > > > what is wrong with chaos and/or the origin of life is no ones fault > but an excellent accident I have no idea what you're trying to say in the first part of that sentence. As to the last, you have no proof that the origin of life was accidental. So, why should you stifle research that presumes there is a better explanation and attempts to find it? > btw darwins theory relates to the origin of species not the origin of > life which as far a i remember he doesn't even speculate upon It is my understanding that ID attempts to find the origin of life. Why can't scientists look to answer that question? > > do you remember when the theory of relativity proved god as if things > were relative there must be an absolute ... ignoring that the > absolute could be any thing etc > Say, didn't that guy that came up with the theory of relativity believe in a so-called "Prime Mover?" Is there an "omnipotent being" or "guiding principle" nudging things along? Some scientists think maybe so. Should they be ostracized from the science and research community for asking those questions? Francis Drouillard, PE Novato, CA 94945 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "StrataList-OT" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/StrataList-OT?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
