gold wrote:
> Eric Jacobsen wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 22:38:19 -0500, robert bristow-johnson
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>in article [email protected], Peter K. at
>>>[email protected] wrote on 12/20/2005 22:24:
>>>
>>>
>>>>http://www.fred.net/tds/noodles/noodle.html
>>>>
>>>>There ain't nothing like the scientific method!
>>>>
>>>
>>>more FSMism. yum!
>>>
>>>anyway, on a more "serious" note, i was pleased as punch to hear the court
>>>decision regarding ID in Pennsylvania where the judge called the ID
>>>proponents (some specific persons such as the school board members that had
>>>voted to inflict ID into the biology class and some to IDers in general)
>>>that they were just "dishonest". and this judge is Bush appointee. it's
>>>good someone in an official position is starting to cut the bullshit and
>>>name this for what it is.
>>
>>What I liked about this ruling, as I understand it, is that ID was
>>thrown out as inappropriate for a biology class. That's the right
>>decision IMHO. If it were a philosophy or civics or comparative
>>religion class or something along those lines I think it would be
>>fine, but it's definitely not science and this is what the judge
>>ruled.
>>
>>More power to 'im. And I concur, finally somebody with some chops
>>takes a stand.
>>
>>And thanks to Peter K for the original link, too. Pasta and beer for
>>everyone! Yaaaay!
>>
>>Eric Jacobsen
>>Minister of Algorithms, Intel Corp.
>>My opinions may not be Intel's opinions.
>>http://www.ericjacobsen.org
>
>
>
> I am surprised why peoples want to stick to an idea which was baseless
> even when it was proposed as well as it is today specially when we are
> scientifically so advanced that we have completely studied the human
> cell and it is found to be astonishingly so complex which could never
> possibly be mutated randomly.
>
> But out there are poeples who want to teach their young generations
> that there great great grand pa and ma was Monkey.

The putative purpose of teaching evolution is that if it is not taught,
the only alternative is the Genesis story, and then we will be all out
of scientists.

We're running out of scientists anyway, and the evolution proponents
are some of the dullest and dishonest bipeds on the planet.

>
> The theory of evolution has so many holes that it should be rejected
> now in our comtemporary age.
>
> Random can never lead to intellegent and cannot always pick the best
> choice or avail the best chance available. survival is impossible!!

I would not say never, but the ball is going to tend to rest in the
valleys rather than the peaks. And there's this nasty little question
if the second law of thermodynamics to contend with.

>
> Gold
>