Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 06/20/2007 2:32:49 AM PDT by balch3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: balch3

Since “both sides” means the scientific side and the religious side, only one gets to be taught in science classes and the other may be taught in elective religion classes.


2 posted on 06/20/2007 3:18:50 AM PDT by From many - one.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: balch3
Thus, the question that Wolf Blitzer should have asked would be along these lines: "Do you think that the topic of Darwinian evolution should be taught objectively in our public schools, with evidence for and against the theory?"

I would agree with the above.

3 posted on 06/20/2007 3:22:14 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: balch3
However, there is increasing skepticism among thoughtful scientists of a central claim of neo-Darwinism, namely that complex living systems can be generated from mindless processes like random mutation and natural selection.

No there isn't.

5 posted on 06/20/2007 3:46:08 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson