Creation/Evolution Debate
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#566 Nov 19, 2012
Christine, you still there?
Judging my posts they way you do?
I can always tell....
Mugwump

Bradford, UK

#567 Nov 19, 2012
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Why are we not dead 100 times over?
And its not my question, but an evolutionary geneticist's
Far be it from me to pretend that a question was just 'mine' when it wasn't...
But I am asking it on his behalf
Ok - that is you best argument, forgive me as I can't be bothered to go back through all the previous posts - do you mind providing the context and ideally a link to the original quote.

But you are agreed that this is your best argument?
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#568 Nov 19, 2012
Mugwump wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok - that is you best argument, forgive me as I can't be bothered to go back through all the previous posts - do you mind providing the context and ideally a link to the original quote.
But you are agreed that this is your best argument?
That's not how it works here Bud
You cant breeze in and out and ask for previous posts to be re-posted
Good try anyway

Now go away unless you have something decent for me....I mean for us

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#569 Nov 19, 2012
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Does your statement about ID-ers and creationists include Muslims and Hindus?
You're way out of your depth with any theological discussion, Kong
Many have tried and failed, my friend
Muslims and Hindus? Really?

Oh well, if you have to move the goalposts again....

No, the quote I used above was referencing Christians in the US (the majority of which accept the ToE, as you recall). Muslims? Not so much. Hindus? Much more accepting: "In India, Hindus widely accept the theory of biological evolution. In a survey, 77% of respondents in India agreed that enough scientific evidence exists to support Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, and 88% of God-believing people said they believe in evolution as well.[3][4] According to the survey conducted by Pew Forum in the United States, 80% of Hindus agree that evolution is the best explanation for the origin of human life on earth.[5]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_views_on_e...
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>Show me where in Levinton's article he has stated evidence for ancestors to Cambrian fossils, or for the Avalon explosion, or for the Ediacaran fauna?

Levinton offers no such evidence, in fact, he mentions that the Ediacaran fauna "seems to be an evolutionary dead end". There is no reference at all that I've found in his paper for the Avalon explosion, and 'inconclusive answers' in linking pre-Cambrian to Cambrian organisms utilizing molecular biological science.

But then this paper is not a study on those subjects, is it? He is discussing in this work his ideas on the speed of, and mechanisms for speciation, NOT the specific organisms themselves -- except to use as examples for his treatise.

[QUOTE who="Russell"]<qu oted text>Don't gasp and sputter, Kong
You are wrong
And its OK
No one is going to beat you up about it
So, chill
Relax
Deep breath....
"Gasp?" "Sputter?" Moi? Perish the thought.

I don't believe I am wrong. If I am, I am in VERY good company, and it will take someone more knowledgable than yourself to convince me of my error.

I'm quite calm and relaxed, and confident in my acceptance of Evolution....Thanks for asking.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#570 Nov 19, 2012
Ron May wrote:
"Never try to teach pigs to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pigs."
At least you are admitting that you are a pig.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#571 Nov 19, 2012
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Why are we not dead 100 times over?
And its not my question, but an evolutionary geneticist's
Far be it from me to pretend that a question was just 'mine' when it wasn't...
But I am asking it on his behalf
Really? Which one. Clearly not Haldane since that never was his claim. A few creatards misunderstood his work and came up with "Haldane's Limit".
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#572 Nov 19, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? Which one. Clearly not Haldane since that never was his claim. A few creatards misunderstood his work and came up with "Haldane's Limit".
Why are you ignoring me, Subby
Why?
Because I haven't yet....notice, haven't yet...watched your YouTube clip?

So, why are we not dead 100 times over?

I'll watch your's if you watch mine
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#573 Nov 19, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>At least you are admitting that you are a pig.
What are we...
In a school backyard?
Grow up

And, no
Growing up is not evolution....
just in case you thought....

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#574 Nov 19, 2012
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
What are we...
In a school backyard?
Grow up
And, no
Growing up is not evolution....
just in case you thought....
You either did not read or did not understand the towing man's post. He admitted that he was a pig and that there is no point in attempting to teach him.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#575 Nov 19, 2012
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Why are you ignoring me, Subby
Why?
Because I haven't yet....notice, haven't yet...watched your YouTube clip?
So, why are we not dead 100 times over?
I'll watch your's if you watch mine
Russell, I don't care if you don't watch my video. I probably have already seen your video. You see, unlike you I can understand the arguments given by the other side and am not afraid of them. You cannot understand evolution or at best are willfully ignorant of the science. You cannot debunk something that you do not understand.

You can link your video again and I will watch it. I will tell you how it is wrong if you promise not to post anymore nonsense again.
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#577 Nov 19, 2012
Ok
Great
It was going to be the Wiggles

But I've changed my mind

I'll find one
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#578 Nov 19, 2012
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Muslims and Hindus? Really?
Oh well, if you have to move the goalposts again....
No, the quote I used above was referencing Christians in the US (the majority of which accept the ToE, as you recall). Muslims? Not so much. Hindus? Much more accepting: "In India, Hindus widely accept the theory of biological evolution. In a survey, 77% of respondents in India agreed that enough scientific evidence exists to support Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, and 88% of God-believing people said they believe in evolution as well.[3][4] According to the survey conducted by Pew Forum in the United States, 80% of Hindus agree that evolution is the best explanation for the origin of human life on earth.[5]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_views_on_e...
They also believe, as per their multitude of religions that the earth is on the back of a giant elephant, or something...
So yes
You are in good company
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#579 Nov 19, 2012
Here is a quote...what do you call it?
A quote-mine...
from the founder of Scientific American:

‘First, then, let us, as rational creatures, be ever ready to acknowledge God as our Creator and daily Preserver; and that we are each of us individually dependant on his special care and good will towards us, in supporting the wonderful action of nature which constitutes our existence; and in preserving us from the casualties, to which our complicated and delicate structure is liable. Let us also, knowing our entire dependence on Divine Benevolence, as rational creatures, do ourselves the honor to express personally and frequently, our thanks to him for his goodness; and to present our petitions to Him for the favours which we constantly require. This course is rational, even without the aid of revelation: but being specially invited to this course, by the divine word, and assured of the readiness of our Creator to answer our prayers and recognize our thanks, it is truly surprising that any rational being, who has ever read the inspired writings should willingly forego this privilege, or should be ashamed to be seen engaged in this rational employment, or to have it known that he practices it.’
That's a great quote-mine.

Porter, R, Scientific American, Editorial 1st Edition Aug 28, 1845

“That's just MY opinion...”

Since: Jan 07

Location hidden

#580 Nov 19, 2012
Russell wrote:
Here is a quote...what do you call it?
A quote-mine...
from the founder of Scientific American:
‘First, then, let us, as rational creatures, be ever ready to acknowledge God as our Creator and daily Preserver; and that we are each of us individually dependant on his special care and good will towards us, in supporting the wonderful action of nature which constitutes our existence; and in preserving us from the casualties, to which our complicated and delicate structure is liable. Let us also, knowing our entire dependence on Divine Benevolence, as rational creatures, do ourselves the honor to express personally and frequently, our thanks to him for his goodness; and to present our petitions to Him for the favours which we constantly require. This course is rational, even without the aid of revelation: but being specially invited to this course, by the divine word, and assured of the readiness of our Creator to answer our prayers and recognize our thanks, it is truly surprising that any rational being, who has ever read the inspired writings should willingly forego this privilege, or should be ashamed to be seen engaged in this rational employment, or to have it known that he practices it.’
That's a great quote-mine.
Porter, R, Scientific American, Editorial 1st Edition Aug 28, 1845
Not an example of a quote-mine. Have someone explain it to you.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#581 Nov 19, 2012
Russell wrote:
Here is a quote...what do you call it?
A quote-mine...
from the founder of Scientific American:
‘First, then, let us, as rational creatures, be ever ready to acknowledge God as our Creator and daily Preserver; and that we are each of us individually dependant on his special care and good will towards us, in supporting the wonderful action of nature which constitutes our existence; and in preserving us from the casualties, to which our complicated and delicate structure is liable. Let us also, knowing our entire dependence on Divine Benevolence, as rational creatures, do ourselves the honor to express personally and frequently, our thanks to him for his goodness; and to present our petitions to Him for the favours which we constantly require. This course is rational, even without the aid of revelation: but being specially invited to this course, by the divine word, and assured of the readiness of our Creator to answer our prayers and recognize our thanks, it is truly surprising that any rational being, who has ever read the inspired writings should willingly forego this privilege, or should be ashamed to be seen engaged in this rational employment, or to have it known that he practices it.’
That's a great quote-mine.
Porter, R, Scientific American, Editorial 1st Edition Aug 28, 1845
No, actually it is a pointless quote. Note first that you had to find someone from before the publication of Origin of Species. The quote had nothing to do with evolution or creation. All it shows is that the founder of Scientific American was a theist.

Wow, what a shocking find <rolleyes>
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#582 Nov 19, 2012
MADRONE wrote:
<quoted text>
Not an example of a quote-mine. Have someone explain it to you.
No need
Just mucking around

And who might you be, pray tell?
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#583 Nov 19, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
No, actually it is a pointless quote. Note first that you had to find someone from before the publication of Origin of Species. The quote had nothing to do with evolution or creation. All it shows is that the founder of Scientific American was a theist.
Wow, what a shocking find <rolleyes>
Am I restricted to Evolution/creation quotes?
How is it Christine went on and on about the Chinese and you didn't say NUTHIN'?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#584 Nov 19, 2012
Russell wrote:
<quoted text>
Am I restricted to Evolution/creation quotes?
How is it Christine went on and on about the Chinese and you didn't say NUTHIN'?
I must have skipped over her posts since they were not directed towards me. Did they have anything to do with the subject at hand?

Let's get back to basics. What sort of evidence do you have for creation? We have all sorts of evidence for evolution. Do you understand the scientific process of developing a hypothesis and testing it? The steps in science are observation, development of a hypothesis, testing of hypothesis, further developing as a theory, testing as a theory, then finally peer review.

How far along are they in developing any hypotheses in creation?
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#585 Nov 19, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I must have skipped over her posts since they were not directed towards me. Did they have anything to do with the subject at hand?
Let's get back to basics. What sort of evidence do you have for creation? We have all sorts of evidence for evolution. Do you understand the scientific process of developing a hypothesis and testing it? The steps in science are observation, development of a hypothesis, testing of hypothesis, further developing as a theory, testing as a theory, then finally peer review.
How far along are they in developing any hypotheses in creation?
Evidence for evolution?
Where
Where?
I must have missed it too....

Firstly, all change is not evolution
Genomic variability is sufficient to explain change in biological entities. Natural slection selects based on environmental pressure.
Secondly, Archaeopteryx, a bird, is a mosaic at best. Other contenders for the transitional fossil status are just that. Contenders. AND are hotly debated. By evolutionists.
Thirdly, I have demonstrated, that despite deep evolutionary time, a concocted concept, mutations do not account for biological evolution as per the GTE.

So what evidence are you referring to?
Russell

Adelaide, Australia

#586 Nov 19, 2012
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
I must have skipped over her posts since they were not directed towards me. Did they have anything to do with the subject at hand?
Let's get back to basics. What sort of evidence do you have for creation? We have all sorts of evidence for evolution. Do you understand the scientific process of developing a hypothesis and testing it? The steps in science are observation, development of a hypothesis, testing of hypothesis, further developing as a theory, testing as a theory, then finally peer review.
How far along are they in developing any hypotheses in creation?
All sorts of evidence...
I have been waiting some 50 pages for ANY EVIDENCE

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
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 5 min ChristineM 199,226
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 7 min renee 34,612
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 33 min Uncle Sam 14,891
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 1 hr ChristineM 151,294
News ID Isn't Science, But That's the Least Of Its P... 6 hr DanFromSmithville 34
the dinosaurs of the lega-warega people: racial... 8 hr teri107 1
My Story Part 1 Fri JanusBifrons 1
More from around the web