It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in evolution debate

I would like to respond to the letter 'Recent letter offered no examples of Darwinian disingenuousness,' . He responds to an article with, 'He says evolution is 'so riddled with holes,' yet fails to provide a ... Full Story

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#102258 Nov 18, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
It appears that bones in the human wrist also presented a fact that humans had a knuckle walking ancestry. On the back of one single fossil this 'fact',that was supported by the majority of the scientific community were wrong and this 'evidence' never was evidence at all.
In fact it was a very clever guess for an ancient bible writer to have knowledge that indeed we are made from the elements of dirt. It appears Moses had some insight into this fact before modern science.
Homology, be it morphological or genetic, is no more than a game of pick a suite of traits that suit and ignore anything that doesn't. Instead give any anomoly a name like convergent evolution, homoplasy, deletion, insertion, recombination, duplication and call that assumptive reasoning, evidence.
Mankind is a primate which is distinguished from any other primate by the fact that mankind is a furless obligate biped, that has the ability to make meaning of the world through higher reasoning ability, abstract thought and sophisticated language. Mankind has shorter telomeres than any other non human primate. It is easy to distinguish man from other apes if one truly wishes to, but evos do not.
http://carta.anthropogeny.org/moca/topics/tel...
What it all means is that chimps, as well as any other primate, and humans are not as alike as some would like us all to think.
The other sad fact is that any child can separate a human being out from a bunch of apes, in pick the odd one out. Unfortunately, adult evolutionists, be they theist or not or scientists or not, are often unable to perform this simple task. This may seen as evidence of the extreme inculcation evolutionists undergo to maintain mankind is nothing more than another evolved ape.

This looks like a summary of a lot of (poor) creationist arguments.

Which of the above nonsense do you really think might hold water. Point it out and I will refute it specifically.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#102259 Nov 18, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
You evos take the cake in narrow mindedness.
I suppose 150 years of change and instability is not a result of evolutionists reinterpreting words to suit their own confirmation bias. I say I can produce no worse whilst you pretend that you have some substatiated advantage based on mythical empirical evidence that changes like the wind.eg human knuckle walking ancestry, brain size tied to bipedalism, single celled LUCA, gradual as opposed to punctuated equilibrium, 2 domains of life change into 3, vestigal organs supposedly having no function poofed into vestigal organs being redefined by a different function, non coding dna is junk another lovely story thrown at creos for decades etc etc etc.
The biggest problem with you evos is that you seem to like to pretend that you have some intellectual advantage because you can refer to over 150 years of history backed by libraries of outdated nonsense supported by flavour of the month.

So science is bad because it continues to learn and improve.

Weird.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#102260 Nov 18, 2012
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
<quoted text>
"The deification of Jesus" is quite an interesting expression. There are many who would say that not even Jesus presented Himself as a "deity"; which may or may not be true.
Yet I am compelled by something to see Him as such. I know that there is hardly one submissive fibre in my body. If it were possible, I would defy the very laws of reality; just straight spit at them.
But there is something about that character, what was said of Him and what He said; simply put, "never before did man speak like that". In His every word is a blueprint for power; there is an "Omnipotence" in every word that He spoke, their truth extending into eternity. Like a sword of truth; sharp on both sides. Not that there is duplicity, but that His truth works both ways.

Your best post, in my opinion.

What happened to Jesus at his baptism by John?

I find Jesus to be compelling even after stripped from the legend and even status as being equal to God.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#102261 Nov 18, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
BTW....Don't you know what your tailbone is used for?
Let me tell you a secret, the coccyx is an attachment point for muscles that evos wish was a vestigal tail.

No, it is a vestigial tail.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_vestigiali...

If you want pictures you can find them on google.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#102262 Nov 18, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to get over yourself. Fof how long have the know alls that are the intelligencia gone on about the NT being written in the 2nd century with their bla bla.
It is not mankind that get to deify Jesus. Just whom do you think mankind is?. Jesus and God are their own bosses just in case you are confused.
Oh bla bla, Jesus said he is the son of God and you can scratch around and quote what ever you want out of context and that won't be changed. Jesus does not need deification and this is the first time I have heard of this level of nonsense.
I suppose you support some fat guy that left his family to find enlightenment or some religion that suggests the world is held up by a turtle instead, or the poofing or life from non life, all sounding equally like myths.
The bible is the only spiritual text where its composers did not take glory for themselves and actually did not live in shameless luxury as they preached. This in itself is akin to a miracle. You'd be hard pressed to find any other spiritual writing that is not based on hypocricy.

I see your ignorance continues past science and inflicts your views on other spiritual texts as well.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#102263 Nov 18, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
Technically I think it is sad that the coccyx being a point of muscle attachment in your humble opinion is not vital. This is like reasoning a finger is also vestigial because it is also not vital.
What's up? Did your silly attempt to prove some stupid evo point evade you?
Get over it. TOE is a philosophy that is backed by theoretical and assumptive reasonings and scenarios that are presented as empirical evidence, but aren't.

I love it when people who don't know the first thing about science or evolution attempt to "debunk" it and know more than the science fluent. Why do people do that again? What is it called?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning-Kruger_e...

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#102264 Nov 18, 2012
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
<quoted text>
The loss of a tail would be in conflict with the trend/nature of evolution; wouldnt it?

Oooooh. Fatal error.

I suggest you try to play it off as a joke.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#102265 Nov 18, 2012
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
<quoted text>
Mr. LowellGuy, if repeatable does not mean able to be reproduced at will; then you need to start clarifying the terms you are using before you speak to me... because we cannot communicate if the expressions dont have the same value to our minds.
If repeatable has anything to do with reproducible at will; then I am afraid the person who made the point about frequency being irrelevant, is irrelevant to this room.
And yes, God affects things in the natural world. But get this, I also affect things in the natural world; but if I do something outside your field of vision, you dont have to believe me no matter how much proof I offer that I am he who did it.
But, if you affect things in the natural world, that is detectable, and that would make you part of the natural world, which means you cannot be supernatural and thus beyond the scope of scientific inquiry. So, now you think your God is not supernatural. Great. Just tell us how to detect your God and we'll be on our way to full-blown global Christianity.
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
As it relates to meaning: I know what I mean when I say what I mean; it is you that must clarify the what other men mean when you use terms they create.
You might know what you mean, but I promise you that nobody understands what you meant when you said that. Try not posting drunk next time.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#102266 Nov 18, 2012
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
<quoted text>
So you cant use an analogy to elaborate a line of logic unless you know genetics?
So I guess if you dont have a PHD you are not able to cross the road either? Brilliant!
If it were up to people like you, you would attempt tell us how many breaths of air to take per day. LOL
Airplanes are heavier than air, therefore they can't fly unless angels pick them up.

I see nothing wrong with this explanation for heavier-than-air flight. And, what's more, you can't disprove it, so I win. Bible 1 : Bernoulli 0. Suck it, science!

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#102267 Nov 18, 2012
MazHere wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to get over yourself. Fof how long have the know alls that are the intelligencia gone on about the NT being written in the 2nd century with their bla bla.
It is not mankind that get to deify Jesus. Just whom do you think mankind is?. Jesus and God are their own bosses just in case you are confused.
Oh bla bla, Jesus said he is the son of God and you can scratch around and quote what ever you want out of context and that won't be changed. Jesus does not need deification and this is the first time I have heard of this level of nonsense.
I suppose you support some fat guy that left his family to find enlightenment or some religion that suggests the world is held up by a turtle instead, or the poofing or life from non life, all sounding equally like myths.
The bible is the only spiritual text where its composers did not take glory for themselves and actually did not live in shameless luxury as they preached. This in itself is akin to a miracle. You'd be hard pressed to find any other spiritual writing that is not based on hypocricy.
You're really pissing off Zeus, you know.

“What, me worry?”

Since: Mar 09

I'm a racist caricature!

#102268 Nov 18, 2012
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
<quoted text>
God is True. Christ identifies Himself as truth; and truth appeals to logic and reason more than any other influence. There is a need to come to a rational and logical faith in God regardless of whether we believe in the Bible or not.
I am truth. There, now I am God. See how easy that was? Here's an idea: try basing an argument on something other than complete horseshit.
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
As an evangelist, I must be prepared to help others see the light by any means; without removing the true value of the message.
Even if you have to lie to get them to see things your way. Yes, we know. We just don't see the value in leading people to "truth" via lies.

You said your God affects the natural world, meaning your God is detectable. Just tell us how to detect your God scientifically. As I had to repeatedly tell KAB...you'd better stop making declarative statements as answers, because the logical consequences of your words will be your undoing. Logic is NOT your friend.
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
I am willing to give the message from the bible directly as it is in the bible; but not everyone is willing and they often have a good reason. The Bible, especially the old testament is often poorly translated (for example: Reed Sea was interpreted Red Sea), and there are many other inconsistencies. Did God move David to number the children of Israel, or did the Devil move him to number them; or perhaps God moved the devil to move David to number them?
So, there are good reasons for rejecting the Bible? REALLY? So, if it were judgement day, and God was asking an atheist why he rejected the Bible, and he gave one of those "good reasons," God would shrug and let him into Heaven because, hey, can't blame the guy. He's got a good reason!

See what happens when you open your mouth? Stick to mindless platitudes and scripture quotes. The second you veer from that path, you step in crap.
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
Furthermore, they have a right to question what they are told; and it is by learning the answers to their questions that their faith is increased.
But, learning more about the history of the Bible and how science works tends to DECREASE faith. Funny thing, that, eh? When people just GIVE you answers, it increases faith, because now you don't have to investigate anything. But, when you have to SEARCH for answers, and the Bible isn't your only resource, it decreases faith, because the flaws in the Bible become so onerous there is no way to overcome them without jettisoning critical thinking entirely.

Aten is the one true God. Akhenaten said so. But, you don't believe that, right? Guess why. Quick answer: politics and happenstance. If you can figure out why those two things control the vast majority of religious affiliation, you get a No Prize.
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
You cant help to induce faith in others by scoffing at their unbelief; but by helping them to see the reason to believe.
You do realize that you're in the camp of Ray "Banana Man" Comfort, right? How is anybody to keep from scoffing? Is one to respect the crocoduck?
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
Moreover, it would be to the Glory of God if all men would accept Christ even if they never saw a Bible in their entire lives; because like you said: God and Jesus are their own bosses... so They Are what They Are, whether it is written or not.
I suggest you watch this:
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish

Kingston, Jamaica

#102269 Nov 18, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
...It was applied to DNA that served no obvious function. Much as the term "UFO" means only that an object in the sky is not identified. And just like UFO's when we look at "junk DNA" closely enough we start to find out what it is and where it comes from. There seem to be two main sources for non-coding DNA that I know of. The first is genes that have been switched off. Sometimes these genes can be switched back on. That is why there is the occasional individual born with a true tail. Another source are ERV's or endogenous retroviruses. ERV's are neat since they are added to an individual very very rarely.
Of course.

I mean evolution removes that which is ineffective or "unwanted" etc, but it just keeps repeating useless DNA structure. The idea of evolution is certainly consistent with what is observed. Brilliant!
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
By looking at the number of differences in ERV's between us and other closely related species we can estimate when they broke off from our line, or our line broke off from theirs.
I can also tell that Mars evolved from Earth too, because some of the elements found on Mars are found in the Earth.
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish

Kingston, Jamaica

#102270 Nov 18, 2012
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Your best post, in my opinion.
What happened to Jesus at his baptism by John?
I find Jesus to be compelling even after stripped from the legend and even status as being equal to God.
Interesting. That is a greater faith than the one held by most; even me.
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish

Kingston, Jamaica

#102271 Nov 18, 2012
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
Oooooh. Fatal error.
I suggest you try to play it off as a joke.
Please bear with me; I still dont get this evolution stuff.

Nature wanted to move towards the more effective/dominant and we are what it produced?

We are hardly more effective than monkeys in surviving and we compromise the operations of nature more than any other living organism. The single fact that we have been endowed with intelligence makes this even worse.
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish

Kingston, Jamaica

#102272 Nov 18, 2012
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
But, if you affect things in the natural world, that is detectable, and that would make you part of the natural world, which means you cannot be supernatural and thus beyond the scope of scientific inquiry. So, now you think your God is not supernatural. Great. Just tell us how to detect your God and we'll be on our way to full-blown global Christianity.
How to detect my God? Lets see:

Calls Himself "I am, I was and I will be": sounds like He is (the) True to me.

"Begets" a "Son" who calls Himself the Truth; sounds like Yishva (He who equalizes) to me.

Somehow it all adds up in my retarded mind:

Only that which is True exists, and the only thing that comes from the True is the Truth.

But if nothing can exist outside of Truth (as Dogen cleverly puts it: "Nothing unreal exists"); the Truth must be superior to all things.

I am essentially worshipping a concept called "TRUTH" as demonstrated by Equality/consistency (Yishva).

I may even be accused of idolatry on a level.
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish

Kingston, Jamaica

#102273 Nov 18, 2012
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
Airplanes are heavier than air, therefore they can't fly unless angels pick them up.
I see nothing wrong with this explanation for heavier-than-air flight. And, what's more, you can't disprove it, so I win. Bible 1 : Bernoulli 0. Suck it, science!
Considering the fact that people back in those days used to think the forces of nature were "spirits"; you would be somewhat correct.

Bible 1: Bernoulli 0. Suck it, science.

LOL

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#102274 Nov 18, 2012
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course.
I mean evolution removes that which is ineffective or "unwanted" etc, but it just keeps repeating useless DNA structure. The idea of evolution is certainly consistent with what is observed. Brilliant!
<quoted text>
Actually, that is consistent with how evolution works.

You other analogy is another fallacy.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#102275 Nov 18, 2012
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
<quoted text>
Please bear with me; I still dont get this evolution stuff.
Nature wanted to move towards the more effective/dominant and we are what it produced?
We are hardly more effective than monkeys in surviving and we compromise the operations of nature more than any other living organism. The single fact that we have been endowed with intelligence makes this even worse.
You are 100% correct in your first statement.

However, you are, as expected, assuming intelligence as the driving force when all that's needed is equilibrium. Chemicals respond to each other, put more in the mix and there will be more interactions, and sometimes those interactions become really complex for short periods of time, we call this life.

“I Am No One Else”

Level 7

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#102276 Nov 18, 2012
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
<quoted text>
How to detect my God? Lets see:
Calls Himself "I am, I was and I will be": sounds like He is (the) True to me.
"Begets" a "Son" who calls Himself the Truth; sounds like Yishva (He who equalizes) to me.
Somehow it all adds up in my retarded mind:
Only that which is True exists, and the only thing that comes from the True is the Truth.
But if nothing can exist outside of Truth (as Dogen cleverly puts it: "Nothing unreal exists"); the Truth must be superior to all things.
I am essentially worshipping a concept called "TRUTH" as demonstrated by Equality/consistency (Yishva).
I may even be accused of idolatry on a level.
According to myths written by people who didn't even know what pi was in spite of neighboring, and much older, cultures knowing. you are hedging bets on people less educated than the Mayans.
Evil-lotion is Rub-ish

Kingston, Jamaica

#102277 Nov 18, 2012
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
... You said your God affects the natural world, meaning your God is detectable. Just tell us how to detect your God scientifically. As I had to repeatedly tell KAB...you'd better stop making declarative statements as answers, because the logical consequences of your words will be your undoing. Logic is NOT your friend.
Logic is nobody's friend Mr. LowellGuy. And neither is science; but somehow you seem to think it is on your side.

I guess thats why you use it to prove what you want to prove; or is it that science cant prove everything.

To think that God an Omnipotent, could be even measurable/testable with material things is like thinking that you can test the the power in a 2000000000 volt power line by holding on to it with your bare hands.

The experience of God (Truth/the True) begins and ends in the mind; because the body has no ability in itself to detect Truth without logical capacity.

Therefore your ability to experience God depends on your ability to think.

And the fact that the Jews are among the wealthiest people in the world, cannot suggest that they lack the capacity to think (you might say this last line doesnt follow, but I know why I include it).
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
So, there are good reasons for rejecting the Bible? REALLY? So, if it were judgement day, and God was asking an atheist why he rejected the Bible, and he gave one of those "good reasons," God would shrug and let him into Heaven because, hey, can't blame the guy. He's got a good reason!
See what happens when you open your mouth? Stick to mindless platitudes and scripture quotes. The second you veer from that path, you step in crap.
As a matter of fact, God just might let that person into "heaven". Being Atheist does not mean being wicked (or does it?). God doesnt judge (period, and especially not) people based on whether they read the bible or not; that would mean King David and even Jesus are going to "hell".
LowellGuy wrote:
<quoted text>
But, learning more about the history of the Bible and how science works tends to DECREASE faith. Funny thing, that, eh? When people just GIVE you answers, it increases faith, because now you don't have to investigate anything. But, when you have to SEARCH for answers, and the Bible isn't your only resource, it decreases faith, because the flaws in the Bible become so onerous there is no way to overcome them without jettisoning critical thinking entirely.
Explain to me how "learning more about the history of the Bible and how science works tends to DECREASE faith".

Science helps me to see how God does His work; it doesnt make me think any less of Him.

You really need to stick to your test tubes.

You lack the ability to reason. If you could, you would realize that a God who is Omnipotent has the ability to reveal Himself in infinite ways; so the method of revelation largely depends on what the person who seeks Him requires.

And YOU CERTAINLY DONT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT GOD. All you know is what you have heard of Him and what other people say of Him.

And until you make a personal attempt to interact with him; you can make NO conclusive statements on Him.

You are really beginning to bore me!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 10 min FREE SERVANT 142,798
"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 2 hr dirtclod 14,696
An atheistic view on evolution vs. a godly view... 8 hr ChromiuMan 960
Why natural selection can't work 9 hr Chimney1 28
Why Are There No Transitional Animals Today? (Mar '09) 9 hr dirtclod 801
Last ditch bid to ban creationism in Scottish c... Thu paul porter 3
Stephen King: Universe 'Suggests Intelligent De... (May '13) Wed Kong_ 455
More from around the web