Posted on 12/30/2008 3:42:31 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
Why would evolutionary scientists take issue with the personal religious beliefs of an "information scientist", and what leads you to the conclusion of their "support for evolution"?
LOL!
Welcome to FR.
Funny, creationists have never acted like that to the best of my knowledge and yet we’re compared to dominionists by some of your compatriots.
With no precedent we’re accused of wanting to burn scientists at the stake.
It goes both ways and we’ve never done anything like that.
All we are is being ACCUSED of it and those made up scenarios are supposed to reflect on all creationists.
I’m not too bent out of shape. Given the subject matter of the article, I’m a tad surprised that they decided to quasi-censor this one...even if it is Tuesday!
Come again?
LOL...yep, it would definitely seem that they are drawing from an old playbook. And in Gernany no less!
Isn't that what "Evo" means?
What data did you use to reach your determination exactly who my compatriots are?
Can you highlight the portions that constitute the calls for violence?
For me, Evo = religion. The high priests of this religion are mostly scientists. Their followers come from all walks of life. And when the followers attempt to use force to crush honest debate, you can bet they are keying off their leaders.
So any assumption that the words you use mean the same thing as they would from anyone else is not necessarily valid?
You talk like dimensio.
Exactly who is that?
A FReeper who quit posting here a couple years ago.
Just sayin’....
My IP address is 76.202.131.XXX which places me in Longview Texas. I am sure you can verify this with the sysadmins that run this site.
Now are you going to answer my original question?
well anybody can move , after all. Just sayin.
Anyone can get a new computer.
Just sayin’....
Probably not. Why should I give away how I try to detect potential retreads?
==So any assumption that the words you use mean the same thing as they would from anyone else is not necessarily valid?
Not *anyone* else, but in a limited sense, I think that is a fair assessment. For instance, I consider creation scientists to be bona fide scientists who are simply attempting to prove that the Bible is historically accurate with respect to creation, the fall, the flood, etc. On the other hand, most Evos do not consider creation scientists to be actual scientists, even if they have the same credentials as their Evo counterparts. They consider their historical interpretation with respect to evolution to be science, whereas they consider the historical interpretation of Creation Scientists to be superstition. And in most cases, creation scientists feel the same way about the Evos. So yes, there are some problems with respect to concepts and definitions. But then again, as far as I can tell, many rival scientific theories (no matter what the subject) have similar problems to one extent or another.
That sort of paranoia can not be healthy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.