St Kilda,
Your reasoning is bigoted by your belief and understanding of both ID and evolution. To assume design is fictional is nonsense.

Quote, "For those who understand the evidience, believing in evolution is like believing that the sky is blue (and the same thing, by the way, can now be said about human induced global warming). Believing in creationism, by comparison, is like believing in the tooth fairy."

Its amazing the comments you get from those who know so little about evolutionary theory and so much less about the design concept.
As i said earlier this is not a question of science in this debate (contained in this forum) it is philosophical.

The alter that scientists worship should be objectionism, yet they are as dogmatic as many of the posts on this forum.
Example, it took 50 years before the idea that the speed of light was not infinite became accepted. 100 years for orbital rotation of the Sun and more recently 20 years for recognition of the work in abdominal bacteria (Nobel prize this year).

Further the idea that flat earth was popular to the intellectual world at any time in history is equally a joke. tell any who lived on the shore, who would first see the tops of the sails and then the hull as ships got closer, or the Egyptians who new of the City that had the sun directly reflected in a deep well and recognized that at a certain time of day there should have been no shadows also. Yet for the Egyptians their columns drew shadows, after much considerations of the time of year, they inferred the Earth was a sphere. Not to mention the biblical references to the circle of the earth, Isa 40:22, Prov 8:27. The word circle is the Hebrew word for a sphere, now that was 2800 years ago.

Lets get some posts on what people know not guess, not postulate, if you don’t know the argument don’t write about it!

The ID debate is to teach the flaws of E.T. through a scientific process, and that is all. So what is everyone afraid of?

As someone who believes the Bible as it is written, I am an odd bird these days. A living fossil perhaps in the minds of most.

For me at least, the evidence concerning evolutionary theory resounds like a solid bell. The science is selective and erratic. As the judge in Pennsylvannia wrote, the theory is incomplete. That said, there is no question most who claim to be scientists agree with Darwin (although none of them can say how the first cell developed).

There was a post by a highly-lettered scientist, Robin Holliday, concerning the fundamental compatability between evolution and relgion or if you will, the Intelligent Design theory.

On that point I believe Mr. Holliday is absolutely right. Given my reading of scripture, one of us is incorrect about how life began and what purpose if any it has in terms of eternity.

Certainly those like me who believe in creation according to orthodox Christian beliefs (Jesus' ancestry to Adam is twice repeated in the New Testament, with both John and Paul attesting to His being the God of Creation with the Father and Holy Spirit)I cannot prove the hypothesis. I can give points to ponder. But you know what? I wasn't there were God stretched out his fingers and brought it into being, or conversely when the Big Bang blew.

In fact, nobody was there to observe. And it sure can't be repeated.

So here we are....

To those who scoff, I guess let's just wait and see. The Bible says Israel will be the center of world turmoil, and each of us will have a microchip implanted in our heads or hands if we want to buy or sell.

If (and they will) these things come to pass, will you believe?

Bingo snowman, and well said. though there are not many who are capable at looking at the big picture in this reductionist world. They are like little boys, good at taking things apart yet can't put it all together.
I was a true skeptic before becoming a Christian, the only reason i could put things together was due to a lack of preconceptions.

Edwin Spencer summarized it this way “There is a principal which is a bar against all information, Which is proof against all argument, and which cannot fail to keep man in everlasting ignorance, That principal is condemnation before investigation”

In other words the greatest barrier to truth is the uninvestigated presumption that you already have it.

Jane Caro exercises a great deal of faith in her assumption of objective science.

I believe in two things concerning this debate. God and United States. That being said, nothing like creationism or Intelligent design should be taught in public schools. Nothing that is founded in religion, any religion, should be taught in public schools. Just as I do not want other people's religion forced on me, I personally do not want to force mine on anyone else.

Anyone who believes Intelligent Design is a "scientifc theory", and not just away to teach religion in school, needs to seriously perform a common sense check and stop all the lying and acting like it's all innocent. That's not the way I want the people in my religion portrayed.

I want my children to learn about God in Church, from our Pastor, which is why the Church and the Pastor are there to begin with.

Fantastic response Murff

OLO needs more christians like you.