Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
465 bytes removed ,  14:01, March 13, 2007
no edit summary
Line 13: Line 13:  
:::Well, you are welcome to read through those to tease out the evolutionist perspective on kangaroo origins. Personally, I'd rather read through the [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?num=20&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=%22intelligent+design%22 7790 peer-reviewed articles] on Intelligent Design (which surely puts the lie to the claim of liberals that ID is not science) [[User:Rich P|Dr. Richard Paley]] 06:45, 8 March 2007 (EST)
 
:::Well, you are welcome to read through those to tease out the evolutionist perspective on kangaroo origins. Personally, I'd rather read through the [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?num=20&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=%22intelligent+design%22 7790 peer-reviewed articles] on Intelligent Design (which surely puts the lie to the claim of liberals that ID is not science) [[User:Rich P|Dr. Richard Paley]] 06:45, 8 March 2007 (EST)
   −
::::Well, of course, if you think that US Patent 5,822,206, 1998 - patentstorm.us
  −
... 65-67. Lee, MH "Towards intelligent design and diagnosis tolls for electrical and
  −
mechanical engineering", Computing & Control Engineering Journal, Jul. ...
  −
Cited by 81 - Cached - Web Search
  −
has anyhing to do with the pretendy biological science of ID, then you dont know much about biology. And scholar.google.com doesnt restrict its search to peer reviewed articles anyway.
       
31

edits

Navigation menu