Re: The Reasonable Minority

On Dec 28, 12:26 pm, Evopeach <keaton1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Dec 28, 9:18 am, Grandbank <zetetic...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
(snip)

Would you agree to meet with the amazing Randy??

It's "Randi", not that accuracy interests you.

Since you are the one making supernatural claims, a category of claims
Randi considers unproven and to which his challenge is extended,
shouldn't you be the one meeting with him? In his own words:

"Randi comments: Creationism = Crackpot Science = Intelligent Design.
And don't you forget it."

"Evolution is a theory which has a huge amount of evidence to support
it. A massive amount of evidence; Darwin's books alone have a huge
amount of evidence in them and every year that goes by we add more to
that database. On the other hand, Intelligent Design has NO theory, it
has NO evidence. It's not a science, by definition its not a science
so it should be taught as part of Religious Studies, I thoroughly
agree with that, along with Voodoo and Casting of Runes and Ouija
Boards and such like. That should all be taught as part of Religious
or Supernatural Studies, yes, but as part of that kind of study, not
as a science, it is NOT a science."

" At JREF, we offer a one-million-dollar prize to anyone who can show,
under proper observing conditions, evidence of any paranormal,
supernatural, or occult power or event."

But thank you anyway. Watching a creationist invoking James Randi
provides even more insight into your intellectual shallowness and
dishonesty.

KP

Can your Harvard trained PhD with extensive peer reviewed publications
(400 he says), over at University of Arizona enter your contest. He's
the firm believer in intelligent evolution, G.O.D. as I recall, and
conducts all sorts of psychokinetic, paranormal, extrasensory
experiments there at U of A.

He's your guy, an evo, and wrote a lot of books as well for your
consumption like the God Experiments. He is certainly no
fundamentalist or Christian or IDer.

Aren't you proud of him....let him get that million.



WTF are you talking about?


KP

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Speculative Design Hypothesis (with predictions)
    ... It is the definition of science as it ... ID offers no testable hypothesis and no supporting evidence. ... If it can be shown that evolution *cannot* ... Not to the IDers, perhaps, but they do matter to scientists. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Challenge to evolutionists
    ... in science and rarely in religion. ... evidence may always change the explanation. ... No it could be included in science class. ... No, Calvin ball is an endeavour without rules, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Bush Remarks On Intelligent Design Theory Fuel Debate
    ... > "I am certainly well aware of the advances of science. ... The question is - in the absence of evidence to the contrary, ... > design and creationism, ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Comprehending Steven J.
    ... Your claim that Romans talks about modern evolution is one. ... The writers of the Bible had no idea about that evidence, and I don't expect them to have anticipated it. ... Ray, I've explained many times why natural evolution means nothing of the sort. ... The writers of the Bible knew nothing about science, the scientific method, or how life works. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Speculative Design Hypothesis (with predictions)
    ... It is the definition of science as it ... ID offers no testable hypothesis and no supporting evidence. ... ID is more logical than evolution ... Not to the IDers, perhaps, but they do matter to scientists. ...
    (talk.origins)