tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post113148353523912048..comments2024-03-18T17:17:00.423+13:00Comments on Not PC: Closing of 'Intelligent Design' trialPeter Cresswellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10699845031503699181noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1131651681904398622005-11-11T08:41:00.000+13:002005-11-11T08:41:00.000+13:00Can't agree more about the state versus school sep...Can't agree more about the state versus school separation. That's the heart of the debate.<BR/><BR/>To AL: the distinction between 'facts' and 'religion' is a false one. Most evolutionists never mention facts that don't fit in their current interpretation and actively oppose articles who are critical of aspects of evolution. Have you ever read a book critical of evolution? Have you ever read the devastating critique of Stephen Jay Gould on gradual evolution?<BR/><BR/>And what are the facts of 40,000 years of evolution in Europe? They were all based on a fraud, recently unmasked. A prof in Germany basically made everything up. His 35,000 year old skulls where still smelling (they actualy were from 1750 or so). What facts where that? For 30 years his 'facts' where the basis of European history.<BR/><BR/>What are the facts of the big bang? It's a theory of which more and more scientists become extremely sceptical. Please read this: http://www.cosmologystatement.org/<BR/><BR/>We all confuse applied science (which we can repeate in a laboratory) versus historical science where stories rule. It could have happened this. Sorry, but I'm a sceptic. I first want to see a demonstration please. What's falsifiable about evolution? You tell me.Berend de Boerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11433622686361556089noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11906042.post-1131508051457218172005-11-09T16:47:00.000+13:002005-11-09T16:47:00.000+13:00Whilst I agree entirely with Al's last paragraph, ...Whilst I agree entirely with Al's last paragraph, I would take issue with his first: (paraphrased) '1. it's not about separating state from church; 2. it's about keeping religion far away from science education'. <BR/><BR/>Firstly, this is precisely about church v state. Secondly, there are those who believe that religion and science are technically one and the same - and that eventually science will prove Genesis.<BR/><BR/>However, that aside, Peter (& William Penn) are correct. It is vital to separate church and state. Few in the developed world would disagree, surely.<BR/><BR/>And I, too, believe that this sorry saga demonstrates the necessity for the separation of state and education - as a matter of urgency.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com