"Jeff Binkley -> Dan Ceppa"  wrote in news:9617
$HOLYSMOKE{at}JamNNTPd:

 JB>>> It is irrelevant to the topic at hand and not something I
chose
 DC>> to

 DC>> Wrong again, Jeff.

 JB> It is irrelevant to the topic at hand.  As I have stated numerous
times,
 JB> our government run schools teach many things which, including
truckloads
 JB> of leftwing dogma, are not science.  Again, I continue to see fear in
 JB> your responses.  I don't see tolerance, understanding or a big tent.

Science works by a series of rules.
On "60 Minutes" recently, they had a segment on "cold
fusion," and we
heard a lot of wild theories, that can't be backed up by actual
evidence.

Likewise, "intelligent design" is not science.
Because for intelligent design to be valid, a key rule of the scientific
method has to be simply ignored, namely the one about evidence.
We're not talking about attacking evolution, which is all you keep
doing.
Your theory, states that some super-being, (just admit it, he's your
God,) waved his hand or whatever and *PIF* life evolved.
Yet there is no evidence whatsoever for this.

There is also a huge bit of evidence against this "intelligent
designer."

Namely, all the total screwups in life on Earth, most of whom have gone
extinct.

 DC>> We know you can't provide the scientific theory.  You realize that,
 DC>> too.   That's why you bob and weave like a bee on acid.

 JB> I won't provide it.  Try and understand the difference between can't
and
 JB> won't.  Two letters may be too much for you.

You can't. Because there is none.

--- Xnews/5.04.25