Joined: June 2007
I'm sure that many of us would like to hear just how you can make ID a scientific enterprise, if you want to get around to that one (we already know how to make it a commercial enterprise.... wink wink nudge nudge saynomore saynomore).
|I'd rather disentagle <sic> the scientific questions from the religious questions so that the real question becomes, can ID produce compelling evidence and arguments to back up their theories? I think the jury is still out on that. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't get a chance to try|
Yeah, we'd love for you to do that also. We'd also love to hear you explain why, in the absence of any compelling evidence that there might BE such evidence or arguments you think that ID'ers deserve this affirmative action? What makes their religious beliefs privileged?
Why don't I deserve to have the NSF fund me completely for 12 years while I work out whether or not the fact that the sun appears yellow to our eyes is predicted by the first principle that god made everything? Why don't we privilege everyone's arbitrary religious beliefs? Let's just forget about science and evidence and reason: you deserve a chance to make the absolutely stupidest argument you can muster, and at the expense of people who actually take this sort of thing seriously.
Your democratic fallacy is showing hon. Might wanna cover it up, it's liable to get bruised 'round heah.
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK
Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG
the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat
I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles