Evolution backed up by Hoaxes and Desperate Lies

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by Barcs

 

Why is it that you all cannot understand we are not talking micro evolution here. There is no proof of inter species evolution. There are ideas, there are clever drawings, but there is no fossil proof. The mutations cause a loss in genetic information, never a gain.

Those fruit flies were all still flies or crawls when the scientists were done zapping them. Darwin's finches were still finches. Show me a lizard slowly over millions of years changing into a bird. You can't, but it sounds good to you so you believe it. You have every right to believe that is how things happened, but you can't say it's truth and proved by science.

There is no difference between macro and micro evolution. Another common misconception. Macro only means long term. There isn't a special built in mechanism to change from one group (NOT SPECIES) to another. Please explain why small changes can't add up over millions of years? I don't get that. You keep saying nonsense like "Oh that's adaptation, not evolution" when adaptation is part of evolution. Yes, creatures only slightly change when they speciate, but after speciating again and again and again and again, the change appears greater.

rationalwiki.org...

I'll just leave you with this, even though you'll probably just ignore it or find some illogical excuse to dismiss. There are others as well. There are modern fish that have legs as well.

You can't debunk evolution without addressing the actual science. You are only bringing up misunderstandings and hoaxes. The science behind genetic mutations and natural selection is dead on. It was suspected by early scientists, shown in the fossil record, confirmed by biology, and confirmed again by genetics. Every new step we've taken in the past century of science has done nothing but confirm evolution, yet we're to assume that it's full of holes and faulty because we haven't found every single species at every single stage of evolution in the fossil record. There is no debate anywhere in the scientific community about the validity of evolution. You are launching an assault on the wrong field of science. All I really see here are strawmans and red herrings.

Originally posted by BlackSunApocalypse
My friend. Life force is by no means a theory. It's a fact. Life force is that intelligence which gives "life" to everything in the universe. Life obviously defines the ability to fuction. So when something has the ability to function, it obviously needs a life force to govern that function. What I think is this, I think you find yourself in a horrible trap. You have by no means understood the intelligence of that which gives movement to every mechanism and function. There is a need to be less complex in your descriptions and more simplistic. What is life? And what is life without a life force propelling it? You have no way of extricating yourself from the position I currently have you in, any argument you throw forth will seem null and void. When this discussion between you and I have been completed. You will be convinced that there is a creator God.

Right. I've been an atheist since I studied Scripture in school. So no offence, but good luck with that.

Originally posted by BlackSunApocalypse
My friend. Life force is by no means a theory. It's a fact. Life force is that intelligence which gives "life" to everything in the universe. Life obviously defines the ability to fuction. So when something has the ability to function, it obviously needs a life force to govern that function.

Tell me, Obi Wan, when did you first become a Jedi?

What I think is this, I think you find yourself in a horrible trap. You have by no means understood the intelligence of that which gives movement to every mechanism and function. There is a need to be less complex in your descriptions and more simplistic. What is life? And what is life without a life force propelling it? You have no way of extricating yourself from the position I currently have you in, any argument you throw forth will seem null and void.

One so badass he will make your eyes bleed and your knees tremble...

When this discussion between you and I have been completed. You will be convinced that there is a creator God.

Classic stuff. I am visualising you saying all this with your eyes rolled back in your head slightly..

I'll just leave this here:

As our case study has illustrated, what began as a puzzling report within the professional scientific community was transformed by the "creation-science" community into "scientific evidence" purporting to substantiate the recent creation scenario. We have seen how the shrinking sun report, as propagated through the recent creationist literature, lost contact with the critical evaluation and continuing investigation performed by the community of professional scientists. And, having lost this vital connection, the solar shrinkage report became the "legend of the shrinking sun" - the vehicle of misinformation and unwarranted conclusions.

It is unfortunate that many readers of "creation-science" literature have been misinformed concerning such matters as the sun's history. To be misinformed, even by well meaning fellow Christians, is a regrettable experience.

Of far greater concern to me, however, is the negative effect that these episodes of misinformation may have on the Christian witness to a scientifically knowledgeable world. The world to which we direct the Christian message has every right to expect our scholarship, including our natural science, to be characterized by the highest standards of competence and integrity. If we publicly fail to maintain those standards, how can that world gain confidence in the message we proclaim? If we disseminate misinformation in the name of Christian scholarship, who will listen to our preaching of the gospel? More than fifteen centuries ago St. Augustine expressed this same concern in his commentary on Genesis:

"Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size ... and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn.... If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven ... ?"

May we be any less concerned than Augustine?

reply to post by iterationzero


Pointing out error that some Christians have made regarding some issues does not have anything to do with the issues of hoaxes and outright misrepresenting the theory of evolution which has been happening by the scientific community for over a hundred years.

Shall we discuss the fraud done within that same community on other issues and use that to prove anything about evolution vs. ID? They are not the same topic. Your comments are baseless really, and prove nothing supporting evolution.

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by iterationzero

 

Pointing out error that some Christians have made regarding some issues does not have anything to do with the issues of hoaxes and outright misrepresenting the theory of evolution which has been happening by the scientific community for over a hundred years.

Shall we discuss the fraud done within that same community on other issues and use that to prove anything about evolution vs. ID? They are not the same topic. Your comments are baseless really, and prove nothing supporting evolution.

How is that any different than you claiming that Neanderthal and Lucy are hoaxes perpetrated by anthropologists when neither are hoaxes. well aside from factually misrepresenting your position in the OP. particularly in lieu of the fact that your last paragraph applies directly to yourself.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

Pointing out error that some Christians have made regarding some issues does not have anything to do with the issues of hoaxes and outright misrepresenting the theory of evolution which has been happening by the scientific community for over a hundred years.

And yet you are part of the "some Christians" that have made errors regarding "some issues" in this very thread. By continuing to try and utilize long refuted arguments from such infamous sources as Kent Hovind, Ray Comfort, the broader Intelligent Design movement, and various other "creation science" groups, you are doing both yourself and Christianity a disservice. By using sources that have been long refuted, it only shows one of two things: that either you did not know that their arguments have been put to rest, effectively indicating that you are arguing from a position of ignorance, or you know that their arguments have been put to rest, effectively indicating that you are being dishonest. Which is it?

Look at one of your more recent statements:

In fact, millions of species just showed up during the Cambrian explosion...

Post

Except that is not a fact and your implication that the Cambrian "explosion" is remarkable is false. Statistical analysis has shown that:

Speciation rates were somewhat elevated during the Cambrian radiation, relative to the Phanerozoic average, but they have been elevated at other times in the history of life too.

And that:

Although high rates of evolution may have prevailed during the Cambrian radiation, they were not phenomenally high nor high enough to merit the formulation of new rules of evolution relating to the tempo of speciation.

Source

Granted, this is not quite the embarrassment that you asking for a crocoduck was, but it does speak to the larger issue that I was trying to point out with my earlier post.

Quoting everything I say and adding your own bits of sarcasm doesn't really show a rational challenge to what was stated.

"Right. I've been an atheist since I studied Scripture in school. So no offence, but good luck with that". You didn't answer any of my questions. And by the way, you probably did too much studying and too little experimenting to know God exists.

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by iterationzero

 

Pointing out error that some Christians have made regarding some issues does not have anything to do with the issues of hoaxes and outright misrepresenting the theory of evolution which has been happening by the scientific community for over a hundred years.

Shall we discuss the fraud done within that same community on other issues and use that to prove anything about evolution vs. ID? They are not the same topic. Your comments are baseless really, and prove nothing supporting evolution.

That's incredibly hypocritical. You have blatantly ignored valid evidence to counter your argument and in doing so you have undermined your own credibility.

Originally posted by BlackSunApocalypse
"Right. I've been an atheist since I studied Scripture in school. So no offence, but good luck with that". You didn't answer any of my questions. And by the way, you probably did too much studying and too little experimenting to know God exists.

You "know" God exists?

Great. Go jump out of a plane without a parachute. Have faith he will save you. You "know" he exists, after all.

Surely you and God can prove science wrong and settle this once and for all.

Or do you indeed have more faith in the validity of science than you do in the validity of God?

reply to post by LightOrange


Both God and gravity are theories. And should it come to a test between the two, no priest will jump from a plane without a parachute. That should tell you which of the theories is more convincing.

reply to post by helldiver

That's incredibly hypocritical. You have blatantly ignored valid evidence to counter your argument and in doing so you have undermined your own credibility.

You say that as though there were any credibility from the start. I certainly didn't notice any. When a theory is based on the fractional fallibility of a competing theory, rather than the validity of its own support, you know it's doomed.

I'm surprised this thread is still active, really.

You "know" God exists?
Great. Go jump out of a plane without a parachute. Have faith he will save you. You"know" he exists, after all.
Surely you and God can prove science wrong and settle this once and for all.
Or do you indeed have more faith in the validity of science than you do in the validity of God?" ................... I think you have a misconception of what "God" is, firstly, God to me is something that "gives" life to all things, he is the "force" that animates all, the force creates and the force destroys. Now friend, I can't prove God exists when you're walking down a blind alley, when your eyes are open I'll show you the evidence, okay? Until then, try opening your eyes and awakening from your slumber.

The force that gives life to all things has it's own type of intelligence, obviously you aren't "aware" of such an intelligence because you're asleep. If you don't have the power to give a single cell in your body life, if you don't know how many hairs are on your chin, how can you deny the greater creative intelligence? If you knew how little you know about yourself, you would by no means deny a higher intelligence, but like you know little about the world, you know little about yourself. You can think of yourself as "powerful and all knowing", but WE all know a stomach ache is enough to put you in bed.

Originally posted by BlackSunApocalypse
The force that gives life to all things has it's own type of intelligence, obviously you aren't "aware" of such an intelligence because you're asleep. If you don't have the power to give a single cell in your body life, if you don't know how many hairs are on your chin, how can you deny the greater creative intelligence? If you knew how little you know about yourself, you would by no means deny a higher intelligence, but like you know little about the world, you know little about yourself. You can think of yourself as "powerful and all knowing", but WE all know a stomach ache is enough to put you in bed.

Can someone please translate the above for me? I haven't the foggiest.

If you haven't the "foggiest" quote what "doesn't" make sense and I'll make "sense" of it for you.

reply to post by AngryCymraeg


I will give it a try.

The force that gives life to all things has it's own type of intelligence, obviously you aren't "aware" of such an intelligence because you're asleep.

There is life so it must be god ,you do not see thing my way so I will call you asleep.

If you don't have the power to give a single cell in your body life, if you don't know how many hairs are on your chin, how can you deny the greater creative intelligence?

Ancient Chinese probverb, God did it how dare you say otherwise.

If you knew how little you know about yourself, you would by no means deny a higher intelligence, but like you know little about the world, you know little about yourself.

You don’t know anything, god is real, dummy, you don’t know anything.

You can think of yourself as "powerful and all knowing", but WE all know a stomach ache is enough to put you in bed.

You think your so cool, waaaaah!!!!!!!!

-------------------------------------------------
I hope that clears things up. It was the best I could do. Google translate said it was English but it doesn’t make much sense.

The stomach ache part is real strange but that is my best guess.

Originally posted by LightOrange

Originally posted by BlackSunApocalypse
"Right. I've been an atheist since I studied Scripture in school. So no offence, but good luck with that". You didn't answer any of my questions. And by the way, you probably did too much studying and too little experimenting to know God exists.

You "know" God exists?

Great. Go jump out of a plane without a parachute. Have faith he will save you. You "know" he exists, after all.

Surely you and God can prove science wrong and settle this once and for all.

Or do you indeed have more faith in the validity of science than you do in the validity of God?

edit on 28-8-2013 by LightOrange because: (no reason given)

You know Satan tried this tactic on Jesus who responded, "Thou shalt not put the Lord thy God to the test".

Just because I don't see things your way doesn't mean I'm asleep. To deny the greater intelligence is to be asleep. Did I deny the greater intelligence? No, so I can't be asleep. If you concede to having life and admit to a life giving force, then of course it would mean you know little-to-nothing. I didn't proclaim to know everything, to proclaim such is the most foolish mistake a man can make, I am aware of the higher intelligence and my need to understand it better, are you? I don't want to read anything about your baseless theories of evolution being all there is, you most certainly know little about yourself, if not, can you prove otherwise? The least you can do is admit to a greater intelligence and seek to establish yourself in it. Pointless you being sarcastic towards me.