Federal judge rules "intelligent design"... UPDATE

[eits]

thank God...

 

[cwgannon]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: glenn1

the·o·ry (the'?-re, thîr'e) pronunciation
1. A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

Sorry, "intelligent design" is not a THEORY in the same sense as evolution or gravity is. ID is a collection of religious superstitutions which don't even qualify as a hypothesis, and are speculation, at best.

True enough. However I can just as easily make the case that abiogenesis is as speculative, unscientific, and untestable as Intelligent Design and there's no amount of "wide acceptance" which can make it scientific either. To me, if the theologians in the crowd want to take that approach in their wrongheaded efforts to discredit evolution, they've been handed their opportunity on a silver platter. Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.

Umm, no, you can't. I can generate RNA sponteneously in a test tube under set conditions, and RNA is sufficient to create self-perpetuating systems that have the capability to mutate and evolve.

Has this been done? I heard it hasnt been done in a laboratory yet.

Dude. Don't pretend you know what you're talking about.

RNA was first synthesized back in the '60s, which as far as I am concerned, is far enough back that I shouldn't even have to provide you with a link to back it up.

Go learn some stuff, eh.