Posted on 09/06/2005 5:11:42 AM PDT by billorites
Why is this issue important? What is notably 'conservative' about one position?
Sorry, but Archaeopteryx is no fake. Multiple examples of this creature have been found, as well as other species which show the transition from dinosaur to bird. More and more feathered dinosaurs are being found every year.
I'm pretty NEW to FR and was enjoying THIS thread, but now I'm worried I need to use LOTS of CAPITALS around here to make a VALID point?
Surely not .... : )
I'm voting troll on this one. Only someone from the DU would show up with this type of attitude, pretend to be a Christian or IDer, and then, somewhere else on the internet, call attention to how 'wacky' people on FR can be by using this as an example.
WELL, YOU CAN ALWAYS PUT CAP-LOCK *ON* AND START EMPHASIZING THINGS WITH *ASTERISKS*. YOUR FINGER WILL GO HOARSE FROM *SCREAMING*.
I think ID should be taught in science class. Along with a new theory that god evolved naturally over billions of years. Or maybe god was designed. OK, lets modify the new theory, where god is designed by aliens who evolved naturally over billions of years. Come to think of, why bother with the aliens or god? OK, lets just have humans evolving naturally, scratch the ID teaching.
Which one that I cited isn't a fake of evolutionists hmmmmmm?
And it was the biologists you deride that deduced the fake Piltdown man.
Aaaah don't flatter your junk scientists by calling them "biologists." REAL biologists proved that Piltdown Man was a fake. Not the kooks you wish to identify as "biologists." I admire REAL Scientists. They have their jobs cut out for them sifting through the endless piles of crap evolutionists try to overwhelm them with.
The fossil record is a laboratory.
Hahaha, yeah! If you say so. Hahaha.
Sadly, you seem to think science can only be done in a room with a fume hood.
I do? Where did I say that? I believe that science deals with what 'is' and absolutes. JUNK science deals it wishful thinking and conjecture. JUNK science NEVER finds an answer to anything. Just more conjecture.
In regards to scientific language, you need an education in that area if you want to argue.
Oh but of course. It's always your ilk's conclusion that anyone who disagrees with your crap is in some way "uneducated" about what you believe. Tell me something doc. How is it that so many of us went through the same public school system and Universities you did, graduated at the tops of our classes and still remain uneducated about your ilk's propaganda?
We're bombarded with your BS theories everywhere we go. The zoo, museums, TV, radio... the list is endless yet we still disagree. Why do you suppose that is doc?
Here is a little eye-opener for you k? MOST AMERICANS (over 80%) believe that God created everything. Sorry! We're right.
We don't want creationism taught because there isn't a single shred of science present in an idea based entirely upon the supernatural. You haven't even offered a better explanation and you willfully ignore evidence right in front of you.
IGNORE IT? I've examined it thoroughly and found your "evidence" to be total BS. Show us ONE SINGLE piece of concrete "EVIDENCE" that isn't total BS.
A closed mind is a terrible thing to waste.
Oh I don't know. You're mind is sealed tighter than a drum and to be honest with you I certainly don't want the open minds of children being sealed up by a bunch of nonsense like that you evolutionists want to teach them.
This is so utterly nonsensical that I have to vote troll.
To me, this isn't a conservative issue at all. I think it is fine that some folks accept the theory and others reject it. There is nothing 'conservative' about it. I just don't understand some folks fixation on stuff like this.
troll
Yup. No "controversy" to teach about this one.
I find it salient because it involves how our tax dollars will be spent.
I mostly agree with you on this, HitmanNY--though I admit my feelings do get a tad riled by the issue, mostly because I think the whole Creationist schtick puts conservatism in bed with some genuine Neanderthals--and I just don't want to go there!
And I'm still reeling from the post that conflated Piltdown and Neanderthal fossils!
Tell you what, you name for me one single "missing link" that's been "discovered" that hasn't been proven to be a hoax and I'll buy into your "theory" of evolution.
I responded in the next post (120) with
Post 661: Ichneumon's stunning post on transitionals.
So what happened? The troll then posted 139, saying:
As I've said PatrickHenry, all of those "transitional fossils" have been PROVEN to be hoaxes.
If it's not a troll, it's some kind of total cognitive breakdown. Or both.
Yep. Like I said, there is nothing 'conservative' about being on either side of this issue. I agree with you that because of vocal (and I think misplaced) advocacy, it sort-of becomes a conservative issue because a lot of the more vocal advocates are conservatives.
Like I said, I don't see it this way. To me, it's amazing that this is even an issue. Anyone is free to believe what they want, and anyone is free to accept or reject anything they are taught in school. I attended Vassar for four years, a liberal/leftist haven, and while I got a good education, I rejected a lot of the 'truths' they taught me (social science, political science, etc ). Look how great I turned out! :-)
Alleged protectors of science need to stop lying about ID, when the truth is more than sufficient to exclude it from science classrooms.
Actually, the comparison is quite apt. One one side you have a dedicated group of researchers who have interviewed survivors, camp guards, and pored over tons of paperwork to document a widely accepted historical fact. On the other side you have a group of cranks who look for minute flaws in that research and then extrapolate those flaws into their own ahistorical theory of a "Massive Joooo Conspiracy".
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.