Sentences with phrase «against creationist»

1st Willis have you ever come up against a creationist, very frustrating and for me you follow the same pattern.

Alongside his 50 years of research into evolution, Professor Ayala has long been a champion of the interdisciplinary questions of faith and science, arguing repeatedly against both creationist / intelligent design and atheist approaches to the origins of life.

Science educator Bill Nye, left, will face off against creationist Ken Ham in Tuesday night's debate.

You win... your stupid level is too high for me... someone else can argue against your creationist troll nonsense...

The first pits nearly the entire scientific community against creationists, who believe that they are upholding the veracity of Scripture by denying that evolution happened at all.

According to a 1994 essay in the New York Review of Books by John Maynard Smith, the dean of British neo-Darwinists, «the evolutionary biologists with whom I have discussed his [Gould's] work tend to see him as a man whose ideas are so confused as to be hardly worth bothering with, but as one who should not be publicly criticized because he is at least on our side against the creationists.

In discussing the regional geology (p. 807) and age (p. 811) of the Koongarra uranium deposits, Snelling 2 describes their geological history in fairly technical terms, however, to avoid the charge we lay against the creationists, of taking quotations out of context, I will quote Snelling 2 verbatim from the paper (p. 807):

In a five - page article, staff writer James Gorman made no effort to hide his bias against the creationists.

And thank your personal gods they have the gall to defend biological science, against creationists especially.

«The flat - earth lie was ammunition against the creationists.

What do you think about left - wing pundits railing against creationists?

Not exact matches

, people want to say that it's creationists against scientist or academia or any other reference that makes a believer seem ignorant.

Whatever orthodox believers may think of Kenny's journey over these decades from classical theism to something vaguer, he is at least an equal - opportunity basher: For his aversion to absolutism can equally well be employed against the New Atheists, who affect an apodictic absolutism in their argumentation that makes them as impregnable to counterevidence as anything found in a creationist textbook.

I don't know why creationists are so against transitional forms.

The same can be said for creationists arguing against evolution.

(CNN)- Bill Nye's viral YouTube video pleading with parents not to teach their children to deny evolution has spawned an online life of its own, with prominent creationists hitting back against the popular TV host.

This reminds me of the creationist argument against dog breeding supporting evolution.

What I think is funny is that creationist use this as supposed «evidence» against evolution, yet have no explanation as to why there are any fossils at all.

Most of the creationist / ID web sites have quietly begun to ask their followers to stop using a whole set of arguments against evolution, including the «just a theory» argument, because they reveal the person's woeful ignorance of real science.

It is completely made up by creationist because they can't argue against micro evolution because it is continually happening right in front of them.

On the other side are «creationists,» who argue — against not only science but also those faiths that accept the compatibility of evolutionary biology and Sacred Writ — that the earth was created on or around Sunday, October 23, 4004 b.c., a conclusion based on a sincere but discredited calculation by James Ussher in the seventeenth century.

In this article Johnson provides what he calls a «rough description» of modern evolutionary biology, raises a series of arguments against evolution, and finally proposes a creationist view of the origin of species.

Against this background readers may perceive the cruel irony in Justice Brennan's opinion for the Supreme Court majority, holding the Louisiana «balanced treatment» statute unconstitutional because the creationists who promoted it had a «religious purpose.»

The civil libertarians have not recognized the problem: by their lights, the liberties of the creationists and others who hold other - than - naturalistic views of human origins are not being infringed upon because only scientific truth is arrayed against them.

Chad, do yourself the disfavor of continuing to argue the stupidity that you do that does more harm to your position and the position of creationists than it does to the theory of evolution that you claim to be against.

If it is that the Catholic Church is somehow against the theories presented by Darrin, then you are way off base the Church does not take a creationist view.

Dr. Austin, the «scientist» in question, is a young earth creationist who went to the site with the stated purpose of finding «proof against evolution,» gathered material which was a mix of newly formed rock and ancient rock which had been ejected from the mountain, dated them with imprecise methods, and then skewed the results, as thousands of actual scientists have already reported.

I have a problem with people imposing their beliefs on others and saying «this is the way it is and there is no other way»... I have a big problem with creationists who go against science and the proof of evolution, but I also have a big problem with people demanding that there is no God on people when it is yet to be proved, and will probably never be proved, that there is in fact, not a God.

We have also been working against new religious Free Schools, including creationist schools.

Peers spoke out against the continuing power of «faith» schools to discriminate in admissions, the appointment of governors and the employment of staff, about homophobic bullying, about extremist (including creationist) groups setting up Free Schools with unbalanced curricula, about the need to repeal laws on collective worship and about the need to maintain community cohesion.

So maybe you, the cards do tend to be stacked, the deck tends to be stacked against you in a debate setting, but I wouldn't want to discourage anyone from thinking, well, you know, «You're [a] creationist, I'm not going to talk to you.»

One of our favorite stories of the year finally solves a lingering debate that has pitted rock art researchers and archaeologists against young - Earth creationists for decades.

The lawsuit alleges that the park expressly discriminated against Snelling because of his creationist beliefs and by doing so violated Snelling's constitutional rights and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

Some creationists do use thermodynamics to argue against evolution, but that is not what I am doing here; as an expert on evolutionary processes I would never do that.

It is freakishly common among creationists and global warming denialists alike against the evil scientific consensus.

The Orwellian - named «Discovery Institute» is an organization dedicated to the promotion of Intelligent Design (ID), which is little more than a superficial repackaging of long - discredited creationist arguments against evolutionary theory.They do not have a legitimate scientific program, although they desperately try to create the impression that they do.