Posted on 10/02/2008 9:32:57 AM PDT by SmithL
The result of which is agnostic.
“This endless protesting that evolution is only a theory is damaging the creation argument more than its opponents are.”
Unless terminology has changed since I went to school I’ll stick to this verbiage to make my point. It would take more faith for me to believe in the evolution theory than the creation theory. Nuff said!
It would take more faith for me to believe in the evolution theory than the creation theory.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I believe that is a much more effective way of stating your case.
That’s fine for physics, but there are plenty of theories in biology and other disciplines that cannot be expressed in purely mathematical form.
that’s why I don’t take most biologists seriously as real scientists. Biology is full of fuzzy, liberal ‘thinking.’
Now that would be an interesting debate question, wouldn't it?
He should also apologize for promoting a lie about Gov. Palin. She did not attempt to ban any books. This story is getting extremely old and everyone knows it isn’t true. It makes those who continually reference it look stupid, biased and very careless about research and sources.
Then I can’t take you seriously when you talk about what constitutes the difference between a theory and a guess. Your definition of what a theory is seems to be a private one, not a scientific on.
Then I can’t take you seriously when you talk about what constitutes the difference between a theory and a guess. Your definition of what a theory is seems to be a private one, not a scientific one.
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.