Joe G
Posts: 12011
Joined: July 2007
|
| Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 09 2012,14:15) | [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/darwinism/question-for-barry-why-do-people-embrace-darwin-today-when-his-cause-is-actually-collapsin
g-in-science/#comment-422123]http://www.uncommondescent.com/darwini....-422123[/URL]
[font=Comic Sans MS] | Quote | 1JoeMarch 9, 2012 at 12:50 pm
The new mantra:
“It only looks designed to you. It doesn’t look designed to me. Therefor I don’t have anything to explain.”
Well, you still have to explain what we observe.
“IDiot!”</span> |
So we have to explain what you think you see, but ID doesn't have to explain anything. More 'positive case for ID', no doubt. |
No, dumbass, you have to explain living organisms- or do you not observe them?
You have to explain bacterial flagella, but you can't.
It doesn't matter if you say neither looks designed to you. You still have to explain them.
--------------
"Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth
"Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton
Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code- Â Acartia bogart, TARD
YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism
|
