Difference between revisions of "Talk:Creation Science"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(New page: Umm...creation science doesn't equal intelligent design. It includes stuff like noah's flood geology, and magic changing isotopes, which ID doesn't touch upon. ~~~~)
 
(ID as "Intelligent Design Creationism" - PR tactic of evolutionists)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
Umm...creation science doesn't equal intelligent design. It includes stuff like noah's flood geology, and magic changing isotopes, which ID doesn't touch upon. [[User:RDre|RDre]] 11:34, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
 
Umm...creation science doesn't equal intelligent design. It includes stuff like noah's flood geology, and magic changing isotopes, which ID doesn't touch upon. [[User:RDre|RDre]] 11:34, 6 April 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
:Agreed. I blanked the page, pending a correct definition.
 +
 +
:Note, however, that groups like E. Scott's NCSE '''assert''' that ID is creationist. She never loses an opportunity to refer to ID as "Intelligent Design Creationism". --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 17:18, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

Revision as of 21:18, April 6, 2007

Umm...creation science doesn't equal intelligent design. It includes stuff like noah's flood geology, and magic changing isotopes, which ID doesn't touch upon. RDre 11:34, 6 April 2007 (EDT)

Agreed. I blanked the page, pending a correct definition.
Note, however, that groups like E. Scott's NCSE assert that ID is creationist. She never loses an opportunity to refer to ID as "Intelligent Design Creationism". --Ed Poor 17:18, 6 April 2007 (EDT)