I see. You want to refute a century and a half of scientific research, yet you have nothing to put in its place.
There is nothing preposterous about intelligent design, just in the nonsense that god willed everything into existence as described in ancient writings.
Since you have no theory of your own, how is it you're so certain that evolution is wrong?
You have posted scientific theories that liberals have to reject in order to be liberals? That was your claim, yet I haven't seen any such theories. Maybe I missed it.
OK, I can't refute that. I have shown that at least most people who describe themselves as conservatives do reject at least two of the three theories under discussion, but, no, I can't show that they must.
I'm still puzzled as to why they do. They don't have to stand reason on its head to maintain their political leanings, yet so many do.
I accept the hypothesis of an anthropogenic component to climate change because nearly all of the credible scientists in the world accept that hypothesis. That has nothing to do with politics. It could turn out that they are wrong, but it seems highly unlikely at this point. The assertion that NOAA, NASA, and the international equivalents of those organizations are somehow involved in a gigantic conspiracy to enslave us all to a Marxist world government is totally preposterous. Surely, you don't subscribe to that nonsense?
