Stupidest piece of legislation considered all year

[NDN]

Oh well, at least he believes in Evolution. Unlike some people.

[NDN]

The one that 90% of scientists accept? Also just because it's a 'theory' doesn't mean it can't be a fact. Unless we're going to start questioning Gravity too.

[NDN]

How is evolution testable?

Microevolution is, at least. We can see individual cells mutating into different strains of bacteria. Even a lot of the fundamentalists have conceded that. Besides that we have plenty of fossil records and DNA testing that indicates significant change over time in species or at least close relation between them.

Anyway, aside from that the term 'theory' in a scientific context just means an explanation based on observed facts rather than just speculation.

[NDN]

Please remember, I'm just playing devils advocate. I believe in evolution but probably not as current science describes it.

Hard to tell with you.

I'm not exactly Richard Dawkins myself you know.

[NDN]

How is evolution testable?

Dogs do it for me.  The Galapogos did it for Darwin.  Madagascar is pretty good too.  Hell, any large island reasonbly seperated from the mainland for 100,000 years.

..and I hate Dawkins with a passion.

Yeah, this works too.

At least he can sort of defend his arguments. What's more annoying than Dawkins is the legions of social whatever crats and Nietzche wannabes that copy him. Without being even remotely as well spoken. They're almost as annoying as the fundies.

[NDN]

Nah, Dawkins is a douche.  He's smart and he's (generally) right, but he's still an asshat.

No disputing that.