paper against evolution, for intelligent design

Rei, you said in responce to Sweetstuff..."Using the "irreducible complexity", one could argue that humans have to have always existed as they do now, because if someone took away modern technology, we'd all starve..."With all due respect, why do you use this as an example of the
"power" of the Irreducible complexity argument? Besides being the fallacy of Bad Analogy, I daresay that there are other forms of providing sustinence for a onesself rather than using modern technology! There are many more plausible and virtually innumerable alternatives to starving in a hypothetical situation as that one you provided. I don't think your analogy shows anything relevant about the Irreducible Complexity argument.Matt

If you can't make judgments on biological organisms, what argument would you propose as a more conclusive and logical argument for ID?Matt

Ashley (aka. Sweetstuff) is in my class @ Rockbridge, yes, a religious school. It is not that we are forced to be close minded at school, or that our teachers are vindictive. It is just that our final paper (due in may) is on the topic of A.) critiquing evolution, or B.) supporting creation. I am sorry, but any attempts to convert Ashley or I to Evolution is fruitless. It is impossible to convert a true Christian to a theory such as evolution. The evidence doesn't support the facts for evolution, and our religious beliefes are much more conclusive in our thinking. So, in conclusion, this young lady is not being forced to remain closed-minded. Not like she could possibly accept Evolution anyway. And for your information, e-mails to thew school would do nothing because you are setting forth a straw man. Our school is not that way, and the reason we are a religious school is because we have reasonably falsified the "alternatives." Oh, and we don't have to meet any State teaching requirements. We would know, My father is the chairman of the board there, and Ashley's father is a Maryland state Delegate. I know you would enjoy those e-mails claiming "hypocrisy!...scraed of evolution!, et al, but it would go unheeded. Sorry!Matt[This message has been edited by Matt Tucker, 12-11-2003]

Primarily, I am sorry for responding for Ashley. I was not aware that people on this site could only post things if the topic was addressed to him/her. Now that I am aware of it, I shall cease to speak without being spoken to. Ha, you happy? And rejecting evolution is not being closeminded. I said it impossible to convert a true christian to evolution, which coincides nicely with your comment concerneing the pope. The pope doesn't quite fit in in my thinking. I don't view Catholics as borna again christians. Maybe I'm passing judgment unjustly, but I do not consider the pope as saved. Also, the reason I said your e-mails would go unheeded was because I was under the impression they were simply a declaration of hypocrisy and unjust judgment passing on part of the school. Therefore, I did not consider the emails as legit questions. Sorry. I misunderstood you. I don't quite see your point in asking whether the school can teach about Santa, the Easter Bunny, et al. So what is we talk about these things in school. If we did, which we do not, what would be wrong with it? We could not get away with the fact that the Holocaust never happenned, because everyone knows it did. You could not get in, due to the fact that you completely deny the existence of God, and that doctrine is the foundation of teaching in every class. Apparently I made myself unclear concerning the subordination of the schools to Maryland state law. We must comply with standards of facilities (i.e., with X amount of people, you must have X amount of lavatories, etc...), but as far as I am aware, there are no teachings compliancies concerning our school.Matt