Quote:

Creationism fails to do this because its whole premise is that "there is a God," which is not subject to empirical refutation or support.



And the "natural sciences" as defined by Darwin and later by Leaky rest on teh premise that teh world formed independant of God. As unscientific as it seems to assume there is a God, it's equally unscientific to assume there is no God.

As far as being placed in "harms way" that is exactly what natural design theorists want is to be juxtaposed in the pubic sphere so people can make up thier minds for themselves. When public schools consistantly teach evidence that has been roundly rejected even by other evolutionists, we know there's a problem.. If evolutionary science was as strong as ,perported they would jump at the chance to put thier theories in harms way as having to prove itself against opposing viewpoints, but like I said, if you're the only game in town then open diologue doesn't seem as apealing as it once did.

Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma. " I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9 JLA brand RACK points = 514k