neophyte321
Guest
There is literally no argument that invalidates ID.
NONE.
In fact, the more its argued against, the more ridiculuous that argument becomes. As the anti-ID crowd argues from their position of supposedly 'pro-science' self-righteousness, they simply expose that they know nothing. "Big Bang" ... Oh that explains it!
On the otherhand the potential form the "Designer" takes is open to an infinite number of interpretations, and will always be.
What's nauseating is the "pro-science" crowd, merely uses their "anti-design" position as a trojan to continue its assault on established-religion. "Kill 'GOD' at All Costs! Even if it means we bastardize our 'pro-science' stance."
They simply expose themselves as hypocritical, cynical, frauds
NONE.
In fact, the more its argued against, the more ridiculuous that argument becomes. As the anti-ID crowd argues from their position of supposedly 'pro-science' self-righteousness, they simply expose that they know nothing. "Big Bang" ... Oh that explains it!
On the otherhand the potential form the "Designer" takes is open to an infinite number of interpretations, and will always be.
What's nauseating is the "pro-science" crowd, merely uses their "anti-design" position as a trojan to continue its assault on established-religion. "Kill 'GOD' at All Costs! Even if it means we bastardize our 'pro-science' stance."
They simply expose themselves as hypocritical, cynical, frauds