Originally posted by Proper Knob I'm not sure. The answer is no doubt runs along the lines of poor education and religious indoctrination. In all my years of debating creationists on this site, there is a common theme which runs among them. None of them have read a book written by an evolutionary biologist explaining how the process works. I once offered an exchange with robbie carrobie ...[text shortened]... o risk reading a book which might 'diminish his faith'. The driving force behind it all is fear.
Oh, I hadn't see this when I made my offer to galveston75. But we'll see if Galveston75 is, as he professed, not closed-minded on the issue.
Originally posted by Rank outsider Why are you posting this? I have pointed you in the direction of Coyne's book 'Why evolution is true'. It is an excellent summary of the main forms of evidence for evolution.
It is better written and more comprehensive than anything anyone could reasonably achieve here. So, if you are interested, why not just get a copy and read it? It is writte ...[text shortened]... even pay for a copy and post it to you, if you want, as long as you promise to read it.
Deal?
Here is a link to a review of Coyne's book that points out how ignorant Mr. Coyne is:
"Illinois high school science teacher Jan Peczkis writes: The misconception that evolution works towards a pre-determined goal is held by many high school and college students. This is understandable because evolution is an abstract and generally non-observable phenomenon, and living things do seem well-designed for their environments."
John Woodmorrappe quoted this in one of his articles, whilst failing to mentioning that he is Jan Peczkis.
Given he is so deceitful, why should we take anything he has to say seriously?
By the way, I asked you some time ago to cite a scientific article on evolution that claims as an assumption that God does not exist, as you had claimed. Still no luck, eh?
Originally posted by Pianoman1 Disappointing that even in the face of the most incontrovertible science you will not change your opinion of evolution because some wandering Jew 4,000 years ago said that it took six days to create all life about 10,000 years ago. The greatest modern scientific brains are all wrong because they contradict this nomadic tribesman who was not even a scienti ...[text shortened]... ew discoveries. Oh, by the way, the earth is not flat, nor is it the centre of the Solar System.
Clearly you have not the slightest idea what you are talking about, its fine, materialists rarely do, but for your information, not that i presume for a single instance to harbour any degree of hope that it will have any efficacy, i have opposed the theory on the basis of entirely rational lines attacking its unscientific nature, that being, the discontinuity of species (you may wish to look it up), the improbability of life having arisen by chance from inanimate matter (citing experimentation in the nineteen fifties which attempted to replicate a primitive atmosphere, not strictly evolution, but a materialistic perspective in the broadest sense), the case against mutations and the Drosophila melanogaster experiments on which so much of classical genetics is based (you may wish to look it up), the fossil record which does not demonstrate a gradual Darwinian process of transmutation from oner species to another (the idea of punctuated equilibrium being invented to attempted to take care of the anomaly), the lack of intermediaries etc etc etc , but sure you continue to ascribe whatever reasons you deem plausible, it will not negate the science. Your term incontrovertible is ludicrous as are your silly ad hominems, i will waste no more time on them, let it simply serve as a testimony to your ignorance and prejudices i hasten to add. Neeeext.
"Illinois high school science teacher Jan Peczkis writes: The misconception that evolution works towards a pre-determined goal is held by many high school and college students. This is understandable because evolution is an abstract and generally non-observable phenomenon, and living things do seem well-designed for their environments."
...[text shortened]... ion that claims as an assumption that God does not exist, as you had claimed. Still no luck, eh?
Truth is truth regardless of who says it. Besides I know of no deception here, however, I do know of deception by Barrack Obama.
As I recall, I did respond to your request for a scientific article. Look it up.
Originally posted by RJHinds Truth is truth regardless of who says it. Besides I know of no deception here, however, I do know of deception by Barrack Obama.
As I recall, I did respond to your request for a scientific article. Look it up.
The Instructor
And liars are liars.
Given that the last two sources you have quoted have been liars, you should begin to notice the trend that creationists can only try to win the argument by lying or deception.
And your response previously was not to a scientific article on evolution but to a creation website. So you are lying about that too.
And I can't be bothered to look it up again just to prove you wrong as, unlike a chess engine, I tire of doing your thinking for you.
Originally posted by Rank outsider And liars are liars.
Given that the last two sources you have quoted have been liars, you should begin to notice the trend that creationists can only try to win the argument by lying or deception.
And your response previously was not to a scientific article on evolution but to a creation website. So you are lying about that too.
And I can't b ...[text shortened]... again just to prove you wrong as, unlike a chess engine, I tire of doing your thinking for you.
As I said before, some view the complexity of life as top down and not bottom up. A non-biological example is that a potter makes a pot. Darwinian Theory turns this idea upside down so that a pot can make a potter. Darwin believed that absolute ignorance produces wisdom. However others, like myself, believe that the wise must instruct the ignorant before he obtains wisdom. That is why I call myself ...
Originally posted by RJHinds As I said before, some view the complexity of life as top down and not bottom up. A non-biological example is that a potter makes a pot. Darwinian Theory turns this idea upside down so that a pot can make a potter. Darwin believed that absolute ignorance produces wisdom. However others, like myself, believe that the wise must instruct the ignorant before he obtains wisdom. That is why I call myself ...
Originally posted by galveston75 Ok here is your chance. Since evolutionist say we "those bible people" don't understand evolution as we are too simple, uneducated or dumb or whatever the word of the day is to describe us Bible people, here ya go.
Make it simple and even use pictures if you want. But give us the simple and easily understandable proof that evolution is indeed a "true" ...[text shortened]... ke your time, think about your comments and show us the facts...
"... there are many reasons why you might not understand [an explanation of a scientific theory] ... Finally, there is this possibility: after I tell you something, you just can't believe it. You can't accept it. You don't like it. A little screen comes down and you don't listen anymore. I'm going to describe to you how Nature is - and if you don't like it, that's going to get in the way of your understanding it. It's a problem that [scientists] have learned to deal with: They've learned to realize that whether they like a theory or they don't like a theory is not the essential question. Rather, it is whether or not the theory gives predictions that agree with experiment. It is not a question of whether a theory is philosophically delightful, or easy to understand, or perfectly reasonable from the point of view of common sense. [A scientific theory] describes Nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And it agrees fully with experiment. So I hope you can accept Nature as She is - absurd.
I'm going to have fun telling you about this absurdity, because I find it delightful. Please don't turn yourself off because you can't believe Nature is so strange. Just hear me all out, and I hope you'll be as delighted as I am when we're through. "
- Richard P. Feynman (1918-1988),
from the introductory lecture on quantum mechanics reproduced in QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter (Feynman 1985).
Originally posted by robbie carrobie Another EPIC fail and the usual bilge offered up by the materialist, why does it fail? Many creationists are highly educated, they simply do not buy the theory of evolution after examining its tenets. Whether they are guided by religious idealism remains a matter of conjecture. Scientific data is open to interpretation and the very same data may b ...[text shortened]... limited your search for truth to unintelligent agencies, not the creationist, you know its true.
yes, many creationists are indeed highly educated, just not in the relevant domain.
a nobel prize winner thought eugenics is a good idea. another believed in telepathy.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie Clearly you have not the slightest idea what you are talking about, its fine, materialists rarely do, but for your information, not that i presume for a single instance to harbour any degree of hope that it will have any efficacy, i have opposed the theory on the basis of entirely rational lines attacking its unscientific nature, that being, the disc ...[text shortened]... , let it simply serve as a testimony to your ignorance and prejudices i hasten to add. Neeeext.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie Another EPIC fail and the usual bilge offered up by the materialist, why does it fail? Many creationists are highly educated, they simply do not buy the theory of evolution after examining its tenets. Whether they are guided by religious idealism remains a matter of conjecture. Scientific data is open to interpretation and the very same data may b ...[text shortened]... limited your search for truth to unintelligent agencies, not the creationist, you know its true.
Retrospective trolling on a comment that i made in jest does not nullify this fact!
Invitation to prove evolution...
31 Oct '13 11:381 edit
Back to Top