Science, Creation & EvolutionJudicial edict mandates evolution :: Re: ReplyRe: Reply Very well - did you think the title was warranted?
I agree. However, it is obvious to all invoolved that the stickers and similar actions are, in fact, religiously motivated. This can be seen in the statements of the advocates of such actions. See, for example: http://ydr.com/story/doverbiology/55668/ and as for the stickers: "The disclaimers stem from a petition drive begun in 2002 by Marjorie Rogers, a creationist" Creationism is a religious position. Oh, I know what you mean. I think such revisionism is repugnant and silly. I feel the same indignation and exasperation when I read or hear people claiming things like 'evolution is a religion' or 'there is no evidence for evolution.' A couple of issues - even if I were to take the time to answer Hovind's questions, would you be able to tell if they had merit or not? Or would you merely dismiss them because Hovind has already declare dthere to be none? More importantly, many of those questions are irrelevant to evolution. They are red herrings. Some are silly, such as the one asking about why would a crewature want to reproduce to make more mouths to feed. I will address a couple of themore egregious distortive "questions." By the way, I have seen Hovind in action. If you think science is an issue for him, guess again. 11. Is it possible that similarities in design between different animals prove a common Creator instead of a common ancestor? It is possible, sure. Is it likely? Is it plausible? Not really. (I can expand on this if you wish) 12. Natural selection only works with the genetic information available and tends only to keep a species stable. How would you explain the increasing complexity in the genetic code that must have occurred if evolution were true? The Human Genome Project and the sequencing of the genomes of other creatures has shown that large segments of genomes result from large-scale duplications. That is, copying errors. These 'errors' produce huge blocks of DNA which itself can alter phenotype, as well as provide raw material for variation. The others call for speculation (which would of course then be labelled as such and used as 'evidence' that evolution can't answer the questions). The other articles are just polemics and disinformation. |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame