Skip to comments.
New Analyses Bolster Central Tenets of Evolution Theory
Washington Post ^
| September 26, 2005
| Rick Weiss and David Brown
Posted on 09/26/2005 3:27:53 AM PDT by Crackingham
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 201-213 next last
To: RoadTest
I assume that you have an actual argument against the theory of evolution rather than just ridicule, right?
41
posted on
09/26/2005 7:25:18 AM PDT
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: DesertSapper
Of course our friendly FR Darwinists will reply that we Creationists do the same thing - and they would probably be correct. However, they miss a huge, glaring truth - they claim science drives them . . . God drives Creation. The former is supposed to process all data without prejudice, the latter doesn't have to - it's supernatural.
In other words, you assume your conclusion without evidence behind it.
42
posted on
09/26/2005 7:35:37 AM PDT
by
Dimensio
(http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
To: PatrickHenry
43
posted on
09/26/2005 7:42:38 AM PDT
by
RadioAstronomer
(Senior member of Darwin Central)
To: PatrickHenry
If you actually knew anything about molecular evolution or biology and acually had read the article in the recent Science concerning the Chimp's repeating element organization you'd know that the talk origins article you are fond of citing is dreadfully out of date and never has been really accurate.
44
posted on
09/26/2005 7:51:19 AM PDT
by
tallhappy
(Juntos Podemos!)
45
posted on
09/26/2005 8:11:36 AM PDT
by
Junior
(Some drink to silence the voices in their heads. I drink to understand them.)
To: RoadTest
Two keys here: "after it's kind" (not another kind!) and "God said" Please define kind. Not examples, but a functional definition that I can apply to all living organisms.
46
posted on
09/26/2005 8:20:17 AM PDT
by
ndt
To: ndt
Won't happen, but good luck.
47
posted on
09/26/2005 8:23:51 AM PDT
by
furball4paws
(One of the last Evil Geniuses, or the first of their return.)
To: tallhappy
"If you actually knew anything about molecular evolution or biology and acually had read the article in the recent Science concerning the Chimp's repeating element organization you'd know that the talk origins article you are fond of citing is dreadfully out of date and never has been really accurate."
I have and I understand it, would you care to elaborate?
48
posted on
09/26/2005 8:25:27 AM PDT
by
furball4paws
(One of the last Evil Geniuses, or the first of their return.)
To: RoadTest
Evolution "scientists" must be part kangaroo! True, but probably more like 90 percent than 96 percent.
49
posted on
09/26/2005 8:33:39 AM PDT
by
js1138
(Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
To: PatrickHenry
It's as if your exam paper in school were 96% the same as the guy who was sitting in front of you, including his wrong answers, and including his crazy answers.That's a really cool analogy.
50
posted on
09/26/2005 8:37:44 AM PDT
by
js1138
(Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
To: DaveLoneRanger
Tell me; how does evolution make predictions if the mutations taking place are RANDOM?It's a bit like this. Suppose student A sits next to B, and A determines his answers by coin tosses. When the exams are turned in, B's answers are the same as A's.
Copied, or not?
51
posted on
09/26/2005 8:42:05 AM PDT
by
js1138
(Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
To: Junior
Are you still keeping your list of threads?
52
posted on
09/26/2005 8:46:47 AM PDT
by
js1138
(Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
To: js1138
On and off. I'm trying to update my database now; I've got a new data format that outputs text ready for pasting.
53
posted on
09/26/2005 8:51:23 AM PDT
by
Junior
(Some drink to silence the voices in their heads. I drink to understand them.)
To: doc30
I say luddites because I have yet to meet a creationsist who does not warp, twist and misrepresent science in their arguements. They have to destroy every field of modern science in order to rationalize their biblical, supernatural explanations. Perhaps it is not the best word. Perhaps either ignorant or lying would be more appropriate. As to you question, read the article, They actually explain the basis of their predictions. But then again, actually reading and understanding something about evolution is soenthing most creationists don't do.
So, according to you, creationists can't read? Thank you for proving my point about shrillness.
And no, I don't chalk up all the flame wars to evolutionists. Just the majority of them.
As I said earlier, this thread sucks. Officially.
54
posted on
09/26/2005 9:14:55 AM PDT
by
JamesP81
To: DaveLoneRanger
the sequence was more than 96 percent identical to the human genome.Even if this point were accurate, what does it prove? Does it prove that chimps and man have a similar ancestor, that they are different branches off of the same evolutionary trunk, or does it indicate that both chimps and man have the same designer who simply created man as a variation on an existing theme?
55
posted on
09/26/2005 9:28:07 AM PDT
by
My2Cents
(The political battles of our day are battles over morality, between the haves and the have nots.)
To: doc30; All
Howdy Doc...
What do you make of this?:
Most Published Research Findings May Be False
Who is warping, twisting, and misrepresenting science in their arguments?
Here's an example:
The hobbits are in a class all of their own, say scientists March 04, 2005
From the article:
HOBBITS, the nickname for the little human relative first discovered last year, were not Homo sapiens but a separate species, analysis of its brain has confirmed.
We now have research that shows these people were "modern":
New 'Hobbit' disease link claimFriday, 23 September 2005
The researchers say their findings strongly support an idea that the 1m- (3ft-) tall female skeleton from Indonesia is a diseased modern human.
And you wonder why the general public is skeptical of the claims evolutionists and scientists make.
56
posted on
09/26/2005 9:33:57 AM PDT
by
Michael_Michaelangelo
(The best theory is not ipso facto a good theory. Lots of links on my homepage...)
To: My2Cents; PatrickHenry
"or does it indicate that both chimps and man have the same designer who simply created man as a variation on an existing theme?"
So God looked and said about the chimp "It's no good and I can do better" and zap a little tweak here and a tuck there and we have Patrick Henry?
BTW and FYI, the coding portions of the chimp and human genome are 99% identical.
57
posted on
09/26/2005 9:34:48 AM PDT
by
furball4paws
(One of the last Evil Geniuses, or the first of their return.)
To: furball4paws
So God looked and said about the chimp "It's no good and I can do better" and zap a little tweak here and a tuck there and we have Patrick Henry?There are those who think it happened the other way around.
58
posted on
09/26/2005 9:52:41 AM PDT
by
PatrickHenry
(Disclaimer -- this information may be legally false in Kansas.)
To: DaveLoneRanger
Tell me; how does evolution make predictions if the mutations taking place are RANDOM?You have been around these threads long enough to have already seen the answer to that question on numerous occasions. This leaves us with a number of possibilities:
- You are extremely stupid
- You have a very bad memory
- You are a shameless liar
- You are a loki troll
- You are a troll
We'll leave the selection as an exercise for the lurkers. Just in case the lurkers haven't seen predictions of evolution before, here is a tiny subset of them.
59
posted on
09/26/2005 9:53:58 AM PDT
by
Thatcherite
(Conservative and Biblical Literalist are not synonymous)
To: JamesP81
So, according to you, creationists can't read? Thank you for proving my point about shrillness.Please point out where the OP said that "creationists can't read".
60
posted on
09/26/2005 9:55:48 AM PDT
by
Thatcherite
(Conservative and Biblical Literalist are not synonymous)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 201-213 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson