Translation: "No, I don't have any, so I'll point them at Google."
oh I’ve got plenty- but I’ll refrain from listing them- I enjoy the ‘you didn’t give links so they don’t exist’ accusations. That second link by the way has more science than you can shake a stick at- but I’m sure you’ll get all tripped up over the fact that he mentions God a few times- but I assure you, focusing in on a few statements like a laser won’t undo the fact that his science is sound! Of course, you’ll no doubt join along with the critics fearful of his science and engage in the time honored tradition of ignoring the science and attacking the character.
post 25: [Looks like the mythology over science crowd are the losers]
Nope- the mythology won hands down. Biological impossibilities? Pfffff, who needs to learn about those in a ‘science’ (and I use the term VERY loosly) class? Better for a biased judge and panel to deny the teaching of science that points out htese facts- Better for an agenda driven judge to stick fingers in ears, sing ‘la la la ID contains no science’ than for the judge to actually concider the fact that his precious religion has some SERIOUS scientific problems that needs addressing. Don’t like the coutner evidences? Then by golly just make childish ad hominem attacks on the opposition and deny them the right to teach SCIENCE in it’s entirety. Better to take the imature stance that Dawkins takes and state “if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid, or insane (or wicked, but I’d rather not consider that).”
Yeehaw, now there’s a purely scientific statement right htere brother!