3
   

Darwinists: Persisting despite the evidence

 
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 May, 2009 03:15 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
Fail on all attempts.


There you go then. When anti-IDers run the educational system they will fail us all and keep all the diplomas to themselves. And with 15% of 300,000, ooo being 45,000,000 their average IQ is bound to be 100.

0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 May, 2009 03:19 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
It is not said assertions that got us where we are, but instead, Science. Life in the 1500's had the same set of assertions that we have today; and yet, we are FAR more advanced then we were 500 years ago. Entirely due to testable science.


That is a claim that complex societies can be run successfully using purely scientific principles.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 May, 2009 05:09 pm
@spendius,
David wrote:
Quote:
(I surmise that I shoud give up on getting a reply from Spendius
to the questions that I presented earlier.)




spendius wrote:
Quote:
I thought they were for gunga.

What were the questions?


OK; thay say that the 3rd time is a charm;
here thay are again, copied and pasted from before:

" Here thay r, Spendius:
" These q's r addressed to each of Gunga n Spendius:

1. How old is the Earth ?

2. How did Man begin to inhabit the Earth ?

3. Where did Man come from ?

4. How old is Man ?

If these r too many questions for u,
then just answer however many of them either of u wish to answer. " "
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 May, 2009 05:16 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
1. I don't know.

2. I don't know.

3. I don't know.

4. I don't know.

And I don't care either. And I can't understand anybody who does care.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 May, 2009 05:23 pm
@spendius,
Like I said - you live in a world where people shouldn't ask questions, and science is just a fancy word for Magic.

I don't know how to interact with someone who believes the way you believe. It's amazing that you spend so much time conversing online about various topics, for someone who is so anti-intellectual and so incurious.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 May, 2009 05:28 pm
I gather from the news that scientists are going to give a load of monkeys Parkinson's disease and a few other conditions of a similar nature so that they can test out methods of curing them.

It's a job I suppose. But monkeys are our brothers they say on other occasions when they have become dissociated again.

Maybe scientists have no gestalt sense.

0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 May, 2009 09:29 pm
I'll say it again: Evolution is garbage science and, as garbage science goes, a spectacularly dangerous and evil variety of such.

http://creation.com/darwinism-and-the-nazi-race-holocaust

Quote:
....Introduction

Of the many factors that produced the Nazi holocaust and World War II, one of the most important was Darwin’s notion that evolutionary progress occurs mainly as a result of the elimination of the weak in the struggle for survival. Although it is no easy task to assess the conflicting motives of Hitler and his supporters, Darwinism-inspired eugenics clearly played a critical role. Darwinism justified and encouraged the Nazi views on both race and war. If the Nazi party had fully embraced and consistently acted on the belief that all humans were descendants of Adam and Eve and equal before the creator God, as taught in both the Old Testament and New Testament Scriptures, the holocaust would never have occurred.....


Long article...
MontereyJack
 
  0  
Reply Wed 27 May, 2009 09:49 pm
Oh, bullshit. God didn't tell the Hebrews to kill the Canaanites and take over their land, because God hadn't created Darwin yet. Christians never massacred Jews in their enforced ghettos in the Middle Ages, never forcibly converted them on pain of death, never kicked them out of England and Spain, because Darwin hadn't been born yet. Conquistadores never massacred the native inhabitants of Central and Soutgh America, because Darwin hadn't been born yet. Catholics never massacred Hugenots, because Darwin hadn't been born yet.

For those who are sarcasm-challenged, gunga are you listening?, that was sarcasm. Christians, and everybody else, for that matter, have never had any trouble inventing reasons to kill another group in wholesale lots. Blaming it on Darwin and someone's perversion of what he thinks Darwin said (which Darwin didn't), is sheer ahistorical nonsense.

0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 May, 2009 10:31 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:
Quote:
1. I don't know.

2. I don't know.

3. I don't know.

4. I don't know.

And I don't care either. And I can't understand anybody who does care.

Some of us care about what has HAPPENED; history, and pre-history.
In some cases, the present is based upon what has happened in the past.
I can understand that; I really enjoy finding out about it.
I care a lot. I 'm interested in vertebrate paleontology,
astrophysics and cosmology; interesting in and of themselves.





David
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 May, 2009 10:56 pm
@gungasnake,
Quote:
I'll say it again: Evolution is garbage science and, as garbage science goes, a spectacularly dangerous and evil variety of such
.

What a completely delusional dippyshit is GUNGASNAKE. He will believe in any myth and Biblical tale even though it contains he without any evidence at all, yet will try to dismiss soundly evidenced science in his fevered . All because he fears Naziis and Communists. (The reality was that Hitler was a YEC and The Soviet Union preached Lysenko and Lamark , because Darwin was "Bourgeois".
I understand that GUNGASNAKE also hates all Muslims , so I suppose that he now denies algebra.
It must be marvelous living in a world of fantasy .
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 May, 2009 10:56 pm
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:

I'll say it again: Evolution is garbage science and, as garbage science goes, a spectacularly dangerous and evil variety of such.

http://creation.com/darwinism-and-the-nazi-race-holocaust

Quote:
....Introduction

Of the many factors that produced the Nazi holocaust and World War II, one of the most important was Darwin’s notion that evolutionary progress occurs mainly as a result of the elimination of the weak in the struggle for survival. Although it is no easy task to assess the conflicting motives of Hitler and his supporters, Darwinism-inspired eugenics clearly played a critical role. Darwinism justified and encouraged the Nazi views on both race and war. If the Nazi party had fully embraced and consistently acted on the belief that all humans were descendants of Adam and Eve and equal before the creator God, as taught in both the Old Testament and New Testament Scriptures, the holocaust would never have occurred.....



That is woefully naive.
That remark does not show a knowledge of history.
Hitler was screaming about how Germany had been abused
in the Treaty of Versailles and that the Germans needed more room.
Hitler did not need Darwin to form his opinions of any other races.
He allegedly resented getting his syphilis from a Jewish lady of the evening.
He wanted the wealth n power that comes from conquest,
in addition to revenge and essentially continuing the First World War.
That had nothing to do with Darwin.
I have already pointed out that the Roman conquests
and those of many other empires (I mentioned the Persians) antedated Darwin.
Was Alex the Great prevented from going a rampage
because Darwin had not yet been born ?


If the different races had suddenly appeared with no evolution,
that woud not have stopped the stronger races from more successfully competing
for scarce resources against the weaker races.





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 May, 2009 11:01 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

Quote:
I'll say it again: Evolution is garbage science and, as garbage science goes, a spectacularly dangerous and evil variety of such
.

What a completely delusional dippyshit is GUNGASNAKE. He will believe in any myth and Biblical tale even though it contains he without any evidence at all, yet will try to dismiss soundly evidenced science in his fevered . All because he fears Naziis and Communists. (The reality was that Hitler was a YEC and The Soviet Union preached Lysenko and Lamark , because Darwin was "Bourgeois".
I understand that GUNGASNAKE also hates all Muslims , so I suppose that he now denies algebra.
It must be marvelous living in a world of fantasy .

What the hell 's a YEC ?
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 May, 2009 11:19 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Young Earth Creationist, (As opposed to an "OEC" ,Old Earth Creationists).

PSthe folks that GUNGASNAKE uses to provide his technical literature are not the bright bulbs of science. Jerry Bergman recieved his PHD in "Biology" from a place called COLUMBIA PACIFIC UNIOVERSITY, which is one of those diploma mills which is unaccredited . For 1000 bucks, my Catahoula Stock Dog and Border Collie can each earn a PhD from COLUMBIA PACIFIC. (The fighting Salmons)

Also Bergman had been dismissed at Bowling Green in the 70"s.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 May, 2009 12:45 am
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

Quote:
Young Earth Creationist,
(As opposed to an "OEC" ,Old Earth Creationists).

I see; thanx.
In what respects do thay disagree ?
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 May, 2009 03:56 am
@OmSigDAVID,
This is an excerpt from a longer Wikioedia article on YECs and OECs.
Quote:

YEC is only one of several forms of creationism. YECs typically oppose these alternative theories, which they consider to be "controlled by the findings of 'science'"[58] or otherwise flawed.


[edit] Old Earth creationism
See also: Old Earth creationism
YECs reject Old Earth creationism and Day-Age Creationism on textual and theological grounds. In addition, they claim the scientific data in geology and astronomy point to a young Earth, against the consensus of the general scientific community.

YECs generally hold that when Genesis describes the creation of the Earth occurring over a period of days, this indicates normal-length 24 hour days, and cannot reasonably be interpreted otherwise. They agree that the Hebrew word for "day" (yôm) can refer to either a 24-hour day or a long or unspecified time, but argue that whenever the latter interpretation is used it includes a preposition defining the long or unspecified period. In the specific context of Genesis 1, since the days are both numbered and are referred to as "evening and morning", this can mean only normal-length days. Further, they argue that the 24-hour day is the only interpretation that makes sense of the Sabbath command in Exodus 20:8"11. YECs argue that it is a glaring exegetical fallacy to take a meaning from one context (yom referring to a long period of time in Genesis 1) and apply it to a completely different one (yom referring to normal-length days in Exodus 20).[59]

Further, YECs argue that their position is the only way to explain the Fall, which introduced death and suffering into the world. They argue that all long-age views entail death before sin, which they regard as a severe theological error, violating Genesis 3, and for Christians, Romans 5:12"19, 8:17"22 and 1 Corinthians 15:21"22.[60]. Further discussion and refutation of these objections can be found on the Day-Age Creationism page.


[edit] Gap creationism
See also: Gap creationism
The "gap theory" acknowledges a vast age for the universe, including the Earth and solar system, while asserting that life was created recently in six 24-hour days by divine fiat. Genesis 1 is thus interpreted literally, with an indefinite "gap" of time inserted between the first two verses. (Some gap theorists insert a "primordial creation" and Lucifer's rebellion into the gap.)

Most YEC organizations reject the gap theory, and say it is unscriptural, unscientific, and not necessary, in its various forms.[61][62] It is asserted that the entire universe is only thousands of years old.


[edit] The Omphalos hypothesis
See also: Omphalos hypothesis
Many YECs distinguish their own hypotheses from the "Omphalos hypothesis", today more commonly referred to as the apparent age concept, put forth by the naturalist and science writer Philip Henry Gosse. Omphalos was an unsuccessful mid-19th century attempt to reconcile creationism with geology. Gosse proposed that just as Adam had a navel (omphalos is Greek for navel), evidence of a gestation he never experienced, so also the Earth was created ex nihilo complete with evidence of a prehistoric past that never actually occurred. The Omphalos hypothesis allows for a young Earth without giving rise to any predictions that would contradict scientific findings of an old Earth. Although both logically unassailable and consistent with a literal reading of Scripture, Omphalos was rejected at the time by scientists on the grounds that it was completely unfalsifiable and by theologians because it implied to them a deceitful God, which they found theologically unacceptable.

Most YECs today argue that Adam did not have a navel,[63] and in contrast to Gosse, posit that not only is the Earth young but the scientific data supports that view. However, the apparent age concept is still used in YEC literature.[64][65][66]
BillRM
 
  0  
Reply Thu 28 May, 2009 05:44 am
@farmerman,
My "lord" when you take on the task of defending a fantasy it get more and more silly over time.

How can adults who are not lock up buy into this level of nonsense?
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 May, 2009 07:24 am
@BillRM,
There are not enough jails mate. According to opinion polls all Americans believe in some fantasy or other. How can you lock everybody up you silly moo?
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 May, 2009 07:56 am
@spendius,
It is my opinion that most people just give lip service to the old man and his son plus the ghost.

That form of behavior would had been breed into us because for most of human history people who dare to question the tribial gods ended up being slowly torture to death.

I do not think that in most people heart of heart that they give any real credit to most of this nonsense.

In fact from the known private behavior of some of the Christian leadership not even they seem to buy into it just being con men at work.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 May, 2009 09:12 am

I see; thank u, Farmer.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 May, 2009 09:16 am

Has there been any survaying to ascertain
what proportion of the population rejects
the concept of evolution and rejects the idea of a c.4.6 billion year old Earth ?

I wonder whether YECs have any astronomers or cosmologists among their number ?
 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 07/16/2024 at 09:18:38