Re: One last bit about "Expelled"

Ken McElhaney <mcelhaney@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> Plus, it points out that Darwin's understanding of cells comes from
> the "cutting edge" of mid-19th century. What if Darwin had our 21st
> century understanding of the complexities of even the simplist living
> cell? Would he have proposed the same theory? 

Yes, he would have. In fact he would have been much more confident in
it than he actually was. The study of cells, their commonalities and
differences provides the best evidence of evolution.

So what? That is how science works. Theories are made to explain the
known data, then experiments are contrived to test the predictions made
by those theories. When new data are found, or when the experimental
results aren't significantly different from the null hypothesis, the
theory is modified to incor****ate the new data. Thus having more
knowledge about the subject now than Darwin had 150 years ago proves
that science works. 

Now the opposite is true of creationism. Theories were made 3500 years
ago to explain the known data, then these theories are carved in stone
and called laws. These laws are not useful to make any predictions.
When new data are found, the laws can't be changed, what with being
carved in stone, so the data must be modified to conform to the law.
Thus, have more knowledge about the subject now than Moses had 3500
years ago proves that religion fails.