Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How Much Longer Can They Sell Darwinism?
From Sea to Shining Sea ^ | 1/4/09 | Purple Mountains

Posted on 01/04/2009 5:39:47 AM PST by PurpleMountains

All across the country, archeologists, paleontologists and biologists are taking part in what is perhaps the greatest example of political correctness in history – their adherence to Darwinism and their attempts to ostracize any scientist who does not agree with them. In doing so, they are not only ignoring the vast buildup of recent scientific discoveries that seriously undermines the basics of Darwinism, but they are also participating, due to politically correctness, in a belief system that indirectly resulted in the deaths of millions of people – those slaughtered by the Stalins, the Hitlers, the Maos, the Pol Pots and others who took their cue from Darwinism’s tenets.

(Excerpt) Read more at forthegrandchildren.blogspot.com ...


TOPICS: Conspiracy; Science
KEYWORDS: allyourblog; darwin; expelled; pimpmyblog; rousseau
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 621-640641-660661-680 ... 1,821-1,826 next last
To: Gumlegs

[[Your two paragraphs quoted above should show anyone quite neatly that your “DEMAND” for accuracy has, to put it mildly, its limits. The bits I’ve bolded somehow don’t quite seem to be the work of someone with a passion for accuracy.]]

Hey- another anally obsessive spelling nazi- The facts get too much, why just attack the other person with petty little insults- Works liek a charm to ‘refute’ what was brought to the table- NOT!

[[The second, in which you respond to my comment that you weren’t paying attention illustrates that you are, in fact, not paying attention. Here’s the evidence:]]

Gee- continued attacks- How professional of you- I already stated that I made a mistake- Guess you missed that part eh?

[[Of course, if you’d looked at the posts in the link before you complained about it, you would not have complained that “we had to search for Ichneumon.”]]

I hit your link, and noted the TITLES only- thinking the link led to a general forum- I didn’t see that they were all one person- which is why- Before you started whining about ‘following along’ I asked you what I did-

I see you’re goign to ignore the obvious, and just glom onto pettiness and nastiness- I see also that you’ll harp on this even AFTER I CLEARLY SAID I made a mistake- AND apologized!- I see you will use any little chink to get your grubby little claws into just for the sake of sport- apparently thinking it makes you look more important or soemthiong- What is it? What does it make you feel Gummylegs? Gee- how atypical of you fellers! {Sarcasm!}


641 posted on 01/05/2009 9:08:46 PM PST by CottShop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 631 | View Replies]

To: NicknamedBob

[[Maybe He was aiming for you as a final product.]]

IF He was, He did a darn fine job then- You all should be as lucky as I am!


642 posted on 01/05/2009 9:09:32 PM PST by CottShop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 632 | View Replies]

To: Gumlegs

[[Exactly what I expected.]]

Said hte kid- running away from the evidence because it’s too icky and makes his preferred hypothesis look silly! Run billy run!


643 posted on 01/05/2009 9:10:43 PM PST by CottShop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 635 | View Replies]

To: CottShop
What does it make you feel Gummylegs?

Like I'm wasting my time.

644 posted on 01/05/2009 9:11:58 PM PST by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 641 | View Replies]

To: CottShop
Said hte[sic] kid- running away from the evidence because it’s too icky and makes his preferred hypothesis look silly! Run billy run!

You didn't present any evidence from which I could run.

645 posted on 01/05/2009 9:13:59 PM PST by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 643 | View Replies]

To: YHAOS
"That's what we are all dying to find out."

After you. I've learned to be patient.

646 posted on 01/05/2009 9:15:44 PM PST by NicknamedBob (If you translate Pi into base 43 notation, it will contain this statement.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 638 | View Replies]

To: js1138; metmom; betty boop
Thank you for your reply! It stands in evidence of the very point I have been making.

From your aspect:

"However, things — real or otherwise — that cannot be studied by the methods of science, will never be anything more than personal experience and personal testimony."

Conversely, from mine:

But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

But God hath revealed [them] unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.

But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ. - I Corinthians 2:6-16

To God be the glory!

647 posted on 01/05/2009 9:19:47 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 466 | View Replies]

To: Gumlegs

[[Like I’m wasting my time.]]

you certainly are wasting your time if you think I’m goign to buy the garbage at face value that you present. You may be content accepting everything Macroevolutionists tell you, taking it without critical examination- but I’m unwilling to do so- You can look up “Macroevolution is impossible’ in google just as well as I can- and you’ll find plenty there with which to ignore per usual, but htere they are! I explained several impossibilites to you already- there are many many more- but run billy run-


648 posted on 01/05/2009 9:22:33 PM PST by CottShop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 644 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
Yet there are things we all agree on. Among these, the common denominator is observable, empirical evidence.

We could probably find a number of things to agree on with reference to mathematics and physics. Even so, we may very well have a different paradigm there also - I am a mathematical Platonist, you may be a mathematical Aristotlean.

649 posted on 01/05/2009 9:23:12 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 467 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
Thank you so much for your outstanding essay-post, dearest sister in Christ! I particularly enjoyed the excerpts from Grandpierre and look forward to your full essay on the subject!

NeoDarwinism cannot demonstrate the origin of intelligence in nature, just as it cannot demonstrate the origin of life from inert matter.

Truly said. Nor has it demonstrated the origin of inertia, information, space/time, autonomy, awareness or conscience.

650 posted on 01/05/2009 9:26:47 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 474 | View Replies]

To: CottShop

Perhaps one day you’ll learn the difference between “explain” and “assert.”


651 posted on 01/05/2009 9:28:05 PM PST by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 648 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
Why should the "opposition" (which includes me) argue your (non-existent) case for you?

Do it yourself!

LOLOL!

652 posted on 01/05/2009 9:30:08 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 488 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Scientists take the supernatural into account when they decide on methodical naturalism. They take it into account when they make assumptions about it before they even proceed with the experiments. By deciding beforehand that there is no supernatural influence, they’ve made an assumption about it and are taking it into account.

Indeed.

653 posted on 01/05/2009 9:32:53 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 509 | View Replies]

To: metmom; Dog Gone; betty boop
Thank you so much for sharing your insights!

Of a truth, if a phenomenon could be consistently observed or studied under laboratory conditions it would not be called a miracle in the first place.

654 posted on 01/05/2009 9:35:32 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 541 | View Replies]

To: Gumlegs
The link goes to the results of a poster search. The poster is Ichneumon.

Ichneumon has told me never to speak to him again, or he'll rat me out to the AdminMods and try to get me banned. After that, I just stopped taking him seriously anymore. I mean, really.... what sort of wimp is it that would let a betty boop p*ss him off?

655 posted on 01/05/2009 9:37:49 PM PST by betty boop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 586 | View Replies]

To: TXnMA
Thank you oh so very much for sharing your beautiful testimony, dear brother in Christ, and thank you for your encouragements!

Truly, I see the creation as part of God's revelation of Himself and I have never discerned that revelation to contradict His revelation in the person of Jesus Christ, in the person of the indwelling Holy Spirit or in Scripture.

The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. [There is] no speech nor language, [where] their voice is not heard. - Psalms 19:1-3 To God be the glory!

656 posted on 01/05/2009 9:44:25 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 550 | View Replies]

To: DevNet
I am sorry but programming isn’t supernatural.

I never said it was. But "programming" is not the same thing as the intellectual capital that gets loaded into the program, for the purpose of attaining a not-yet-existing end or purpose. "Intellectual capital" is not a direct observable; it is immaterial, intangible, and thus not itself subject to experimental test.

657 posted on 01/05/2009 9:44:26 PM PST by betty boop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 581 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Wow, it’s just too late to be posting any more.

Yeah, I'm tired too, and am going to bed.

Sleep tight, and I'll see you tomorrow!

658 posted on 01/05/2009 9:45:52 PM PST by betty boop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 625 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
what sort of wimp is it that would let a betty boop p*ss him off?

What sort of a person trashes scientists, while knowing nearly nothing about the subject?

A purveyor of unknowledge, as a former poster put it.

659 posted on 01/05/2009 9:47:31 PM PST by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 655 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
"Nor has it demonstrated the origin of inertia ..."

I had some information about that, but it didn't want me to move it here.

660 posted on 01/05/2009 9:47:31 PM PST by NicknamedBob (If you translate Pi into base 43 notation, it will contain this statement.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 650 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 621-640641-660661-680 ... 1,821-1,826 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson