Evolution is Just Junk Science

June 3, 2007

In alt.atheism On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 12:13:09 -0700, Jason@nospam.com

(Jason) let us all know that:

>Yes, I believe there was a global flood.

There's no evidence for it. None.

Also, Jason--I answered your questions.

Don

---

aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, Member of the [H]orde

Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.

"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"

Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"

June 3, 2007

On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 14:11:57 -0700, in alt.atheism

Jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

<Jason-0306071411580001@66-52-22-102.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

>In article <615663l15ik3mdb5s0bm2rg636pnmqfevk@4ax.com>, Jim07D7

><Jim07D7@nospam.net> wrote:

>

>> Jason@nospam.com (Jason) said:

>>

>> <...>

>> >

>> >I attended a Christian college for two years. One of the biology

>> >professors was a Christian and was an advocate of creation science. He

>> >taught evolution theory. He did not teach creation science to his

>> >students. He did have a special session each quarter where he taught the

>> >basics of creation science. None of his students were required to attend

>> >and none of the students that attended the special session were required

>> >to take tests. As far as I know, the other biology professors did not

>> >discriminate against him. I visited his office and had a conversation with

>> >him. He was not my biology professor. I doubt that he would have been

>> >allowed to teach the special creation science session if he had worked in

>> >a state university.

>> >Jason

>>

>> Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, has been the location of

>> a presentation by Duane Gish, presenting the case for scientific

>> creationism. "Gish is [or was] the vice president of the Institute for

>> Creation Research and was touted in fliers for the event as "one of

>> the world's leading experts on Scientific Creationism.""

>>

>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duane_Gish

>> http://www.ftvc.org/news0900.html

>

>That is great news. I saw Dr. Gish debate a professor from the local state

>college. The auditorium was full of people. They advertised the debate in

>the ICR newsletter and at many of the churches. As a result, lots of

>Christians attended the debate.

>Jason

>

Gish is a con man. It's not great that he is allowed to teach his lies

anywhere. Churches should feel shame that they let him teach such

nonsense.

--

"Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel

to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy

Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should

take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in

which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh

it to scorn." -- Augustine, The Literal Meaning of Genesis

June 3, 2007

Jason wrote:

> In article <f3ueed$8qe$02$1@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris

> <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote:

>

>> Jason wrote:

>>> In article <f3t24v$7mv$02$1@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris

>>> <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote:

>>>

>>>> Jason wrote:

>>>>> In article <4661add3.268854@news.east.earthlink.net>,

>>>>> luminoso@everywhere.net (Luminoso) wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 09:48:06 -0700, bramble

>>>>>> <leopoldo.perdomo@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> On 31 mayo, 21:21, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

>>>>>>>> In article <f3mkof$hbv$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> My point was that the so called founder of evolution theory was a

>>>>>>>> Christian at least during some years of his life. I only read the last

>>>>>>>> chapter of his book and it was apparent that he had an excellent

>>>>>>>> understanding of the book of Genesis. He mentioned the term "creator"

>>>>>>>> several different times. I am more in agreement with Darwin than I

>>> am with

>>>>>>>> Evolutionists that believe that mankind evolved from a one celled life

>>>>>>>> form. It's my opinion that Darwin did NOT believe that. I read the last

>>>>>>>> paragraph three times and it was difficult to understand the point

>>> that he

>>>>>>>> was making. However, he did use these words in that sentence:

>>>>>>>> "...having been originally BREATHED INTO A FEW FORMS OR INTO ONE." That

>>>>>>>> appeared to me to be related to God breathing life into people. That is

>>>>>>>> very different than believing that mankind evolved from a one

> celled life

>>>>>>>> form.

>>>>>>>> Jason

>>>>>>> Of course, Jason. He was living in a Christian world. He had to

>>>>>>> tread very carefully as not to have problems. That is why, he let in

>>>>>>> his first book the man outside of the picture. It was a time in which

>>>>>>> there was a certain degree of freedom. If Darwin had lived a hundred

>>>>>>> years earlier, he could not have dared to write this book. So in

> spite of

>>>>>>> being the author of the book, Origins of species, he had to behave as

>>>>>>> any other high class gentleman of his time, going to church on

>>>>>>> sundays.

>>>>>> There is a myth propagated by the extreme 'creationist' faction

>>>>>> that it's impossible to be both "religious" and an "evolutionist".

>>>>>> Very likely Darwin -was- religious, his culture was saturated

>>>>>> with religious ideas and perspectives. It would have been very

>>>>>> unusual for him -not- to have been religious in some way.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> But he couldn't have been a strict "CHRISTIAN". His studies

>>>>>> showed that the proposed scheme of creation in the christian

>>>>>> bible was flat wrong. No "Zap ! There's an elephant, Zap !

>>>>>> There's a chicken". A long and winding road instead.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> So Darwin had to be something other than a strict "christian".

>>>>>> A "bad christian" perhaps, a deist maybe. What he had learned

>>>>>> was incompatible with christian dogma, but not with the idea

>>>>>> of -some- kind of god-entity kick-starting life on earth.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> The kind of reason & evidence-based thinking that Darwin helped

>>>>>> along eventually spawned a crop of unbelievers, but AT THE TIME

>>>>>> and given the cultural environment true athiests were few and

>>>>>> far between (and they usually didn't advertise themselves).

>>>>>>

>>>>>> As for the thread title, yes, there may be an "alternative"

>>>>>> to evolution. Alas it would have to involve aliens or 'gods'

>>>>>> constantly bringing new forms of life to earth over a very

>>>>>> long period. The 'intermediate forms' not being 'intermediate'

>>>>>> but simply genetically-engineered lifeforms that didn't adapt

>>>>>> well, thus requiring a series of "improved" versions to be

>>>>>> constructed.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> That scenerio, while not impossible, seems -extremely- unlikely.

>>>>>> If there are aliens involved, more likely an alien stopped-off

>>>>>> here to take a crap and some of its bacteria managed to survive,

>>>>>> and subsequently evolve. There would be a certain poetic justice

>>>>>> in discovering that egomaniacal humans were spawned from a

>>>>>> floater left by some grey-skinned alien :-)

>>>>> The problem is that evolutionists now have total control and will not

>>>>> allow any alternative theories to be taught in the public school system.

>>>> If it's a valid theory, no problem. We explained at length what a valid

>>>> scientific theory must be. Which criteria it must fulfill. ID simply and

>>>> plainly fails said criterias.

>>>>

>>>>> They don't even like it when college professors teach college students

>>>>> about creation science.

>>>> See above.

>>>>

>>>> Many years ago, there was a famous movie about the

>>>>> Scopes Monkey Trial. I saw that movie. The Christians were accused of not

>>>>> allowing a teacher to teach students about evoluton. That has all changed.

>>>>> The evolutionists are now in control and will not allow intelligent design

>>>>> to be taught in the public schools system.

>>>> NOT in SCIENCE CLASS! It FAILS all criteria. So it is not science! Teach

>>>> it all you like. Around here the class is termed "Religion" (pronounce

>>>> it german). Or "Ethik". (It IS taught, just not in science class.)

>>>>

>>>> The evolutionists are the new

>>>>> fascist.

>>>> lol

>>>>

>>>> Several days ago, I read about a college professor that was an

>>>>> advocate of creation science. He was denied tenure (spelling??).

>>>> That depends what class he wanted to teach. If it was sociology, he can

>>>> be my guest. If it was biology, he is out. Nor science. Simple, actually.

>>>>

>>>> Of

>>>>> course, if he was an advocate of evolution, he would have been granted

>>>>> tenure.

>>>> Depends. If he wanted to teach sociology, What is his qualification?

>>>>

>>>> Tokay

>>> I was told he taught astronomy classes.

>>>

>> Also a field in which the so called "ID-nuts" don't especially do too

>> good. Astonomy includes how the universe began. He probably "argued"

>> that "goddidit". So no wonder. Also, if he is one of those buggers that

>> believes the universe and/or the earth is only 6000 years old, he runs

>> into tons of trouble.

>> So, no. He is out.

>>

>> Tokay

>

> Tokay,

> He did not get tenure but is still a professor. If they fire him, he could

> get a job as a professor at a Christian college where they don't

> discriminate against the advocates of creation science. Discrimination is

> suppose to be illegal but I guess that some of the members of this

> newsgroup appear to believe that it's acceptable for public colleges to

> discriminate against professors that are advocates of creation science by

> not granting them tenure. How would you feel if a Christian college

> refused to grant tenure to a biology professor since he was an advocate of

> evolution?

First, it's their right. Second, it is exactly what I would expect. The

surprise would be that they hired him in the first place.

> Jason

>

June 3, 2007

"Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message

news:Jason-0306071236540001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> In article <1180864433.482133.263330@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, Martin

> Phipps <martinphipps2@yahoo.com> wrote:

>

>> On Jun 3, 9:37 am, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

>> > In article <f3t1f1$i75$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris

>> >

>> > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote:

>> > > Jason wrote:

>> > > > In article <f3rg71$rer$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris

>> > > > <tokay.gris.b...@gmx.net> wrote:

>> >

>> > > >> Jason wrote:

>> > > >>> In article <s9j163tfd53h20c63pfengglsdqakrb...@4ax.com>, Free

>> > > >>> Lunch

>> > > >>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

>> >

>> > > >>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 18:29:51 -0700, in alt.atheism

>> > > >>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

>> > > >>>> <Jason-0106071829510...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

>> > > >>>>> In article <bqc163pt6i3gfpq0oi8u9lp5rr85pmd...@4ax.com>, Free

>> > > >>>>> Lunch

>> > > >>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

>> >

>> > > >>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 18:01:10 -0700, in alt.atheism

>> > > >>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

>> > > >>>>>> <Jason-0106071801100...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

>> > > >>>>>>> In article <i9c163t9qp9l8uhdkc3a0mmiahrdffg...@4ax.com>,

> Free Lunch

>> > > >>>>>>> <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

>> >

>> > > >>>>>>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:35:24 -0700, in alt.atheism

>> > > >>>>>>>> J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

>> > > >>>>>>>> <Jason-0106071735240...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

>> > > >>>>>>>>> In article

> <1180735061.142997.73...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>,

>> > > >>>>>>>>> gudl...@yahoo.com wrote:

>> > > >>>>>>>> ...

>> >

>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Except those who are educated and are not idiots.

>> > > >>>>>>>>> Visit a large city zoo and you will notice that they keep

>> > > >>>>>>>>> the

>> > apes and

>> > > >>>>>>>>> monkeys in cages. When I visited the San Diego Zoo, they

> kept the

>> > > >>> gorilla

>> > > >>>>>>>>> in a facility that made it impossible for him to escape or

>> > throw fecal

>> > > >>>>>>>>> material at the crowd. Perhaps God should have created and

> designed

>> > > >>>>>>>>> monkeys and apes to be vastly different than humans so as

>> > > >>>>>>>>> not to

>> > > >>> confuse

>> > > >>>>>>>>> the advocates of evolution.

>> > > >>>>>>>>> Jason

>> >

>> > > >>>>>>>> What does California keep in the cages at San Quentin?

>> > > >>>>>>> People that do not obey the laws. Do wild monkeys and

>> > > >>>>>>> gorillas

>> > use fire?

>> > > >>>>>> Does your entire theology rely on the fact that humans

> learned to tame

>> > > >>>>>> fire and other animals did not?

>> >

>> > > >>>>>> Wow....

>> > > >>>>> No--I was only pointed out one of the major difference between

>> > mankind and

>> > > >>>>> animals.

>> > > >>>> It's a trivial behavioral difference.

>> >

>> > > >>>>> I also pointed out in another post that mankind worships God

>> > > >>>>> and

>> > > >>>>> that animals do not worship God. Of course, not all humans

> worship God.

>> > > >>>> Another trivial difference.

>> > > >>> Another major difference:

>> > > >>> IQ levels--much lower than normal people.

>> >

>> > > >>> also: Animals can not have conversations with people by talking.

>> >

>> > > >> Actually, they can. You should really start reading some

>> > > >> scientific

>> > > >> stuff. They taught some bonobos to use a kind of sign language. So

>> > > >> they

>> > > >> can't "talk" by language. But conversation is not limited to

>> > > >> sound.

>> > > >> What was your point again?

>> >

>> > > >> Tokay

>> >

>> > > > My point is that they can not have converations with people BY

>> > > > TALKING.

>> >

>> > > I hope you do not fix this on language. Language, i.e. sounds. We are

>> > > communicating by internet. No sound?

>> >

>> > > > Of course, they can communicate. One lady had a bird feeder outside

>> > her window.

>> > > > When the bird feeder became empty, the birds would peck on her

>> > > > window to

>> > > > let her know that she needed to refill the bird feeder. After she

> refilled

>> > > > the feeder, the birds would stop pecking on her window. Dogs let

>> > > > their

>> > > > owners know when they are hungry. Yes, apes can use sign language.

> Do you

>> > > > think that an ape would be able to win a chess game with a 12 year

>> > > > old

>> > > > child?

>> >

>> > > Hardly. But that is not the question.

>> >

>> > > Do you think that an ape would be able to figure out the solution

>> > > > to an algebra problem? One of the other differences is a low IQ.

>> > > > jason

>> >

>> > > Ah, so the difference is one of IQ?

>> >

>> > > You are on very thin ice, let me tell you.....

>> >

>> > I have provided three separate reasons.

>>

>> The point is, Jason, that your IQ is hardly that much more than that

>> of an ape, based on what you've posted here. I'm sure an ape could

>> also learn to cut and paste, especially if there was no requirement

>> for him to understand what he was cutting and pasting.

>>

>> You really do need to have things spelled out for you, don't you?

>>

>> Martin

>

> Martin,

> You have told me that life evolved from non-life. Yes, spell it out for

> me. Explain how life evolved from non-life.

> Jason

It's really simple Jason, once the earth was uninhabitable. Now there is

life. Life doesn't 'evolve' from non-life. Life can begin from non-life.

Regardless of how life started, evolution now directs the distribution and

diversity of life on earth.

June 3, 2007

"Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message

news:Jason-0306071242230001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> In article <1180863203.738843.244120@w5g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,

> gudloos@yahoo.com wrote:

>

>> On 2 Jun., 03:01, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

>> > In article <i9c163t9qp9l8uhdkc3a0mmiahrdffg...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch

>> >

>> > <l...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:

>> > > On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 17:35:24 -0700, in alt.atheism

>> > > J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in

>> > > <Jason-0106071735240...@66-52-22-63.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:

>> > > >In article <1180735061.142997.73...@p47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>,

>> > > >gudl...@yahoo.com wrote:

>> >

>> > > ...

>> >

>> > > >> Except those who are educated and are not idiots.

>> >

>> > > >Visit a large city zoo and you will notice that they keep the apes

>> > > >and

>> > > >monkeys in cages. When I visited the San Diego Zoo, they kept the

>> > > >gori=

>> lla

>> > > >in a facility that made it impossible for him to escape or throw

>> > > >fecal

>> > > >material at the crowd. Perhaps God should have created and designed

>> > > >monkeys and apes to be vastly different than humans so as not to

>> > > >confu=

>> se

>> > > >the advocates of evolution.

>> > > >Jason

>> >

>> > > What does California keep in the cages at San Quentin?

>> >

>> > People that do not obey the laws. Do wild monkeys and gorillas use

>> > fire?-=

>> Skjul tekst i anf=F8rselstegn -

>> >

>> > - Vis tekst i anf=F8rselstegn -

>>

>> Does using fire mean that you are not related to other apes? No

>> Jason, it does not mean that. You zoo example was completely

>> meaningless.

>

> These are some of the differences:

> the use of fire

> burying the dead

> the ability to communicate by talking

> differences in DNA

> differences in IQ

> the ability to worship

Explain to me how chimps and humans share the same defect gene as explained

here:

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/0500450102v1.pdf

June 3, 2007

"Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message

news:Jason-0306071213090001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> In article <f3ue0d$7q7$02$1@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris

> <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote:

>

>> Jason wrote:

>>

>> [snip a bunch of questions. Learn yourself. I am not wasting my time]

>>

>> > 20. Would you like to explain the origin of any of the following

>> > twenty-one features of the earth:

>> >

>> > The Grand Canyon and Other Canyons

>> > Mid-Oceanic Ridge

>> > Continental Shelves and Slopes

>> > Ocean Trenches

>> > Seamounts and Tablemounts

>> > Earthquakes

>> > Magnetic Variations on the Ocean Floor

>> > Submarine Canyons

>> > Coal and Oil Formations

>> > Glaciers and the Ice Ages

>> > Frozen Mammoths

>> > Major Mountain Ranges

>> > Overthrusts

>> > Volcanoes and Lava

>> > Geothermal Heat

>> > Metamorphic Rock

>> > Strata

>> > Plateaus

>> > Salt Domes

>> > Jigsaw Fit of the Continents

>> > Fossil Graveyards

>> >

>> > If so, I will point out some obvious problems with your

>> > explanation and refer you to 77 pages that explain them all as a result

>> > of

>> > a global flood.

>>

>> You REALLY think that all this was the result of a global flood?

>> How long ago?

>> IIRC some scientists think there even was one.... Some 4 billion years

>> ago.

>> But that is another matter.

>

> Yes, I believe there was a global flood. I don't know how many years ago

> that it happened. I doubt that anyone knows the time period that it took

> place.

I'm glad you believe that Jason. Since the world of science says that there

is no evidence of a global flood perhaps you can explain why you think there

was.

June 3, 2007

"Jason" <Jason@nospam.com> wrote in message

news:Jason-0306071208450001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...

> In article <f3ueed$8qe$02$1@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris

> <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote:

>

>> Jason wrote:

>> > In article <f3t24v$7mv$02$1@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris

>> > <tokay.gris.beau@gmx.net> wrote:

>> >

>> >> Jason wrote:

>> >>> In article <4661add3.268854@news.east.earthlink.net>,

>> >>> luminoso@everywhere.net (Luminoso) wrote:

>> >>>

>> >>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 09:48:06 -0700, bramble

>> >>>> <leopoldo.perdomo@gmail.com> wrote:

>> >>>>

>> >>>>> On 31 mayo, 21:21, J...@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

>> >>>>>> In article <f3mkof$hbv$0...@news.t-online.com>, Tokay Pino Gris

>> >>>>>>

>> >>>>>> My point was that the so called founder of evolution theory was a

>> >>>>>> Christian at least during some years of his life. I only read the

>> >>>>>> last

>> >>>>>> chapter of his book and it was apparent that he had an excellent

>> >>>>>> understanding of the book of Genesis. He mentioned the term

>> >>>>>> "creator"

>> >>>>>> several different times. I am more in agreement with Darwin than I

>> > am with

>> >>>>>> Evolutionists that believe that mankind evolved from a one celled

>> >>>>>> life

>> >>>>>> form. It's my opinion that Darwin did NOT believe that. I read the

>> >>>>>> last

>> >>>>>> paragraph three times and it was difficult to understand the point

>> > that he

>> >>>>>> was making. However, he did use these words in that sentence:

>> >>>>>> "...having been originally BREATHED INTO A FEW FORMS OR INTO ONE."

>> >>>>>> That

>> >>>>>> appeared to me to be related to God breathing life into people.

>> >>>>>> That is

>> >>>>>> very different than believing that mankind evolved from a one

> celled life

>> >>>>>> form.

>> >>>>>> Jason

>> >>>>> Of course, Jason. He was living in a Christian world. He had to

>> >>>>> tread very carefully as not to have problems. That is why, he let

>> >>>>> in

>> >>>>> his first book the man outside of the picture. It was a time in

>> >>>>> which

>> >>>>> there was a certain degree of freedom. If Darwin had lived a

>> >>>>> hundred

>> >>>>> years earlier, he could not have dared to write this book. So in

> spite of

>> >>>>> being the author of the book, Origins of species, he had to behave

>> >>>>> as

>> >>>>> any other high class gentleman of his time, going to church on

>> >>>>> sundays.

>> >>>> There is a myth propagated by the extreme 'creationist' faction

>> >>>> that it's impossible to be both "religious" and an

>> >>>> "evolutionist".

>> >>>> Very likely Darwin -was- religious, his culture was saturated

>> >>>> with religious ideas and perspectives. It would have been very

>> >>>> unusual for him -not- to have been religious in some way.

>> >>>>

>> >>>> But he couldn't have been a strict "CHRISTIAN". His studies

>> >>>> showed that the proposed scheme of creation in the christian

>> >>>> bible was flat wrong. No "Zap ! There's an elephant, Zap !

>> >>>> There's a chicken". A long and winding road instead.

>> >>>>

>> >>>> So Darwin had to be something other than a strict "christian".

>> >>>> A "bad christian" perhaps, a deist maybe. What he had learned

>> >>>> was incompatible with christian dogma, but not with the idea

>> >>>> of -some- kind of god-entity kick-starting life on earth.

>> >>>>

>> >>>> The kind of reason & evidence-based thinking that Darwin helped

>> >>>> along eventually spawned a crop of unbelievers, but AT THE TIME

>> >>>> and given the cultural environment true athiests were few and

>> >>>> far between (and they usually didn't advertise themselves).

>> >>>>

>> >>>> As for the thread title, yes, there may be an "alternative"

>> >>>> to evolution. Alas it would have to involve aliens or 'gods'

>> >>>> constantly bringing new forms of life to earth over a very

>> >>>> long period. The 'intermediate forms' not being 'intermediate'

>> >>>> but simply genetically-engineered lifeforms that didn't adapt

>> >>>> well, thus requiring a series of "improved" versions to be

>> >>>> constructed.

>> >>>>

>> >>>> That scenerio, while not impossible, seems -extremely- unlikely.

>> >>>> If there are aliens involved, more likely an alien stopped-off

>> >>>> here to take a crap and some of its bacteria managed to survive,

>> >>>> and subsequently evolve. There would be a certain poetic justice

>> >>>> in discovering that egomaniacal humans were spawned from a

>> >>>> floater left by some grey-skinned alien :-)

>> >>> The problem is that evolutionists now have total control and will not

>> >>> allow any alternative theories to be taught in the public school

>> >>> system.

>> >> If it's a valid theory, no problem. We explained at length what a

>> >> valid

>> >> scientific theory must be. Which criteria it must fulfill. ID simply

>> >> and

>> >> plainly fails said criterias.

>> >>

>> >>> They don't even like it when college professors teach college

>> >>> students

>> >>> about creation science.

>> >> See above.

>> >>

>> >> Many years ago, there was a famous movie about the

>> >>> Scopes Monkey Trial. I saw that movie. The Christians were accused of

>> >>> not

>> >>> allowing a teacher to teach students about evoluton. That has all

>> >>> changed.

>> >>> The evolutionists are now in control and will not allow intelligent

>> >>> design

>> >>> to be taught in the public schools system.

>> >> NOT in SCIENCE CLASS! It FAILS all criteria. So it is not science!

>> >> Teach

>> >> it all you like. Around here the class is termed "Religion" (pronounce

>> >> it german). Or "Ethik". (It IS taught, just not in science class.)

>> >>

>> >> The evolutionists are the new

>> >>> fascist.

>> >> lol

>> >>

>> >> Several days ago, I read about a college professor that was an

>> >>> advocate of creation science. He was denied tenure (spelling??).

>> >> That depends what class he wanted to teach. If it was sociology, he

>> >> can

>> >> be my guest. If it was biology, he is out. Nor science. Simple,

>> >> actually.

>> >>

>> >> Of

>> >>> course, if he was an advocate of evolution, he would have been

>> >>> granted

>> >>> tenure.

>> >> Depends. If he wanted to teach sociology, What is his qualification?

>> >>

>> >> Tokay

>> >

>> > I was told he taught astronomy classes.