Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fact, Fable, and Darwin (If you haven't read this already, you should!!!)
American Enterprise Magazine ^ | 8/04 | Rodney Stark

Posted on 08/02/2004 3:58:04 PM PDT by Renfield

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 681-693 next last
To: balrog666
What a diaper load. Anybody that uses the term "Darwinist" is by definiution a creationist."

Spoken in the stentorian, authoritarian voice of a true Inquisitor of the OHDI. You have unwittingly proved the author's point, sirrah...

the infowarrior

81 posted on 08/02/2004 11:06:15 PM PDT by infowarrior (TANSTAAFL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
Actually, my point is that the evolutionist twists and turns to try to say that God can fit into their view of origins, and the fact is it's an ackward fit. Why don't they simply admit that their theory is a convenient way to explain origins while giving them the ability to thumb their collective noses at God in the process? That's what Darwin did.

But that's like saying Christian astronomers twist & turn to try to fit God into their view of the motion of the planets, and in fact it's an awkward fit. After all, astronomy is a convenient way to explain the motion of the planets while giving them the ability to thumb their noses at all those hard-working angels who toil, 24/7, to keep the planets in their ellipses where they belong.

82 posted on 08/02/2004 11:29:53 PM PDT by jennyp (Tremble and cower, Osama! John Edwards is comin' to getcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: jennyp
But that's like saying Christian astronomers twist & turn to try to fit God into their view of the motion of the planets, and in fact it's an awkward fit. After all, astronomy is a convenient way to explain the motion of the planets while giving them the ability to thumb their noses at all those hard-working angels who toil, 24/7, to keep the planets in their ellipses where they belong.

Shhhh.....!!!!!!! The astronomy guild does not want that information out yet. Would cause panic in the streets. LOL!

83 posted on 08/02/2004 11:39:33 PM PDT by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Renfield
So, name a specific argument from this article that sounds particularly convincing to you. Let's see how well his arguments hold up. (In fact, I wonder if these creationist arguments have ever been refuted before? They sound so devastating, surely no evolutionist scientist or polemicist has ever been able to refute them. Even if you searched the whole, wide Internet, you'd never find refutations to these arguments anywhere.)
84 posted on 08/02/2004 11:41:28 PM PDT by jennyp (Tremble and cower, Osama! John Edwards is comin' to getcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
Shhhh.....!!!!!!! The astronomy guild does not want that information out yet. Would cause panic in the streets. LOL!

It's a darn good thing those angels haven't gone on strike. <shudder>

85 posted on 08/02/2004 11:42:27 PM PDT by jennyp (Tremble and cower, Osama! John Edwards is comin' to getcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Havoc
The odds being what they are, you'd have more chance of hitting the lottery for 250,000,000 dollars 10^1billion times in a row than finding a single missing link - they don't exist and never have.

What's a "missing link", exactly?

86 posted on 08/02/2004 11:43:40 PM PDT by jennyp (Tremble and cower, Osama! John Edwards is comin' to getcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
Your willingness to jump to the conclusion that this is "proof, in the lab, of evolution!" does prove this: belief in this stuff requires a huge shot of faith, or at the very least, wishful thinking.

Go back to post 39 and start over. The original comment was: "Someone has observed the rise of a new specie [sic] in the lab? Funny, I missed that bit of news." I provided two links. That's all. Now you are screeching about my alleged "proof, in the lab, of evolution!" You are raving about "a huge shot of faith, or at the very least, wishful thinking."

I have no idea what you're talking about. And to be brutally candid, neither do you. But it's been interesting chatting with you.

87 posted on 08/03/2004 4:23:51 AM PDT by PatrickHenry (Since 28 Oct 1999, #26,303, over 193 threads posted, and somehow never suspended.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents

Regarding your question why would God wait for a couple of billion years - that is our time frame. For God, even a trillion years is nothing. He created time.

Regarding your question about relationships - it is arrogant of us humans to think God's relationship to us is more important than God's relationship to other creations. Including slime mold.

Regarding your second paragraph, God doesn't lie. People do. I'm sure you follow what I'm saying.

Best wishes,


88 posted on 08/03/2004 5:23:50 AM PDT by razoroccam (read Germs of War to know the real Armageddon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents

Regarding your question why would God wait for a couple of billion years - that is our time frame. For God, even a trillion years is nothing. He created time.

Regarding your question about relationships - it is arrogant of us humans to think God's relationship to us is more important than God's relationship to other creations. Including slime mold.

Regarding your second paragraph, God doesn't lie. People do. I'm sure you follow what I'm saying.

Best wishes,


89 posted on 08/03/2004 5:24:03 AM PDT by razoroccam (read Germs of War to know the real Armageddon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: jennyp

Missing link is the early terminology for what they now term 'intermediate steps'. IE a bat with no wings, and then multiple stages of the bat with non-working wings, then shazam, wings. It isn't that they just exist in small numbers. They don't exist at all. As the writeup notes, there's been a virtual explosion in the number of fossils available to these guys. They keep finding more and more new species; but, in the booming conversation of bones, there is no record of their missing links. The whole idea was a nutjob theory to begin with. I'm sure if they'd known then what they know now about how the body's systems function and rely on one another and how the systems safegaurd against mutation, Darwin would have kept his pie-hole shut or maybe just wrote a poor grade science fiction book.. which is about what it amounts to anyway. That this fantastical crap gets taught in face of the facts is astounding.


90 posted on 08/03/2004 5:29:12 AM PDT by Havoc (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Havoc

I disagree with you on two points.

Evolution does not blaspheme God. It challenges the Bible and Koran, but does NOT challenge God. I don't accept the Koranic and Biblical version of creation - so I don't have to tell you how plants requiring photosynthesis can survive for eons without the sun. You are mixing your hypothesis - you are the one who believes that plants predated the Sun. I don't.

God is too magnificient to be tied down to one religion's view point.


91 posted on 08/03/2004 5:33:22 AM PDT by razoroccam (read Germs of War to know the real Armageddon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
"I think evolution is something of a cult. It requires a leap of faith to accept it. No one can drag the theory into the lab and submit it to the scientific method to prove it's validity. This isn't so much a criticism, as a statement of fact. But the "Darwinists" take it as a criticism. It's plain that Darwin's theory of the rise of species has been used by many for over a hundred years to attack belief in the Bible. When used for this purpose, evolution ceases to be an explanation of origins, and becomes a soapbox in a war of religious viewpoints.

My opinion about evolution is that it is the best explanation that man has been able to come up with to explain the origin of species, without God."

I absolutely and whole heartedly agree with and share your sentiments when you made the above statements. My only regret is I didn't think of them first.

I do have good news for all of you, I mean besides saving a bunch of money on my car insurance with Geico, God is one day going to irrefutably and undeniably answer the question once and for all how we got here in front of us all. He already has in the Bible, but what I mean is, He will show us with our own eyes to see His miracle of life created.
92 posted on 08/03/2004 6:02:04 AM PDT by ChevyZ28 ( For I know the thoughts I have for you says the Lord, thoughts of peace, not of evil.. Jer. 29:11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: razoroccam
Evolution does not blaspheme God. It challenges the Bible and Koran, but does NOT challenge God. I don't accept the Koranic and Biblical version of creation - so I don't have to tell you how plants requiring photosynthesis can survive for eons without the sun. You are mixing your hypothesis - you are the one who believes that plants predated the Sun. I don't.

Yes, it most certainly does challenge God. Either it happened the way we're told it did in scripture, or scripture is a lie and thusly God who inspired it becomes a liar. It is a direct challenge to both the scripture and God. Evidently you know just enough about scripture to be dangerous or a bad liar and I don't know which. As far as the plants predating the sun, that's scripture. I don't pick and choose what scripture to follow.

As far as your commentary on God's magnificence, if you revered it so much, you might have more respect for what is His word. I don't know what group you're pandering for; but, it's not gaining you any credibility with me.

93 posted on 08/03/2004 6:12:49 AM PDT by Havoc (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy
These so-called "crevo" threads serve as a perfect example of the extra-scientific nature of the "debate".

That's because it is entirely a religious debate on both sides.

94 posted on 08/03/2004 6:15:50 AM PDT by biblewonk (WELL I SPEAK LOUD, AND I CARRY A BIGGER STICK...AND I USE IT TOO.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Havoc

I don't care if I gain credibility with you or not. It is completely immaterial and irrelevant.

I have read the Bible, Koran, Vedas (Hindu, if you don't know) and Dharmapada (Buddhist, for those ignorant). Evolution and Big Bang challenge the first two. Not the last two.

People who are ignorant of ALL religions of the world should either take the trouble to read them, or accept the reality that they ignorant and live in the spiritual darkness of a cave.

Don't confuse "scripture" with "Biblical scripture". There are scriptures in the world that suport evolution and the big bang. Take the reincarnations of Vishnu for example - fish, turtle, boar, small primate, walking primate, man. Get the point?

Just because it is your scripture does not mean it is either right or reality.


95 posted on 08/03/2004 6:38:02 AM PDT by razoroccam (read Germs of War to know the real Armageddon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: ProudGOP
Also, I noticed that you didn't mention any of the "favorable evidence" that has "exploded in volume". Shall I just take your word for it?

I think it fascinating that so much of creation science involves bludgeoning others with the willful ignorance of the creationist. The major lines of evidence are summarized in this article, 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution. A frequent creationist reaction to that article is that it's too big to read and a high-level summary is needed. That IS the high-level summary of many different and largely independent lines of evidence leading to the same conclusion, that all life on Earth has common ancestry. (And, no, the evidence for "common design" would in most cases NOT be the same.)

There's plenty more, but we'll see what you do with that first.

96 posted on 08/03/2004 7:37:18 AM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Havoc
An argument from silence doesn't become an argument from falsifiable evidence by producing some web links about theories.

Web pages about transitional fossils are about the evidence for a theory. When creationists say, "There is no evidence," the proof of their assertion is that no one can make them see the evidence. This is an intellectually bankrupt science indeed! Cretin Science!

97 posted on 08/03/2004 7:46:50 AM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: razoroccam
I have read the Bible, Koran, Vedas (Hindu, if you don't know) and Dharmapada (Buddhist, for those ignorant).

You miss the larger point. The first one is loaded with fulfilled prophecy which tends to give it credibility. Credibility, which the others lack. To my knowledge, the Koran has no prophecy in it - much less any that's been fulfilled. The Hindu religions are pantheon - like the old Roman religions - gods for this and that. There isn't much going for their stuff either.

And I don't confuse Biblical scripture with "scripture" as a general term. Biblical Scripture is the word of God. Everyone elses pretty much makes a pretense but is otherwise left wanting.

Evolution and Big Bang challenge the first two. Not the last two.

Gee, do you think?

98 posted on 08/03/2004 8:01:40 AM PDT by Havoc (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

bump


99 posted on 08/03/2004 8:04:38 AM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro

When Creationists say there is no evidence, it is because there is no evidence. None. Evolutionists have been scouring the planet for such evidence driving themselves batty to no avail; because transitional fossils don't exist. This is because transitional critters don't exist and never did. But, there is no record of transitional forms. There never will be. And you guys can't bring yourselves to admit it because maintaining the great lie of science has become your life's work. If it turns out a lie, then your life is a lie. And by gum we can't have that, now can we. Get over it. We still love you. We just know your wrong and trying to handwring to save face.


100 posted on 08/03/2004 8:14:08 AM PDT by Havoc (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 681-693 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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