Fascistfury-
I agree 100% with you on this. GW spent 4 years at Andover(a very expersive prep school), 4 years at Yale and 2 years at Harvard. But look at the result of all that training!?
He still seems unable to string two ideas together in a cohert manner. And now he seems unable to distinguish between near scientific certainly and a creation myth.
And he wants to be the education president?!
Am I the only one scared here? I dont know what the minimum threshold for presidential intelligence is, but I dont think GW is even 50% there!
david a-
How do I reply to your clever sophistry? I noticed you already posted elsewhere with your 'scientific' evidence claiming that science has proven Jesus has risen from the dead with certainly.
You have basically picked a very small subset of the scientists that worked on Evolution and basically quoted them out of context. Obviously, Evolution is an incomplete theory that is being refined and changed, but very few competent scientists in the area disagree with most of its basic premises.
Your selective argument for the Resurrection is even worse -you quote a bunch of pseudoscientists or 'whacks' and claim this is rigorous evidence! And fail to mention the other 99% percent of relevant ( and more respected) scientists that would strongly disagree with your 'proof'. This is the type of crap that gives science a bad name!
Maybe your fundamentalist upbringing has taught you all of these 'truths', but you need to grow up and use your brain!
Reason and faith are compatible for many devoted believers. There is no need to assume the head in the sand approach to reason.
E
|