"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"Trevor Wilson" wrote in message
...

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Schizoid Man" wrote in message


I cannot believe the audacity of Judge Johns. Not only is
he legislating from the bench, he is also not qualified
to dismiss the scientific theory of intelligent design as
'thinly-veiled creationism'.

I don't know why Christians feel the need for their own unsupportable
theory of creation just like the one that the secularizers have
(evolution).

**The problem with that is that Evolution is a fact. It is observable and
undeniable. What is not completely understood, are ALL of the factors
which contribute to evolution. Darwin, in his seminal work, attempted to
explain a good deal of the fact of evolution, by the term: 'Natural
Selection'.

Correct. It is "Natural Selection" that is unproven, not "Evolution."
Conceivably, the selection process could be the result of "Intelligent
Design."

**Whilst there is abundant evidence to support Natural Selection as part of
the evolutionary process, there is no evidence to suggest any intelligent
design. If evidence comes to hand to support intelligent design, then and
only then, should it be considered.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au