buzsaw writes:
So the ID creationist must debate/discuss science with, as Rush Limbaugh would say, "half our brains tied behind us," in that evolutionists are allowed to debate/discuss science which is "mysterious" and science of which there is "no physical imperative that it is so,", whereas we, the ID creationists are not allowed to share this advantage. For to to so would be nonsensical talk. Is that fair and balanced, Percy?
There's a thread elsewhere for discussion of moderator issues, so I'll only comment here that there's no logic to saying that if there's something we don't know then we're free to ignore the things we do know. You are not free to disregard the known laws of physics simply because time's arrow is not represented in the equations.
But if time were reversed, how would this model be less scientific than Peeper's model?
I was only reinforcing Peeper's comment about time reversal by providing a little more detail, not introducing a different model.
My suggestion to you hasn't changed in over a year. Educate yourself on a topic before discussing it. Please don't allow this thread to be taken over by another discussion about whether you know what you're talking about.
--Percy