Intelligent Design Theory: Science or Religion?

Love it. I foget who said that, A creationist stated that there were "NO INTERMEDIATE FOSSILS". period. Ther was a "gap" between reptiles and birds. When an intermediate bird with reptile features was found in the Solnhofen, the Creationist then said , AHA, NOW THERE ARE 2 GAPS.

wande quoted-



As that is untrue because in evolution there are no complete or fully-formed species either shown in the fossils or alive today there isn't much point in reading on.

Can you buy a B.A. with academic concentrations in Bible and Biology from Bob Jones University.

Farmerman or Rosborne should be able to tell you about the level of respect commanded by Bob Jones University.

fm wrote-



It makes sense to everybody who knows what happens to letters to the Government. What makes sense to you fm is neither here nor there in this regard and in regard to a number of other aspects of life as well. I'm telling you what actually happens.

If you get a pro-forma reply thanking you and informing you that the contents of your letter have been noted a young lady will have dealt with it.

wande wrote-



I presume from that that attacking emanations from that source is the equivalent of a straw man. One only takes it seriously in order to stick something on the branch to shoot at.

It distracts from arguing with me and I'm the only serious ider on here. On that basis putting the quote up is a form of snow to avoid answering the muzzling question, and a few others.

Unless, wande, you were happy with the quote I highlighted in which case you need to study evolution theory yourself. The idea that there are any "fully-formed" species is laughable.

spendi,

The pressure involved in addressing your "muzzling" issue is too difficult for me to handle. I therefore posted something "lighter".

Bob Jones University commands a level of respect one notch below a Spendi post. And until this moment I hadn't realized that anything could be more worthless than a Spendi post.

ros wrote- in a cascade of useless cliche-



And yet wande wrote-



It would seem ros that your principle dispute is with wande and it concerns the utility of repression disguised by cascades of useless cliche.

Why don't you reassure a fellow IDer that the muzzling question is a piece of piss and not "too difficult to handle" at all and, while you're at it, advise fm on the issue as he seems to be unable to answer it although he lacks wande's honesty and inclines to your own methods of trying to make hiding the head in the sand not look as stupid as when ostriches do it causing the ringpiece to become exposed for us all to have a good laugh at.

wande's remark shows that he has thought about it, maybe even wrestled with it in the night, as many have, and that you haven't taken the trouble he has and prefer to try to throw a smokescreen over your intellectual desuetude, an insult to our intelligence in its own right, with that small load of gobshite you just posted.

The University of Ferrara made degrees available more easily and less expensively than its neighbour, the University of Padua, which is why Canon Nicolas Koppernigk qualified at the former, if Carlo Malagola has it right, rather than at the latter where he had studied for four years. So it sounds a bit like the Bob Jones outfit of the early 16th.

This thread ros has raised its game. If you have nothing to say it is worse than worthless coming on. Doing so is directly contary to the laws of preservation of energy and the contingent theory of evolution in its post-Darwinian phase. Energy expended on worthlessness is evolutionary madness.

wande wrote-



It was Lola's issue wande, not mine. I would never stoop to such an underhand tactic as that. I just bear it in mind all the time.

spendi You mean like in "delicious jams and jellies?"

What on earth could possibly be contrary to the laws of preservation of energy in delicious jams and jellies.

Delicious surely means conforming to them in some fundamental way or else evolution theory really is a a pile of shite.

never mind, you missed the whole point.

I often do. Thankfully.

I'm not one to criticise a Nobel prize winner. I'd prefer to assume his words have been messed about with.

As quoted I can't see the point of that either.

Maybe he's starting a run for office in which case you anti-IDers should get on his staff now and ride his coat-tails into the sunset.

Im afraid that Varmus is correct. Why look at Britain, once the standard for innovation , can now not even keep a Rover from leaking all over your garage.(if one were foolish enough to consider buying a Rover).

MostBrits dont even know that there is no LAw of Preservation of Energy.

Standards of innovation having nothing to do with production-line difficulties.

A guy in the pub has a 12 year-old Rover and it's a minter. I drove it once and it's like new. No oil leaks. Obviously the American motor-industry propaganda will be putting out fm's assertions hoping the less endowed will believe them. That's life. It's only science in the same way ID is. When you have your eyes in your pocket and your nose in the ground there's a science to that and when you raise your sights from the dirt and the grubs there's a science to that. The former can't write, can't make music, can't dance and, if Darwin is anything to go by, they can't sit a horse properly; not even a young tamed filly.

Nobody knows what the next innovation will be. If we did it would already have been innovated and the technologists can take it away. Unless there's some muzzling of course.

A genetic basis for cancer doesn't have to be physical. It may be mental as well. One's family backgrounds give one a bunch of attitudes and fixations besides a physical structure. There is some evidence that the latter is the dominant of the two.

I noticed that Mr Varmus mentioned "funds" though. More than once I think. And scientists having more say.

Scientists may well report a sense of alienation but that can have other causes too other than the lack of proper funding. Having your eyes in your pocket and your nose in the ground for ever and ever could lead to that.

It is certainly a sly appeal to a certain coalition of interests and worthy of a politician in the making. Winning a Nobel prize has been known to make many others feel a bit giddy.

With the "smoke-filled rooms" an anachronism it could get past a dumbed down population.

The top two worst SUV's in the high price category are
1 Porsche Cayenne--"They havent got a clue"

2 Range Rover-- " they still dont know that oil is a finite resource"

This, according to The last CR rating of SUVs ( low mid and high priced)


Best value aint English, German, or US. Its the Subaru Forester (which is technically a crossover)



I just needed to rub in the "Law of Preservation of Mass and Energy"

You should try Mrs Trumpinton's rubbing in her traditional organic rose-scented balm fm.

There's no crossovers with that stuff I can assure you.

It does often involve an expenditure of energy to no useful purpose though.

what the hell are you talking about????