Try asking an anthropologist !
No, it's far stronger. And again, what is it with you atheists that makes you compare ID to ridiculous things? Is the string theory as pointless as balls of cheese?
In what sense is it "stronger". Strength sugests evidence; you have offered none. You are simply speculating. You can now choose between one of the many individual gods, a committee of gods, aliens and so on,. You obviously enjoy dscience fiction.
Finally someone who can the difference between religion and concept. ATHEISTS TAKE NOTE! They change. But the change from the supposed beginning of man to what we are today is a massive one.
What the hell are you talking about ? Why do you think what you call massive change cannot be accounted for by evolution ? As I previously suggested, you have no idea what you are talking about but that does not seem to bother you, at least to the extent where you are prepared to learn something about evolution.
Massive change can be accomplished in small incremental steps over time.
I think we should teach it as an idea, not as a fact or even a theory. Just as an idea. It is a rational enough idea.
An idea cannot be " rational enough"; it is either rational or it is not. ID is not rational in the light of the mountains of evidence that sipports evolution. It is intuitively attractive to the ignorant.
Perhaps we should also teach alien abduction as an idea. The sky is the limit when it comes to "ideas"
I never once agreed with creationism. I find creationism to be an interesting myth. I don't believe it, though.
So what point are you hoping to make ? You do not understand evolution as your posts clearly show. You think Creationism is an interesting myth. Well, you will find that creation myths abound. You can learn about them if you study mythology.
Speculation is important, because everything starts out with ideas. It isn't a ridiculous supposition that we were created, now the only problem is finding evidence.
Speculation has its place in the scheme of things but, in the present instance, you are speculating in vain. We have the evidence to support evolution, so speculating about rival ideas is a waste of time.
What position of ignorance am I at? I do believe in evolution.
Your position of ignorance has nothing to do with your beliefs. Youare ignorant of evolutionary theory, as your posts show. People have tried to tell you this but you don't want to know. Don't expect to be taken seriously !
Again, Creationism is not ID; ID simply suggests the concept that we were created. Nothing unreasonable about that. Creationism specifically states the exact everything about ID, which is why it's unreasonable. ID isn't, it's broader and understandable.
ID and Creationism are one and the same thing. ID is now used because it has a more respectable ring to it,. I have even heard speakers talk of Creation Science. The bottom line is that, whatever the name, it represents an attempt to clothe Biblical myth in respectable garb.
I think it should be taught as an idea, and evolution shouldn't be taught as fact. As a theory, yes, and a theory with alot of evidence, sure. But not fact. Teach both if you want to give people every side of the argument and let them choose for themselves.
You are just repeating yourself and, again, showing your ignorance. Evolution is a theory and is taught as such. When we talk of evolution, we should more properly talk of evolutionary theory in the present context. Evolution is a process and the associated theory explains how that process works. The alternatives are not theories because they lack supporting evidence. They could be taught under religious studies or mythology.
I take it from everything you say that you have little or no background in science. Go educate yourself ! If you can't be bothered, then stop posting nonsense which is all you are capable of doing at present.
