Why do people deny evolution?

@farmerman,

Quote:

y and hes a lying sack of ****.

Ok, you have been warned!!

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

PLEASE< BE MY GUEST AND REPORT ME, IDIOT. There is a difference twixt Ad hominem and direct insult. I am practicing the latter and I at least wish you would get it strait before you report me.
Our arguments here are often passionate and if you are somehow offended well -too bad genius. I am also offended at your obtuseness

OH I WAS wrong about 1 thing

That dipshit article about "The mathematical impossibility of Evolution" was NOT in AIG,(Answers in Genesis) it was in the proceedings of the ICR (Institute of CREATION RESERCH). If that's not an oxymoron I don't know what is.
WHAT is left to research oif you are a creationist? You've already settled on an answer.

The article was by Henry Morris (whom I thought had died).
I have many of his writings including his "geology of the Noadic Flood" (I use that in classes sometimes to give the kids a chance to look at what clap trap lies out there posing as real science.(We spend time looking at " defensible" data that the ICR tries to manufacture
"

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Heres a Wikipedia stub on Henry Morris. He died in 2006 so that dumass article was probably one of his last fairy tales before he died.

Quote:

Henry Madison Morris (October 6, 1918 – February 25, 2006) was an American young earth creationist and Christian apologist. He was one of the founders of the Creation Research Society and the Institute for Creation Research. He is considered by many to be "the father of modern creation science."[1] He wrote numerous creationist and devotional books, and made regular television and radio appearances.[not verified in body] He supported his religious beliefs in the inerrancy of the Bible by opposing theories and scientific results he saw as being contrary to it, especially such notions as the billions of years time-scales involved in measurements of evolution, the age of the Earth, and the age of the Universe.[2] Morris's influential approach, while adopted widely by the modern creationist movement, continues to be roundly rejected by the scientific community, and also by some other creationists.[

So Quahog says hes NOT a religious prson and doesn't "believe" in Creationism, yet he posts articles as "Evidence" written by one of the most infamoys Creationist IDIOTS whose ever lived.
Henry Morris claims the validity of
1A seven day Creation
2A worldwide Flood
3Dinosaurs living with humans
4cats and dogs living together

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

So Quahog says hes NOT a religious prson and doesn't "believe" in Creationism, yet he posts articles as "Evidence" written by one of the most infamoys Creationist IDIOTS whose ever lived.

You are really confused now.
It doesn't matter WHO wrote it.
It only matters if the argument is valid.
You are using a AH again! You are attacking the person because you can't
fight the arguments.

2 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

You have posted a unpeer reviewed, untested, totally bogus article that, if you understood a jot about genetics would see the fallacies inherent in his bullshit.
Henry Morris has a pssle of dipshit ideas to his name. Do you accept the WORLLDWIDE FLOOD as as one of these"Valid ideas?"

0 Replies

Quote:

Quehon said: Well, we have to be real, evolution isn't anything anymore, it never was of course.It has to go, bye bye.

Right, it's one of the biggest con tricks around and atheists have swallowed it hook line sinker.. Smile

Demon-possessed Dawkins and his scientist chums are proven liars, so it's only to be expected that they do as their daddy tells them-
Jesus said to their kind-"You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires..there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies"- (John 8:42-44)

PS- in fairness to atheists, Satan has also got a firm grip on most assorted religions and oddball cultists too.. Wink

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

He's certainly got you under his spell.

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

Quote:

.
It doesn't matter WHO wrote it.
It only matters if the argument is valid.

so you subscribe to the "infinite number of chimpanzees at an infinite number of keyboards will eventually give us "King Lear"?

1 Reply

Quote:

Izzy said to me about Satan: He's certainly got you under his spell.

He certainly has a go at me, just as he has a go at every human on the planet, sifting through our minds to try to pick up on any character flaws and weaknesses that he can make flare up.
He even tried it with Jesus who told him "On yer bike mate!" (Matt 4:10).
And Jesus warned Peter- "Satan wanted to sift you" (Luke 22:31)

Atheists are easy meat for him because they don't even believe he exists and therefore can't defend themselves against him.
Christians however can sense when he's trying to sift and tempt and sabotage them, and are therefore able to defend themselves.. Smile

"Don't give the devil a foothold" (Eph 4:27)
"Resist the devil and he'll flee from you" (James 4:7)

KIRK- "Report Mr. Spock?"
SPOCK- "We're being scanned Captain, source and origin unknown!"
KIRK- "Red alert, shields up!"

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/Spock_science_station_zpsc58274f8.jpg~original

3 Replies

@Wilso,

Quote:

Atheism is a religion in the way that abstinence is a sexual positon.

Abstinence is a sexual position Wilso. You, as a fundie misogynist, having no experience of it is not evidence to the contrary.

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

Quote:

(btw one more Ad Hominims and I will inform the moderators!! I don't do this easily, but
you have to stop from now on with your Ad Hominems!!!!
you have been warned!!)

You should encourage him Q. Every AH he uses, must be a few thousand directed at me, discredits him in the eyes of intelligent people and who cares what unintelligent people think?

The questions he is asked which he refuses to answer are the best guide to how busted his flush is. And there have been a great number.

2 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

You should encourage him Q. Every AH he uses, must be a few thousand directed at me, discredits him in the eyes of intelligent people and who cares what unintelligent people think?

I have reported him now.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

so you subscribe to the "infinite number of chimpanzees at an infinite number of keyboards will eventually give us "King Lear"?

No, you are twisting my words, and you haven't refuted the math.
Here clear for anyone to see.

Time to face evolution is nonsense.

But, I have patience, because I am well aware that this a process of letting go this bullshit. sleep on it, chew on it, assimilate it.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

The Cambridge University physicist who is declaring that black holes are a hoax is Laura Mersini-Houghton. She is also billed as an associate professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

0 Replies

@Quehoniaomath,

why not hold your breath until all the elite universities begin to accept Henry Morris as a "Scientist" worth considering. If evolution is a scam, howcomes it can be demonstrated in the lab .
Why do we not see fossil elephants in the rocks of the Cambrian?

I know you have no answer.

PS, if I get banned, the morons have won.

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

The questions he is asked which he refuses to answer are the best guide to how busted his flush is

So , by your way of thinking, no matter how moronic the question , I should answer it?
Ill pass on the invitation .
Answering a moronic question merely raises its credibility to others.
When Quahog posted the Henry Morris ejaculate, he failed to realize that Henry Morris has ZERO credibility in anything relating to genetics.
He merely tried a twist on the Haldane "dilemma" (which, by the way, Hldane himself said "OOOPS I WAS WRONG NOW THAT I KNOW HOW GENES WORK")

Why should anyone dignify that poopery by trying to answer it reasonably.

As far as any other math--I think Parados put Quahog in his place a few pages back regarding a separate statistical expansion. Seems that math isn't one of Quahogs Skill sets. Hes only good at quote mining and repeating idiotic mantras

2 Replies

Speaking of fossils, why are they only of fully-formed finished creatures?
I mean, why are there no "partially-formed" flops from earlier on the evolutionary ladder?

1 Reply

@Quehoniaomath,

Quote:

I have reported him now.

If you have its because youre afraid of engaging me in debate. All you do is repeat a phrase or two. No intelligence in that.

You are our Reverend Dr Wilberforce. (Now that's an ad Hominem)

0 Replies

@Romeo Fabulini,

Quote:

I mean, why are there no "partially-formed" flops from earlier on the evolutionary ladder?

Those we call "miscarriges"
Are you this dumb, really?

Take for example the Trilobite, an index fossil of the Paleozoic. There were thousands of species, each one more bizarre than the other. Some, likeTerrataspis grandi or Ampyx tetragonis are as weird as George Lucas could have imagined. Yet, there they are, in the fossil record, adapted to whatever in their time .

2 Replies

I mean, when the first birds appeared, they surely couldn't have had miraculous perfectly-formed working wings out of nowhere!
So where are the fossils of birds from earlier on the rungs of the evolutionary ladder that had only partially-formed non-working wings?

For example the Spitfire Mk 1 and II were the 1940 Battle of Britain versions, but by the end of the war the Spitfire had "evolved" through a further 18 marks up to Mk XIX, each one being better than the previous one with new guns, new engine, new refinements etc.
The Mk I Spit can be seen in museums, but where are the fossils of Mk1 birds?

0 Replies

Why do people deny evolution?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know