-----Original message----- From: "mex sara" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:27:15 -0800 To: [email protected] Subject: [Stratalist-ot] Re: "Expelled, No Intelligence Allowed"
> > On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 3:23 AM, mex sara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 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 > > > > 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 > > > > 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 > > > > mx > > ps the point of intelligent design is to prove divinity i thought > rather than an envolvement of intelligence pre se Heaven forbid should any scientist prove the existence of God. The Darwinists simply can't have that. Like I said, when you get to define ID, you get to knock in around anyway you like. And, when we use different definitions to debate the same topic, we can yell and scream and insult one another more often. I'm rather sick to death of such crap, which is why I'm being careful to describe my understanding of ID. But really, take a look at "Expelled," then ask yourself why Darwinists are so ready to defend a theory that doesn't answer all the questions it purports to answer, including the origins of life. Besides, how can you claim to completely understand the origins of species without knowing the origins of life itself? I'm just as fascinated by the evolution mechanism as any biologist, but I also find the oringins of life fascinating. I'd like sceintists to research that, too, and if ID is part of a multi-faceted approach to answering that question, that's okay with me. 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
