[continued from previous message]   
      
   >> about what happened in some court case decided by a judge in a shit   
   >> show of a trial.  Yes, I've read many of the parties involved and   
   >> their work, but how they handled a trial is irrelevant to me.  For   
   >> you, the winning outcome is of utmost importance.  It's all that   
   >> matters.  Some judge said it was not science.  This cannot be in   
   >> schools.  That alone is laughable to me, yet I completely understand   
   >> why he did it.  You go on and on, I guess about their ultimate motive   
   >> being to have religion taught in schools.  I would agree that society   
   >> should have a separation between church and state and don't think any   
   >> of this can be done properly in today's school system.  I would rather   
   >> it was not.  Yet, your religion of materialism, does the same thing   
   >> you accuse the ID people of.  You do it here all the time.  You spit   
   >> out figures like millions of years, you seem to give Darwin's natural   
   >> selection powers a rational person might think it doesn't have, and   
   >> many other things you treat as proven fact, when in reality they are   
   >> all theories.  If you would only say, "We believe" things happened   
   >> like this it would be more palatable, but you don't.  I don't respond   
   >> to this stuff usually, I just notice it and find it less than truthful.   
   >   
   > Willful stupidity is nuts.  What you need to do is learn from history so   
   > that you aren't duped by the ID scam.  It is likely that you are just   
   > like MarkE and only want to be lied to, but what kind of existence is that?   
      
   Oh, I have far more confidence in my ability to reason than I guess you   
   think I do.   
      
      
   > What winning?  ID was known to be a loser from the start.  After the   
   > bait and switch started to go down Nelson (Nelson was one of the   
   > original ID perps that started the ID scam unit at the Discovery   
   > Institute) started admitting that the ID science had never existed and   
   > that they were just working on developing some real ID science.  Nelson   
   > was YEC and he would never have signed up to support the Wedge strategy   
   > if the other ID perps had, had any real ID science.  The Nelson quote   
   > from 2005 is usually put up, but Nelson was making similar comments   
   > years before that was published.  Nelson has continued to support using   
   > ID as bait to this day.  Just look it up.  You don't have to believe me.   
   >   Find out for yourself.   
      
   Again, you are concentrating on what this group of people does.  ID to   
   me is so much more than that.  It's nothing new, and has been written   
   about since Plato in one for or another.   
      
      
   >> When it really comes down to it, most of the stuff you think you know,   
   >> is never a threat to my beliefs.  Most is either expected, interpreted   
   >> in silly ways, based on faulty assumptions, or just outright   
   >> theoretical guesses that align with materialism.  EV never seems to   
   >> connect the dots.  That's OK, I would expect everyone to keep   
   >> looking.  Yet if you attend today's schools, you would never know this   
   >> is the reality.   
   >   
   > What a nut job.  You obviously do not understand what the situation   
   > actually is.  Willful stupidity and ignorance is not your friend.  There   
   > is no real reason for you to even try to support the ID scam at this   
   > time.  You likely do not want them to succeed in producing any valid ID   
   > science anymore than Kalk and Bill did.   
      
   There you go.  Very unhelpful.   
     ---rest snipped---   
   --   
   Science doesn't support Darwin.  Scientists do.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)