Another anti-evolution bill, Missouri 2012

That's one of the reasons. The star "cdesign proponentist", Dr Behe, had to admit that ID is as much of a "science" as astrology. It basically happened because, under oath, he couldn't get away with telling outright falsehoods the way he can when speaking to church groups. Oh, I don't know about that. Do you consider, for example, Francis Collins, a devout Christian and a very prominent scientist, who rejects ID as pseudo-science, part of the "atheistic scientific community"? I think the astrology thing did it. The truth shall set you free. Where did I get that? Edited by Pressie, : Changed paragraphEdited by Pressie, : No reason given.Edited by Pressie, : Spelling mistakeEdited by Pressie, : Changed words

Can I keep this as a signature?It's not our fault that one of the founders of ID could not even expose these "realities to simple minded people" in the court process. I mean, all it needs is one piece of evidence.Was he too "simple minded" to explain his "theory" to those "simple minded people"? It's not our fault that he sees astrology as "science". Even those "simple minded people" were way too intelligent to see astrology as "science". It says a lot about you, though.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.Edited by Pressie, : Changed sentence

Sorry marc9000, if I disrupt this thread, but this is the second time I noticed something like this about the Democrats. Is there anything wrong or is it illegal to vote for the Democrats? Is it anti-American to vote for the Democrats? Don't around 50% of Americans normally vote Democrat? What is your problem with people voting for them? As I understand it, the Democrats in a lot of the Southern states are more conservative than the Republicans from New England, for example.Do you equate Democrats, evolution and atheism somehow? Aren't a lot of Democrats also Christians?

The summary of my argument is neatly summarised by my following answer to the first few sentences from marc9000 Of course they would. You have religious "answers", not even one of them having anything to do with science. You were also provided with reasons why ID is not science and why it should not be discussed in science classes. The only reason for people introducing ID bills is religious fanatisism. Nothing else. It has been pointed out numerous times, one is the Wedge Document, for example. ID is not science and therefore has no place in science classes at school. Yes, we agree. Actually, you've got only one reason for wanting to introduce ID into science classes. Religion. Nothing else.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

Individual States in the US or countries or groups of random people don't determine what is science and what is not science. The scientific method does.Just as individual States in the US or countries or random groups of people don't determine what 1 + 1 is equal to. Mathematics determine the answer.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

So they can also discuss Panspermia. The FSM will also bless them! Nothing to do with the Theory of Evolution at all. They can still only teach the ToE in Biology! Hope this law forces schools to give the FSM equal time on the origin of life with all the other religions in religious studies!Edited by Pressie, : Added sentence

That's fine in religious classes. It will open the eyes of some kids to realise that their parents religions are not special, but just one of many. As long as they give the FSM equal time. Yes, I know, but they've been doing it since they started creation "science". Nothing new. Yes, it is. Nothing new. It's been happening for decades now. Remember, after their original creation "science" didn't work, they opened up a new term, called "Intelligent Design". It worked for the unintelligent, but didn't fool the intelligent, nor the courts. They've been trying it for decades now. It works on some people, but scientists and courts (where people have to tell the truth under oath or face a sentence in penetentiary) are not that easily confused. That's great. That's the time for kids to ask for evidence for their respective religions. When I was at school, only the Christian religion was allowed in religious classes. No evidence asked, no evidence provided. Only sermons. I only found out that other religions existed, later. They've done it that way since creation "science" started. I think it was the early eighties. It's thirty years later, it still hasn't worked. A lot of people do have intelligence and are not that easily fooled. They'll keep on trying to do it , forever. If it doesn't work for them, they tried and will try different names, again. History repeats itself. They'll never stop.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.