"A Totally Different Type of Biology"- and EvoTard Confusion
The seems to be a rumble of evotardgasms over "A Totally Different Type of Biology". Let me attempt to clear the air:
Richard Dawkins said those words:
The implication you make is that there’s something about religion which is personal and upon which evidence doesn’t have any bearing. Now, as I scientist I care passionately about the truth. I think that the existence of a supreme being – a supernatural supreme being – is a scientific issue. Either there is a God or there isn’t. Either there are gods or there are no gods. That is a scientific issue. Yes, it’s a supremely important scientific question. If the universe was created by an intelligence, then we are looking at an entirely different kind of scientific theory than if the universe came into existence by natural means. If God or gods had something to do with the creation of life, then we’re looking at a totally different kind of biology.
It is a direct quote from him. If I quote Richard Dawkins does that mean I am saying it and those are my words? What happens if someone else also quotes him? Are we all Richard Dawkins? EvoTards are so pathetically predictable.
But anyway- RICHARD DAWKINS said it. That was taken from here- Dawkins starts talking near the 14:30+ mark.
What makes it "a totally different type of biology"? Origins- it is the difference between geology and archaeology, ie all the difference in the world. And that is why one of the three basic question science asks is "how did it come to be this way?"- because it matters to any investigation how it did come to be the way it is.
IOW the only people who would even question that are people who are scientifically illiterate.