Interesting video

Alan, if you tell me you watched the whole thing I'll watch it.

You bet it wasn't!

what came first the chicken or the egg?

Stevo

:laughing3:

.....................................................................................................................................................................................................Kudos to Rolo

OK I'm bored so I'm downloading the video from utube to watch it at my leisure. If it's any good I will then enlighten you with my interpretation so you can all sleep better at night :fart4:

I will gladly comment on this idea more fully later. But rest assured, that this is a completely unsubstantiated pseudo-scientific theory. Even the head scientist pushing ID (Intelligent Design), William Dembski, has said that the science hasn't caught up the proposed theories. It is at the stage where they are focused picking apart the flaws in the Neo-Darwinian concept of evolution. There are few ideas of their own to push their theory, and every single one of these has been refuted by solid science and a proper understanding of evolution.

The ID movement was created by the same people pushing "Creation Science", trying to substantiate that the world around us was created by a "supreme being". Specifically, so it can be taught in schools. There was a movie about this topic, from the ID point of view; "Expelled". They were doing their best to show that it is a science, but it recently took a hard blow.

"In Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, a group of parents of high-school students challenged a public school district requirement for teachers to present intelligent design in biology classes as an alternative "explanation of the origin of life". U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III ruled that intelligent design is not science, that it "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents", and that the school district's promotion of it therefore violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.[23]"

ID leaves more questions than answers and it presupposes a conclusion before the evidence is found. I have a strong opinion on this topic, but I don't want to write too much now.

Jim I think you'd do very well in politics :noshit: