199
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 121:
Line 121: + + + +
Talk:Intelligent design controversy (view source)
Revision as of 16:53, April 10, 2008
, 16:53, April 10, 2008no edit summary
::::: Thanks for actually addressing the points that I made, and for doing so civilly. Too often critics are derogatory and keep throwing up new objections without actually addressing the responses that have been made.
::::: Thanks for actually addressing the points that I made, and for doing so civilly. Too often critics are derogatory and keep throwing up new objections without actually addressing the responses that have been made.
::::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:39, 10 April 2008 (EDT)
::::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:39, 10 April 2008 (EDT)
:::::::Actually, Creationism '''is''' a minority view. Just about every organized group of Christians outside the United States (and most fo the ones inside) are perfectly OK with believing in both the Bible and that "when God made Man, He used a Monkey to do it."
:::::::Let me quote the Wedge Document: ''However, we are convinced that in order to defeat materialism, we must cut it off at its source. That source is scientific materialism.'' <ref>[http://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.html The Wedge Document]</ref> Never mind that "god did it" makes for a LOUSY scientific theory, and has never made anything useful the way Scientific Materialism has--polio vaccine, light bulbs, neutron bombs. All of which work fine even if you don't have any Faith in them.
:::::::And on the acedemic front, there are more scientists [http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/steve/ named Steve] who support evolution than there are Creationist/ID scientists, '''period'''. :) --[[User:Gulik5|Gulik5]] 12:53, 10 April 2008 (EDT)