A Fish With Feet?
Much is being made in the liberal press of the discovery of a fossil said to be a fish with some evidence that it had feet. There have been other such discoveries that were initially proclaimed as the “missing link”. These discoveries, sooner or later, have all been exposed as either fraudulent or irrelevant, and most people who identify themselves as proponents of Intelligent Design accept the fact that evolutionary changes take place within a species. Where we draw the line is in accepting the theory that evolution explains the origin of life and the creation of new species (Darwinism).
A more compelling bit of information on this matter is the following:
“Over 500 doctoral scientists have now signed a statement publicly expressing their skepticism about the contemporary theory of Darwinian evolution. The Scientific Dissent From Darwinism statement reads: “We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”
The list of 514 signatories includes member scientists from the prestigious US and Russian National Academy of Sciences. Signers include 154 biologists, the largest single scientific discipline represented on the list, as well as 76 chemists and 63 physicists. Signers hold doctorates in biological sciences, physics, chemistry, mathematics, medicine, computer science, and related disciplines. Many are professors or researchers at major universities and research institutions such as MIT, The Smithsonian, Cambridge University, UCLA, UC Berkeley, Princeton, the University of Pennsylvania, the Ohio State University, the University of Georgia, and the University of Washington.” www.evolutionnews.org
Unfortunately, under prodding or from legal attacks by the ACLU, some school boards have actually retreated from their policy that the teaching of Darwinian evolution should be accompanied at least by the disclaimer that not all scientists accept the THEORY of Darwinism and that there are other possible explanations. The ACLU continues to collect huge fees and fines by bringing school boards to court and challenging even this mention as an unconstitutional infringement of the separation of church and state.
In other words, with our judicial system overwhelmingly polluted by activist, liberal judges, school boards are afraid that even a mention of a possibility that Darwinism might be faulty will bankrupt them. The Dover case was a perfect example of this ongoing travesty.
posted by RussWilcox @ 7:11 AM
6 comments
6 Comments:
So they think that some species of anciant fish had legs, and we may have evolved from him? If this is true, then why can't I breath underwater? I think that these Lefties have been reading too many comic books.
More creationist disinformation.
"These discoveries, sooner or later, have all been exposed as either fraudulent or irrelevant"
Thousands of transitional fossils have been discovered. Of those, a grand total two were frauds, maybe three if you stretch the definition of fraud. The rest are only irrelevent to those who wish to blind themselves to the evidence.
"Where we draw the line is in accepting the theory that evolution explains the origin of life and the creation of new species"
No one claims Darwinian evolution explains the origin of life. Denying that evolution can explain the origin of species is denying observable reality. The Darwinian mechanism has been observed to create new species both in the lab and in the wild.
"In other words, with our judicial system overwhelmingly polluted by activist, liberal judges, school boards are afraid that even a mention of a possibility that Darwinism might be faulty will bankrupt them. The Dover case was a perfect example of this ongoing travesty."
The judge in the Dover case is a Bush appointee with a consistent record of judicial restraint. To tar him as a liberal activist is absurd and, frankly, just the kind of tactic a leftist would engage in.
It really stings to accuse me of using liberal tactics. Any judge who deliberately misinterprests the "establishment" clause is an activist judge, no matter who appointed him. (i.e. Souter). For a full explanation of the supposed transitional fossils, go to Discovery.org.
LOL. What does "misinterprests" mean?
I assume you meant to say "misinterprets." Pray tell, how exactly did the judge misinterpret the establishment clause?
BTW, the Discovery Institute isn't much of an of authority on paleontology, so why would you be so deferential to their supposed "explanation" of transitional fossils?
A major goal of many leftists, including the ACLU, is to use the "establishment" clause to wipe out every symbol or mention of God or religion from our public life. The Dover decision is one such case.
That's funny. I thought intelligent design is a strictly scientific theory and has nothing to do with religion. At least that's what it's chief proponents say.
But you're right, ID is religion mascarading as science. Now I hate the ACLU as much as you do, but do you honestly believe that teaching religion as science is equivalent to saying "under God" in the pledge of allegence?
Religion has an important place in public life. We agree with this much. But it does not follow from this premise that it's okay to pass off a sectarian religious views as if they were science in a public school. That's precisely the sort of thing the establishment clause was designed (very intelligently, I might add) to prevent.
Post a Comment
<< Home