Prayer ... SERIOUSLY?!

[Statler Waldorf]

---

Not at all, but then, as we have discussed elsewhere, and as even Dawkins has admitted, science had many of its roots in religion, and back when the one was slowly drawing itself as distinct from the other, many men of science were raised with religion and held onto it as a sort of social grace. Certainly, today, scientists need not appeal to the great goblin in the sky for people to take their work seriously, and had those men and women been born today, it is very likely that a large number of them would either have abjured religion as a whole, or kept it a quiet affair, as appeal to it would only lessen their work's importance.

Fun strawman, though.

---

So you are admitting those men were scientists despite what your little Wiki article claimed? Not a straw man at all, you claimed that creation science was pseudo-science, I refuted this claim by pointing to some of the greatest minds science has ever known who also believed in six day creation (with the exception of Owen who was an old earth creationist).

Actually if we are speculating, I would say none of them would be atheists today because they all presupposed that scripture was the word of God and would not allow for fallible science to disprove this because to do so would be absurd. So when did creation science become pseudoscience? Who determined this? Give me a precise date please and who determined this to be the case.

I wish we could both agree that censorship and black listing are wrong, but I guess you are not willing to take that step yet.