http://www.dailyastorian.info/main.asp?FromHome=1&TypeID=1&SectionID=23&ArticleID=13754&SubSectionID=392


http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A29972-2004Jan19


http://www.churchcentral.com/nw/s/id/18118/template/Article.html

On THIS issue, my first response would be to say that President is out where the busses don't run.

Religion is even more fun to argue than politics and people take it even more seriously.

Any well read person can easily argue both sides of the argument. Both sides have HUGE holes in their stories and rely on belief. The only real difference is that those on the scientific side are willing to explore and adapt their beliefs to what they find. Very few on the religious side are willing to explore and adapt what they believe to fit the evidence.

Two different kinds of belief and both strenuously supported by their supporters. Personally I don't care if they sell copies of the Bible and Marvel comics from the bookstore. I just hope they turn a profit, unlike most government run businesses.

... In a letter to a national newspaper.  "Evolutionists have only a theory while Creationists have nothing at all".

because their beliefs cannot withstand the scrutiny required to do so.  There is a lack of empirical evidence.

As creationists gain political power, they pull us backward, especially with regard to the extent that they can influence the education of children.

"Any well read person can easily argue both sides of the argument. Both sides have HUGE holes in their stories and rely on belief." -- MichaelCA


do you REALLY believe that?  that it's entirely equivocal and it all rests on 'belief' (as opposed to scientific evidence)?

you do realize that SCIENCE is entirely responsible for you, right now, using sub-atomic particles (electrons) to communicate with thousands of people, thousands of miles away, through an incredibly complex micron-scale network of silicon circuitry and fiber optic telecommunication lines

science that nominally took only 300 years of logical development and refinement to develop, through a tireless and painstaking process of hypothesis/experiment/revision (aka the "scientific method") as opposed to 2000 years of mental stagnation brought upon by religious doctrine

Singleton, I've been wondering where you were.  Well, you popped up at the right time, and most definitely on the right side of this issue.  I couldn't agree with you more!  I could go on forever pointing out the fallacies of religious dogma and creationist theories, but I'm not going to get started here.  Clarence Darrow must be rolling over in his grave!