Darwinism & 'Christian nation' theory

Originally posted by RJHinds
You are becoming a complete NUT. 😲

You got a counter argument or are you just going to make ad hominems?

EDIT: At least you didn't use the smugness emoticon, so that's something.

EDIT2: I have actually made this argument at least twice before on these forums without anyone noticing. So this is iteration 3 so I have had time to refine and improve on it.

Originally posted by RJHinds
You are becoming a complete NUT. 😲

Like Fab said, why don't you answer my question instead of insulting me? Did I sling any arrows at you? Which "founding fathers" were discussing evolution 50 or more years before Darwin went on that famous boat ride and wrote that reviled book, well, only reviled by people like you, who are becoming less and less numerous and more and more irrelevant as time goes by. So you are dreaming a pipe dream if you think so-called 'intelligent' design gains any real traction, scientifically speaking.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Like Fab said, why don't you answer my question instead of insulting me? Did I sling any arrows at you? Which "founding fathers" were discussing evolution 50 or more years before Darwin went on that famous boat ride and wrote that reviled book, well, only reviled by people like you, who are becoming less and less numerous and more and more irrelevant as tim ...[text shortened]... you think so-called 'intelligent' design gains any real traction, scientifically speaking.

perhaps they have mistaken the use of the word "evolution" with the theory of evolution. i wouldn't put it past creationists to make such a stupid mistake, or such a deliberate mistake.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Like Fab said, why don't you answer my question instead of insulting me? Did I sling any arrows at you? Which "founding fathers" were discussing evolution 50 or more years before Darwin went on that famous boat ride and wrote that reviled book, well, only reviled by people like you, who are becoming less and less numerous and more and more irrelevant as tim ...[text shortened]... you think so-called 'intelligent' design gains any real traction, scientifically speaking.

Did I insult you by telling the truth? How rude of me. And as for your
question about which founding fathers were discussIng evolution before
Darwin wrote his book, I don't know. You will have to ask Mr. Barton
that question since he is the expert in that area. I was only saying
that they could have since there were evolutionary theories before
Darwin wrote his book.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I was only saying that they could have since there were evolutionary theories before Darwin wrote his book.

How could the "entire debate" already have been had before Darwin wrote his book? How could an "expert" [your choice of word] historian make such a claim?

Originally posted by FMF
How could the "entire debate" already have been had before Darwin wrote his book? How could an "expert" [your choice of word] historian make such a claim?

Maybe it happened. That is how he could make the claim.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Maybe it happened. That is how he could make the claim.

With what justification do you call him an "expert" when you know he has made such an unsupportable claim?

Originally posted by FMF
With what justification do you call him an "expert" when you know he has made such an unsupportable claim?

He has claimed to be an expert is all I know and I do not know if his
claims are supported or not. I am taking him at his word since it is
possible it could be true.

Originally posted by RJHinds
He has claimed to be an expert is all I know and I do not know if his
claims are supported or not. I am taking him at his word since it is
possible it could be true.

So, you count him as an "expert" historian: what do you make of his contention that one of the main reasons for the American Revolution was that the colonies wanted to break away from Britain so Americans could abolish slavery?

Originally posted by FMF
So, you count him as an "expert" historian: what do you make of his contention that one of the main reasons for the American Revolution was that the colonies wanted to break away from Britain so Americans could abolish slavery?

I don't know about that. I think it was to gain freedom for themselves
and not for slaves. But I am not an expert like him. 😏

Originally posted by RJHinds
He has claimed to be an expert is all I know and I do not know if his
claims are supported or not. I am taking him at his word since it is
possible it could be true.

wow. if ever i heard a confession of dorkiness, this is it.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
wow. if ever i heard a confession of dorkiness, this is it.

HalleluYah !!! 😏