10 Ways Darwin got it wrong - The Conspiracy of Evolution

reply to post by loner007


I totally agree. Like Freud was to psychology, Darwin is to evolution. They both took footsteps in the right direction and got the ball rolling. Sure, a portion of Darwin's theories have been proven wrong or incorrect, but evolution has itself evolved. As we studied more, we corrected what needed to be corrected. What has the bible done?? It has already been proven the the plaques of Egypt (Moses) where caused by an environmental disaster, and that the Jews really weren't slaves, but do you see the bible being updated to the current knowledge?? No!

If it wasn't for Darwin, we would not would not have the understanding that we have now, and people would still be sent to prison for thinking outside the bible.

hey heres a thought and yes this is from, the movie contact

"So what's more likely? That an all-powerful, mysterious God created the Universe, and decided not to give any proof of his existence? Or, that He simply doesn't exist at all, and that we created Him, so that we wouldn't have to feel so small and alone?"

how to prove a creationist wrong

Perfection's Imperfect Revelation



The Bible is supposedly God's perfect Word. It contains instructions to humankind for avoiding the eternal fires of hell. How wonderful and kind of this God to provide us with this means of overcoming the problems for which he is ultimately responsible! The all-powerful God could have, by a mere act of will, eliminated all of the problems we humans must endure, but instead, in his infinite wisdom, he has opted to offer this indecipherable amalgam of books which is the Bible as a means for avoiding the hell which he has prepared for us. The perfect God has decided to reveal his wishes in this imperfect work, written in the imperfect language of imperfect man, translated, copied, interpreted, voted on, and related by imperfect man.

No two men will ever agree what this perfect word of God is supposed to mean, since much of it is either self- contradictory, or obscured by enigmatic symbols. And yet the perfect God expects us imperfect humans to understand this paradoxical riddle using the imperfect minds with which he has equipped us. Surely the all-wise and all-powerful God would have known that it would have been better to reveal his perfect will directly to each of us, rather than to allow it to be debased and perverted by the imperfect language and botched interpretations of man.

-evilbible.com

reply to post by ashanu90


Great, now this thread has turned into a bible-bashing athiest fest! No wonder I stopped replying. Believe what you want. That's your right. But don't try to tell me that my God is evil because of things you don't understand or refuse to understand. Just keep your hatred for my God to yourself and stop trying to convince us that He's not real. Other than that, please have a lovely day.

reply to post by rnaa


I love how you pass yourself as being super-intelligent and then accuse me of pagarism. Whatever.

reply to post by Locoman8


well theres no need to get upset if you know that god is real you shouldn't get so defensive you should shrug it off and say too bad for them.

but apparently you don't

just an observation

reply to post by ashanu90


I respect you. I respect athiests in general. My little brother is athiest. I have no problem with them. I do have a problem with someone yelling out how they believe God doesn't exist yet they have no proof that He doesn't exist. Believing in His non-existence is your choice but it isn't fact... of course you can't really prove He does exist scientifically.... so that's my choice to believe. I respectfully ask that you refrain from trying to disprove my God's existence and just make a comment mentioning that you personally don't believe in Him.

reply to post by Locoman8


very well i understand your point im sorry that was mean of me

reply to post by ashanu90


No apology needed. I just enjoy discussions in which two sides can meet in the middle for some understanding. I'm a creationist. You're obviously an evolutionist. That's fine. No harm, no foul. The title of this thread is "Ten Ways Darwin Got it Wrong" and it's already been shown by both sides that Darwin was wrong. There really isn't much more to discuss in this thread to be honest with you. Good day to you.

reply to post by Locoman8

I love how you pass yourself as being super-intelligent

I don't think I've ever tried to pass myself off as anything other than a person with an educated opinion. I am indeed reasonably well educated, both formally and informally, but nowhere near as well as a lot of other people on this forum. That doesn't make me any more intelligent than anyone else, including you.

and then accuse me of pagarism. Whatever.

If the shoe fits, wear it.

Quoting other peoples work without attribution is plagiarism, in the world at large, in Academe, and in the ATS terms and conditions.

Doing it once could be an oversight, so I reminded you. Doing it a second time after being called out is not an oversight, it is a purposeful tactic to deliberately hide the source to prevent readers from checking it out for themselves and evaluate the context and the robustness of the source.

You already apologized, and I thought, moved on. Your reply to my three month old post is not much of an acknowledgment that your cherry picking quotes were misunderstood, a misunderstanding that could have been avoided had you actually researched the quote instead of blindly parroting your favorite anti-science flamesite.

And what does intelligence have to do with plagiarism? That's an odd juxtaposition.

Whatever.

reply to post by rnaa


Go back and look at my posts. I post my sources. That's not plagarism. The MODS would be all over me if I did plagarize. Yes, I forgot to mention the source on one or two posts on this thread when I first started, but I edited and added my sources. I wasn't trying to hide the sources. I wasn't trying to take full credit of the literature. I was actually in a hurry and did some posts and forgot to add the sources. I did correct the mistakes. I am not a plagarist by no means. Rid that label off me please. That's my only point. Instead of the topic at hand you had to cry about "plagarism". It's the mods job to find, not yours. And I'm not trying to misjudge your intelligence. I just find your passive criticism offensive and it's like you cover it up with your logic. I do bid you farewell as there is no middle ground in our differences. I do hope you have a plesant life (not sarcastic). I mean you no harm and do wish to see you on ATS for some other topics that maybe we can agree on. Peace.

reply to post by Locoman8


Yes, you edited your posts and fixed them after being called out on it. Once should have been enough, but you did it twice.

You have apologized already. Apology accepted, OK?

Please move on.

[edit on 11/3/2010 by rnaa]

reply to post by rnaa


Twice before being called out and both times were on the same day if I'm not mistaken. You keep saying "apology accepted" but you are still putting the label on me as "Plagarist" and I don't appriciate it. That's all my point is about. Please retract that label that apparently ONLY you gave me.

reply to post by Locoman8

Twice before being called out and both times were on the same day if I'm not mistaken.

If you read back through the thread, you will notice that your two posts were TWO days apart. I mentioned after the first error, and you did it again anyway.

For the record, I never called you a plagiarist. I did quote the ATS terms and conditions that define your error as plagiarism. And I did charge you with doing it on purpose the second time, AFTER I had pointed out the first one.

You have fixed it and apologized. That's all I asked and I have accepted your apology.

There is nothing more in this discussion for me.

reply to post by rnaa


Well, the terms and conditions of ATS were apparently not broken since the mods never even warned me about it. Be that as it may, I'm done with that spill. Apologies to the OP for going off-topic.

reply to post by Locoman8


i understand your offended by some of the posts people have made about bible bashing etc but a creationist made a thread chalening evolution and they are defending their views i suppose there are some rude things that shouldn't have been said hell i was pretty rude myself but if the tables were turned and the thread was an evolutionist saying the 10 ways genesis got it wrong you would act likewise. (i'm not saying you would be rude however)

reply to post by ashanu90


I'm not offended by anyone opposed to creationism.... just those that try to drag christianity into the dirt when not all of us are the mainstream zealots you see everyday. I'm more irritated that I was tagged as something I'm not while I was just trying to prove my point. Agree, disagree, fine. Just keep it respectful.. and you have apologized which I'm thankful for. Good day to you.

Someone should create a thread called "10000000000000 things creationism got wrong."