|
FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
Topic Review (Newest First) |
Dec 21st, 2005 03:34 PM | ||
Cosmo Electrolux | it's creationism, man...it in no way resembles science. | |
Dec 21st, 2005 03:32 PM | ||
Big Papa Goat | intelligent design doesn't rely on a supernatural creator, but it does rely on an infinitely complex intelligent entity that cannot be observed in nature | |
Dec 21st, 2005 12:28 PM | ||
Rez |
I.D. gets K.O'd http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4547734.stm the way he ruled, you'd think they tried to crash a hot-air balloon into the white house and call it art. "breathtaking inanity" i wonder how transparent these fuckers must have been for a bush-appointed judge to rule like this. or maybe he's actually got a sense of, y'know, ethics. You can read the ruling as a PDF: http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmil...miller_342.pdf More from http://www.nature.com/news/2005/0512.../051219-8.html Quote:
i look forward to the day when children get accosted during recess and are asked "hey, you want a theory of how we came to be that "they" DON'T want you to know? i got what u need, man, it's all here." who the fuck are these people? "come on you guys, i mean look at it, it's so huge! i dont think science could do this, y'all!" |