Originally posted by The CougarWell, this will just go on and on won't it?
(Our evolution debate continued on the thread 'For Beatlemania', so I am posting this here, as well.) Long time, no chat. Too much to do, and not enough time for email debates, especially when there is no need to reinvent the wheel, so to speak. I regret to say that, as I posted in my first email, I just do not have enough free time on my hands, while t ...[text shortened]... are abundantly available via a simple Google search. I pray that each of you will do so.
Your position is completely disingenuous.
You are right, the chances of getting everything together in just the right way and at just the right time are so remote as to be ludicrous - even in an infinite universe.
But that is not how evolution works, and either you know that and are attempting to mislead, or you don't and really should try to find out more about this theory you're attempting to debunk.
Evolution of a complex feature - let's say the eye - doesn't require that all of the elements of an eye come together at just the right time and place, since most of them are already there. They build adaptations incrementally. Light sensitive cells ... recessed light sensitive cells ... mucous coverings over the recess ... hardening of the covering ... muscular control of the recess ... and so on. These don't all happen together, they build on the backs of previous adaptations, using stuff if its useful and reworking other stuff too if it's useful.
Originally posted by amannionI'm sure he's heard it before. It's not that he is disingenous exactly. He just couldn't care less about the problem. He's writing in hopes that you're even more clueless about evolution than he is so that he can run you through some gauntlet of cooked up arguments.
Well, this will just go on and on won't it?
Your position is completely disingenuous.
You are right, the chances of getting everything together in just the right way and at just the right time are so remote as to be ludicrous - even in an infinite universe.
But that is not how evolution works, and either you know that and are attempting to mislead, or yo ...[text shortened]... ious adaptations, using stuff if its useful and reworking other stuff too if it's useful.
If you don't follow his Chick-track or AIG formula, he won't register a word you write.
Originally posted by telerionChecking in once again.
I'm sure he's heard it before. It's not that he is disingenous exactly. He just couldn't care less about the problem. He's writing in hopes that you're even more clueless about evolution than he is so that he can run you through some gauntlet of cooked up arguments.
If you don't follow his Chick-track or AIG formula, he won't register a word you write.
Y'all still haven't proved that evolution is fact!
Yunz have stated statement after statement, but nothing that disproves the Bible!!!
Congratulations!
I'm proud of all of you!
Evolutionists/Scientists/Atheists/Agnostics alike....
You've staked no claim that CREATION is false!!!!
That's a good thing...WHY?
If CREATION were false, no of us would be here today.
I thank my brothers in Christ for helping me pray for all of you!
We still will pray for all of you!
In His Service
Nosrac/WD
Originally posted by NosracIf you don't want to get mocked for your arguments skills, please refrain from making that kind of posts.
Checking in once again.
Y'all still haven't proved that evolution is fact!
Yunz have stated statement after statement, but nothing that disproves the Bible!!!
Congratulations!
I'm proud of all of you!
Evolutionists/Scientists/Atheists/Agnostics alike....
You've staked no claim that CREATION is false!!!!
That's a good thing...WHY?
If CR ...[text shortened]... me pray for all of you!
We still will pray for all of you!
In His Service
Nosrac/WD
"I'm proud of all of you"
You think you are so right in your claims... They the least plausible.
No one proved the Bible wrong, nor the Qu'ran nor the Book of Mormon. They are all in the same level.
Yet science doesn't try to prove anything. But you probably don't know that...
Keep your feeble beliefs to yourself and your little cult friends.
Originally posted by NosracWhen will you creationists get it?
Checking in once again.
Y'all still haven't proved that evolution is fact!
Yunz have stated statement after statement, but nothing that disproves the Bible!!!
Congratulations!
I'm proud of all of you!
Evolutionists/Scientists/Atheists/Agnostics alike....
You've staked no claim that CREATION is false!!!!
That's a good thing...WHY?
If CR ...[text shortened]... me pray for all of you!
We still will pray for all of you!
In His Service
Nosrac/WD
Of course evolution is not a fact. No scientific theory or model is. Any accepted model or theory is simply the best explanation for a particular phenomenon that we have at this point in time. Could we come up with other ones that are better? Of course, that's how science works.
Originally posted by amannionI agree with that, but many evolutionist here don't think so.
When will you creationists get it?
Of course evolution is not a fact. No scientific theory or model is. Any accepted model or theory is simply the best explanation for a particular phenomenon that we have at this point in time. Could we come up with other ones that are better? Of course, that's how science works.
Kelly
Originally posted by KellyJayWrong again. I agree completely with Ammanion's statement. Evolution is not a fact, it is a theory, an explanation. An explanation which has substantively passed every test which has ever been thrown at it over 150 years.
I agree with that, but many evolutionist here don't think so.
Kelly
Still, I thought this should make a resurgence, I feel Kelly needs reminded of the fact that this thread, where creationists were so roundly beaten that they resorted to people like RBHILL and Nosrac as their "thinking men".
All the crap, Kelly, that you're spouting now was roundly rejected and right here.
2 edits
Originally posted by scottishinnzzzzzzz
Wrong again. I agree completely with Ammanion's statement. Evolution is not a fact, it is a theory, an explanation. An explanation which has substantively passed every test which has ever been thrown at it over 150 years.
Still, I thought this should make a resurgence, I feel Kelly needs reminded of the fact that this thread, where creationists men".
All the crap, Kelly, that you're spouting now was roundly rejected and right here.
Cry me a river will you!
I was agreeing with his point about evolution being a theory! It was
a statement of agreement and you still want to complain when
I'm calling it a theory! My statement was not about evolution if you
read the ONE LINE POST you will see it was some of the people
here who call evoltuion a more than a theory was what I said. You
really do need to get a life, spending time trying to find things you
and I disagree with seems to be a bit much for you! You go out
of your way to misquote me.
Kelly
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayNo, I was disagreeing with the clause you made. The one where you said "evolutionists wouldn't agree". (as is patently obvious from my text)
zzzzzz
Cry me a river will you!
I was agreeing with his point about evolution being a theory! It was
not a statement of agreement and you still want to complain when
I'm calling it a theory! My statement was not about evolution if you
read the ONE LINE POST you will see it was someone of the people
here to call evoltuion a more than a theory was wha ...[text shortened]... I disagree with seems to be a bit much for you! You go out
of your way to misquote me.
Kelly
Again, you go out of your way to stop thinking.
Still waiting for the Zhang refutation, by the way.
Originally posted by rwingettSorry Rob, I thought the Ghost of Christmas Past might put paid to Kelly's saltation arguments (again). Apparently there's no keeping a good automaton down, however.
3,112 posts spread over 208 pages. Unbelievable. John Cleese's character from Monty Python's 'argument clinic' sketch was right, it really is just contradiction.