Originally posted by cjbaldw:
You can continue to attack "people" like me, even though you have no idea what my beliefs are, you can continue to dismiss arguments based upon the same rhetoric the NCSE does (you've done a great job so far  ), or you can keep this thread on topic and argue based upon the merits, which you continue not to do, I am still waiting.
Attack? I donâ??t think so â??? unless by attack you mean stating it just as it is. No idea what your beliefs are? Of course I do â??? youâ??ve spent six flipping pages explaining it all to us. Incidently cjbaldw, you can bloody well bet I know where your talking points come from.
I think the merits of the case are clear to any thinking person.
The religious right wants to redefine science in a way that no scientist can accept. Science under the new definition means â??Because it says so in the bible.â?
Using this new definition of â??scienceâ? they want to teach all children that a â??scientificâ? alternative to evolution in creationism. That evolution is â??just a theoryâ? sort of on par with clouds made of cotton candy theory. They want to do this harm to children in pursuit of their political goals.
Where am I wrong here? Is this not the real issue? The question is who decides what science is. The scientific community or a religious organization?
99 Tropic Green SVT, Tan Leather, 20K miles, "Nice Twin" (factory stock).
99 Tropic Green SVT, Tan Leather, 28K miles, "Evil Twin" (Turbo AER 3L and more in progress)
96 Red LX, Opal Grey Leather 2.5L, ATX, 22K miles
| 
