|
|
|
=======
|
| |
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: NA
|
|
Dec 6th, 2005, 04:19 PM
Yep. I've heard the simplicity and complexity of genetics can also work against the idea of common descent. I am in no way unmotivated to understand this or anything else. I am asking to be made to understand. My threshold for acceptance and belief is just as high on this, however, as it is for religious ideas.
Does my contention ring true at all to you that the Goliath of Science, based in actual facts, shouldn't be still going toe to toe with the David of Religion on this? The biggest black eye that evolutionism has is that it has yet to find a way to silence it's critics that are based in ignorance and superstitious ideas.
Is there any other science that is so controversial on the existence level? I mean, sure there's moral controversy on some stuff, but nobody's really running around doubting the Big Bang, planet orbits, black holes, dinosaurs, cloning, genetics or just about anything else regarded as scientific fact. Isn't that odd?
String theory and other nebulous ideas on the fringes are always referred to as controversial ideas... is this where the theory of common descent belongs?
| |
__________________
mburbank~ Yes, okay, fine, I do know what you meant, but why is it not possible for you to get through a paragraph without making all the words cry?
How can someone who obviously thinks so much of their ideas have so little respect for expressing them? How can someone who so yearns to be taken seriously make so little effort?!
| |
|
|
Threaded Mode
