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

To: thomaswest
What is your objection to inferring in this context?

I have more than one objection, the first two being similar. Such inferences are often presented with a unjustified certitude. They are labeled as hard science when in fact they are nothing of the kind. There is ample room for misinterpretation of the evidence when it is assumed from that start that common forms are the result of common history (it's called intellectual laziness). Those who draw them not only think their ideas are entitled to an exclusive hearing by law in public schools but also proceed to use the courts to enforce them. Other than these I am aware of no further objections, your Honor.

81 posted on 10/14/2006 3:23:41 PM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies ]


To: Fester Chugabrew
intellectual laziness

What greater "intellectual laziness" exists than that of ID?

The IDists hyave reported no laboratory results, have never gone on a field expedition, and the Discovery Institute has never discovered a single thing.

How lazy is it to simple take a text written 2000 years ago by people in a trbal society who had not notion of an atom, no coherent notion of the Earth, no notion of cause and effect as presently unde4rstood, and then claim this represents "scientific and spiritual truth" for all time?

That is surely lazy thinking.

90 posted on 10/14/2006 3:43:48 PM PDT by thomaswest (The truth will make you free. But it may tick you off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | 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