Evolution vs. Creation

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Full Story

Level 2

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#107832 Jan 4, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I think you forgot to include this part of the story in your mined quote.
"It's not so much a case of Darwin being wrong, as there is no shortage of evidence for competition driving divergent evolution in some very young lineages," said Dr Joe Tobias of Oxford University's Department of Zoology, who led the study. "But we found no evidence that this process explains differences across a much larger sample of species."
I am having a difficult time believing you were in antibiotic research, ever.
You are right. My source for the article is and he does not slum it on Topix.

“River of tears flowing out of ”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

West Plains

#107833 Jan 4, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> You are right. My source for the article is and he does not slum it on Topix.
I suppose I don't blame that scientist, very often you just meet anti-science liars, and fundamentalists that quote mine and provide misinformation.

“River of tears flowing out of ”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

West Plains

#107834 Jan 4, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Scroll down. It is peer reviewed.
That per review is as valid as 85 Lumber's mill certified plywood. The mill said it was good.

Level 2

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#107835 Jan 4, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I think you forgot to include this part of the story in your mined quote.
"It's not so much a case of Darwin being wrong, as there is no shortage of evidence for competition driving divergent evolution in some very young lineages," said Dr Joe Tobias of Oxford University's Department of Zoology, who led the study. "But we found no evidence that this process explains differences across a much larger sample of species."
I am having a difficult time believing you were in antibiotic research, ever.
I highlighted the top few paragraphs and you say i mine quoted? What did you just do? Mine quoted a paragraph.

Level 2

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#107836 Jan 4, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I suppose I don't blame that scientist, very often you just meet anti-science liars, and fundamentalists that quote mine and provide misinformation.
Getting nasty? LOL. On the defensive? Anti science liars? When all else fails throw mud! Sort of like the ole saying, a bigot is anyone losing an argument to a liberal, mentality. Have a nice day Dan.

Level 2

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#107837 Jan 4, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>That per review is as valid as 85 Lumber's mill certified plywood. The mill said it was good.
Either way you missed it until i had to point it out to you. Even though it is referenced in the first sentence of the article. How stupid is that?

“River of tears flowing out of ”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

West Plains

#107838 Jan 4, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Either way you missed it until i had to point it out to you. Even though it is referenced in the first sentence of the article. How stupid is that?
It isn't stupid all that you would have to tell someone that a creationist publication is peer reviewed. It is a lie.

I didn't miss anything, I merely pointed out that lie. Rubber stamping pseudoscience is not peer review.

“River of tears flowing out of ”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

West Plains

#107839 Jan 4, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Getting nasty? LOL. On the defensive? Anti science liars? When all else fails throw mud! Sort of like the ole saying, a bigot is anyone losing an argument to a liberal, mentality. Have a nice day Dan.
No, not nasty, just realistic. I am not throwing mud. I am stating my opinion of some of the sorts that you find on this forum and stating my agreement with why that person doesn't follow this forum. Though, more likely, he is completely unaware of the existence of it.

I will point out though, that you distinctly referred to being here as slumming and all that it implies. Hypocrisy is a characteristic of fundies that is almost universal. It seems you must have known you were failed before you had even gotten very far. You whole post is defensive and typical.

You have a nice day as well.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#107840 Jan 4, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> Getting nasty? LOL. On the defensive? Anti science liars? When all else fails throw mud! Sort of like the ole saying, a bigot is anyone losing an argument to a liberal, mentality. Have a nice day Dan.
have you been called a bigot a lot? why?

give me those arguments you gave that caused that and see what i think...as a verified conservative i will give you the control group you need.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Dubai, UAE

#107841 Jan 5, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
Human Chromosome Fusion Debunked
http://designed-dna.org/blog/files/3e06d2e493...
Pity that the active gene he cites as evidence is a pseudogene.

Funny how he does not mention that.

Meaning that whatever it does appears to be useless. So if a "functional" though useless gene or gene fragment got caught in the middle of the fusion event, so what?

Pseudogenes, of course, are just another facet of the genome that Design advocates have a hard time explaining.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Dubai, UAE

#107842 Jan 5, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> The overal point of the article cited being Darwin Evolution is about as useful in a practical sense as a fifth person on a double date.
<quoted text>
And that is clearly wrong.

Multi-drug therapy relies on the fact that resistance is a result of random mutation and that therefore, if the resistance to one drug is 1/x probability and to a second drug is 1/y probability, then the simultaneous resistance probability is 1/xy. However, if we administer x first and then y later, we are massively increasing the odds that the pathogen will develop resistance.

This is only true if the engine of change is random mutation, and the natural selection part speaks for itself. So what part exactly of this fundamental mechanism of change do you think is irrelevant?

So like I said, the discovery that some molds are poisonous to some bacteria does not rely on evolution, but the discovery that bacteria develop resistance and how best to combat that IS relevant and does rely on understanding how evolution works.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Dubai, UAE

#107843 Jan 5, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
<quoted text> I highlighted the top few paragraphs and you say i mine quoted? What did you just do? Mine quoted a paragraph.
Quote mining is not a question of counting words, its a question of conveying the full conclusion and intent of the original author, rather than taking part of what he said and suggesting that his conclusion was something completely different.

You are free to partially quote and use that data to draw a different conclusion, so long as you make it clear that these are your conclusions and not the author's, and where relevant point out clearly that the author drew a different conclusion from your own.

You specifically ignored Tobias' statement to the contrary of the conclusions you drew from his earlier words.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Dubai, UAE

#107844 Jan 5, 2014
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>Chimney, very interesting. I am unfamiliar with Morton. Thanks for posting this. I can understand why the fundies would be up in arms over this. The premise of your post fits with comments I just made to another poster.
Cheers. I hope you read the article. Morton has courage.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#107845 Jan 5, 2014
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
The immense point that all the advocates of Evolution keep annoying you with is that nobody is interested in arguments "by that premise". They've debated too many Creationists who use stupid tricks to hijack a debate and you're an example of one of them. We're all content to let you go round and round and round and round in your little bubble and be an example of pathetic, Creationist rationalization for the others who show up here.
Move on or keep on circling! It's all good!
Tell that to yourself. Evolution to date, is a garbage.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#107846 Jan 5, 2014
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
It is your logic that a language "belongs to" the peoples of the land where it originated. While I understand your premise, it does not hold that the modern peoples of those land hold any rights of ownership. Your logic fails. Again.
OK, do you agree that English originated in England? if yes, it belongs to them by origin. Ok?

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#107847 Jan 5, 2014
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think Replaytime is a religious extremist. I think he is a person who wants to cling to religious belief and is of the view that accepting the science would negate his religious views.
All trash. Nothing can evolve without a cause or maker. Evolution is a lie.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#107848 Jan 5, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> OK, do you agree that English originated in England? if yes, it belongs to them by origin. Ok?
Can you find a link to ANYONE on the entire internet that agrees with your idea that a language "belongs" to the country of origination?

“River of tears flowing out of ”

Level 9

Since: Jan 11

West Plains

#107850 Jan 5, 2014
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Cheers. I hope you read the article. Morton has courage.
I did read it and found interesting and enjoyable. I agree, a very courageous fellow.

Level 6

Since: Mar 12

Dubai, UAE

#107851 Jan 6, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> All trash. Nothing can evolve without a cause or maker. Evolution is a lie.
Things do evolve through causes, but the causes are not a conscious "Maker". The causes are random mutation and non-random natural selection. We have evidence of mutation and evidence of natural selection and evidence of what these causes did over vast periods of geological time, in the form of fossils and other evidence.

Perhaps this "Maker" you refer to just put in place the principles by which evolution occurred. That is what your Catholic Church thinks, and at least this view does not try to ignore the evidence for evolution like you do.

Or perhaps there is no "Maker" at all. You have not provided any evidence for one, even though you claim to know beyond all question that this "Maker" exists. Since I doubt very much that you have any evidence to offer, I would say its you who is lying and trying to pretend to a certainty you just don't have. Shout louder, but it wont help. You have no more clue than I do whether this Maker exists, the difference is, I am honest about it.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#107853 Jan 6, 2014
lightbeamrider wrote:
Human Chromosome Fusion Debunked
You're lying again.

God is watching you.

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.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Ford Heights, Illinois; Worst town/suburb in Am... (Aug '11) 7 min He who knows 16
Only Three Letter Words - Alphabetically (Jul '11) 16 min Rudy360 1,681
The ALPHABET Game (May '11) 18 min Rudy360 10,745
Keep a Word.....Drop a Word Game (Sep '13) 23 min Vector aka Victor... 6,249
Ferreting Out The Ferrets 26 min Chilli J 3
Change "1" letter =ONLY= (Oct '12) 28 min Rudy360 3,896
Do you have a Topix crush? (Jun '11) 31 min Princess Hey 6,837
Truck containing 36,000 pounds of Crisco stolen 1 hr JV Team 44
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 1 hr CJ Rocker 149,045
True or False Game 1 hr -CatCiao- 410
What are you thinking about now? (Jun '10) 1 hr ms_Sweeter 22,238

Weird People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE