Duane Bozarth wrote:
Larry Blanchard wrote:

Fletis Humplebacker wrote:

Steve Peterson wrote:


So give us your words. How about the first 20 sentences a teacher
should use to introduce the idea that evolution, or some other
scientific theory, has met an impasse, and cannot advance without
invoking an intelligent designer?




My, my, you're getting yourself all worked up. All because you
made an assertion that you can't support. I haven't suggested
that scientific investigation stop, neither do most ID proponents as
far as I can tell. That's a straw man argument if there ever was one.


You're really good at evading the question, aren't you?


Oh, he's not good at evading at all, simply ignores what he doesn't like
to hear--as do all others of his ilk I've run into.

That's quite a good example of what shrinks call "projection".
I've answered your questions and said quite clearly how
teachers should address what science cannot determine
about origins and/or life. I'll let any reader that's still interested
see who the liar is.