tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8776899.post111651951270063112..comments2024-03-06T03:15:58.539-05:00Comments on <b>THE NEW REFORM CLUB</b>: Interesting Weblog on Intelligent DesignHunter Bakerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14961831404331998743noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8776899.post-1117659590614882482005-06-01T16:59:00.000-04:002005-06-01T16:59:00.000-04:00Hi Tlaloc,"That really doesn't answer my question....Hi Tlaloc,<BR/><BR/><I>"That really doesn't answer my question."</I><BR/><BR/>Yes, it does. You asked if Hunter was mistaken when he characterized Telic Thoughts as an ID blog, and I explained that he wasn't. I then expanded on my answer, pointing out that non-ID theories aren't the only ones that can incorporate evolution.<BR/><BR/>You seem to be the only one who's confused.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8776899.post-1117059064568989042005-05-25T18:11:00.000-04:002005-05-25T18:11:00.000-04:00Hi Tlaloc,"So was Hunter wrong when he touted the ...Hi Tlaloc,<BR/><BR/><I>"So was Hunter wrong when he touted the site as a weblog for ID?"</I><BR/><BR/>No. Evolution isn't the sole property of the non-teleological approach.<BR/><BR/><I>"Actually do I even care? Not really."</I><BR/><BR/>Yet you chose to point to a particular post, trying to make an issue out of which side of the "fence" the author was arguing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8776899.post-1116961355875719102005-05-24T15:02:00.000-04:002005-05-24T15:02:00.000-04:00Hi Tlaloc,"I meant the author of the comments in t...Hi Tlaloc,<BR/><BR/><I>"I meant the author of the comments in the post about the article, not the author of the original article."</I><BR/><BR/>Guts? He's also an evolutionist.<BR/><BR/>Krauze<BR/><A>http://www.telicthoughts.com/</A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8776899.post-1116941084537042302005-05-24T09:24:00.000-04:002005-05-24T09:24:00.000-04:00Hi Tlaloc,"The article quotes a source that is a g...Hi Tlaloc,<BR/><BR/><I>"The article quotes a source that is a great support for evolution and yet the author treats it as if it supported ID. Um Hello! You're the ones arguing AGAINST evolution."</I><BR/><BR/>No, he's not. Mike Gene, the author of that article, is an <A HREF="http://telicthoughts.com/?p=75" REL="nofollow">evolutionist</A>.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com