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

Skip to comments.

Why Darwinism Is Doomed
WorldNetDaily ^ | 09/27/2006 | Jonathan Wells

Posted on 09/27/2006 9:56:09 AM PDT by SirLinksalot

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 151-200201-250251-300 ... 1,151-1,195 next last
To: stands2reason
Personal attack alert. Is that all you have?

It was not a personal attack because it was not directed at any person. But thanks for playing.

201 posted on 09/27/2006 2:11:02 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: Luka_Brazi
He didn't believe in a designer. He was agnostic. He didn't believe in a God

The word "agnostic" was created by Thomas Henry Huxley.
According to Huxley, "agnostic" means that knowledge of the cause and origin of existence is not only an uncertainty, but an impossibility, whether you’re considering that the origin may be God, science, or something else entirely.
If he didn't believe in God he would be an Atheist, not an agnostic.

Then you are not a Deist. Deists are not Agnostic about the existence of God, by definition Deists believe in a God
LOL!
You are going to tell me that I'm not a Deist?
Shall I tell you that you are not a Christian?
Agnostic refers to knowledge, not faith.
Deists recognize that God's nature can't be comprehended by human knowledge.

"I cannot pretend to throw the least light on such abstruse problems. The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us; and I for one must be content to remain an Agnostic."
Thanks for proving my point...He was talking about knowledge, not faith.

"I am inclined to look at everything as resulting from designed laws, with the details, whether good or bad, left to the working out of what we may call chance."... Charles Darwin, the inventor of Intelligent Design.
.
202 posted on 09/27/2006 2:17:26 PM PDT by mugs99 (Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper

Explain it to me now, where did say the 70 million year old T-rex come from?


203 posted on 09/27/2006 2:20:03 PM PDT by finnman69 (cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestu s globus, inflammare animos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: mugs99
I'm not barking up any tree. Put my statement back in context.

What are you talking about? If you think the context is wrong - explain the context. I did not take anything out of context.

204 posted on 09/27/2006 2:20:14 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason
So he belongs to a cult. That shouldn't be a reflection on his mental faculties at all! (/sarc)

I beleive that statement is an example of bigtory. Based on his religion you pasted judgement on his scientific work. What next? The color of his skin?

205 posted on 09/27/2006 2:25:14 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Al Simmons
Actually, as a 'recovering born-again Christian', I know more about it than you'd think. I've personally ,et some of the biggest names in born-again Christianity, and I am sad to say that for every Billy Graham there are 5 or 6 hucksters, making it up as they go along.

I'll never forget Creflo Dollar asking people to come up and leave $$$$ at the feet of the preacher whose church he was guest-speaking at, or Kenneth Copeland telling the story of how God told him to buy a million-dollar airplane and then how his congregation made it happen.

Cherchez l'argent

206 posted on 09/27/2006 2:28:43 PM PDT by Virginia-American (What do you call an honest creationist? An evolutionist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
This stupid guy with only a PhD in Biology from Berkeley. Good grief, we know that no REAL scientist has any doubts about evolution!!

/sarc

207 posted on 09/27/2006 2:30:27 PM PDT by DeweyCA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog

Exactly. Which is why the origin of life is not a part of ToE.


208 posted on 09/27/2006 2:32:04 PM PDT by stands2reason (The map is not the territory - A. Korzybski)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog

We are talking about species -- groups -- not individuals.

Species that do not reproduce but CAN are lions and tigers. Without our assistance, they'd never reproduce. That's why they are different species.


209 posted on 09/27/2006 2:34:17 PM PDT by stands2reason (The map is not the territory - A. Korzybski)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
It was not a personal attack because it was not directed at any person.

It was not a plural, it was specific. Who was the remark in reference to?

210 posted on 09/27/2006 2:35:42 PM PDT by stands2reason (The map is not the territory - A. Korzybski)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
File pic of Jonathan Wells (left):


211 posted on 09/27/2006 2:36:02 PM PDT by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason

Thank you. The mudskipper appears to be no more a "missing link" than this supposed missing link: http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2006/04/05/fossil-fish-20060405.html


212 posted on 09/27/2006 2:41:24 PM PDT by Cinnamon Girl (OMGIIHIHOIIC ping list)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

Comment #213 Removed by Moderator

To: Last Visible Dog
I beleive that statement is an example of bigtory.

It's called discrimination based on mental faculties. Would you feel comfortable having surgery if your anesthesiologist started talking about the aliens who are stealing his thoughts?

What next? The color of his skin?

Don't be ridiculous.

214 posted on 09/27/2006 2:42:47 PM PDT by stands2reason (The map is not the territory - A. Korzybski)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: Al Simmons
Moonie Wells doing a wild bit of naysaying on a few unrelated news items and titling it "Why Darwinism is Doomed?" Papa Sun Myung must be smiling.
215 posted on 09/27/2006 2:42:51 PM PDT by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot; gobucks; mikeus_maximus; MeanWestTexan; JudyB1938; isaiah55version11_0; Elsie; ...


You have been pinged because of your interest regarding matters of Creation vs. Evolution - from the young-earth Creationist perspective.
Freep-mail me if you want on/off this list:
Add me / Remove me

216 posted on 09/27/2006 2:43:07 PM PDT by DaveLoneRanger (Lord, help me to be the Christian conservative that liberals fear I am.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason
Species that do not reproduce but CAN are lions and tigers. Without our assistance, they'd never reproduce. That's why they are different species.

So you are saying if two groups of animals CAN reproduce but don't are considered different species - OK - what are groups that CAN'T reproduce called?

Like I said earlier - can you provide any supporting evidence for your claims?

217 posted on 09/27/2006 2:44:42 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
The issue here is not "evolution" – a broad term that can mean simply change within existing species (which no one doubts). The issue is Darwinism – which claims that all living things are descended from a common ancestor, modified by natural selection acting on random genetic mutations.

Glad he makes this distinction...one than many Darwinists on FR refuse to make.

218 posted on 09/27/2006 2:45:40 PM PDT by My2Cents (A pirate's life for me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Buck W.
one which is perfectly compatible with Christianity.

Define "Christianity."

219 posted on 09/27/2006 2:47:47 PM PDT by My2Cents (A pirate's life for me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: finnman69

The "70 million year" figure is highly debatable, and, contrary to popular belief, highly subjective. There are huge disagreements as to the validity of the "accepted" ages....or what those ages actually are.


220 posted on 09/27/2006 2:48:18 PM PDT by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
This thread is an embarrassment to conservatism.

Now, if Darwinism had anything to do with conservatism, you might have a point.

221 posted on 09/27/2006 2:49:00 PM PDT by My2Cents (A pirate's life for me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Theo
The issue here is not "evolution" – a broad term that can mean simply change within existing species (which no one doubts). The issue is Darwinism [snippage] Darwinism is absolutely not compatible with Scriptural Christianity.

Then "Darwinism" can't be the issue either, since it's only incompatible with Christianity (and/or theism in general) by the stipulative, gratuitous and utterly ahistorical definition contrived by the ID types.

Their definition of "Darwinism" has nothing to do with understanding of the term by self-described "Darwinists". It's exactly like stipulating that pro-lifers are, by definition, religious extremists. It completely ignores notable Darwinists like R.A. Fisher, Francisco Ayala, Ken Miller, Simon Conway Morris, etc, who were or are theists. In fact all the preceding are professing Christians specifically.

222 posted on 09/27/2006 2:51:24 PM PDT by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason
It's called discrimination based on mental faculties.

So you claim you know Jonathan Wells metal faculties - how did you gain this knowledge? Have you ever met this man? Did you evaluate him? What is your Ph.D. in?

We all know you likely know absolutely nothing about his mental faculties - your statement is just poor cover for your bigoted statement

223 posted on 09/27/2006 2:51:52 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: <1/1,000,000th%
They'll still be writing this story 100 years from now

100 years from now, our descendants will all be living in a North American caliphate, and this silly little debate won't be permitted.

224 posted on 09/27/2006 2:52:14 PM PDT by My2Cents (A pirate's life for me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman
It is a scientific field.

It's propaganda.

225 posted on 09/27/2006 2:53:38 PM PDT by My2Cents (A pirate's life for me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
100 years from now, our descendants will all be living in a North American caliphate, and this silly little debate won't be permitted.

Evolution certainly won't be taught. But at least we'll all be religious.

226 posted on 09/27/2006 2:54:21 PM PDT by js1138 (The absolute seriousness of someone who is terminally deluded.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason
It was not a plural, it was specific. Who was the remark in reference to?

What difference does it make if it was plural or not - I did not direct the comment at any person therefore it can not be a personal attack.

If I say "Watch out for the idiots" - is that a personal attack? ...only if you think you are an idiot.

227 posted on 09/27/2006 2:55:54 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 210 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
So you are saying if two groups of animals CAN reproduce but don't are considered different species - OK - what are groups that CAN'T reproduce called?

They're also separate species. I don't get your point. Whether they can't, or simply don't, or even if they do but hybrids are sterile, of if they do with sufficient rarity that population genotypes are unaffected, etc, whatever. In all these cases their populations are reproductively isolated.

228 posted on 09/27/2006 2:56:26 PM PDT by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents

"Define 'Christianity.'"

St. Paul teaches us in Galatians that Christianity is the acceptance of the belief that Jesus was the Messiah, that he died for our sins, and, through the power of God, defeated death, thereby giving the promise of eternal life to all those who accept that gift.

In Romans and other letters, St. Paul instructs us not to bicker about the denominational details (which is basically anything more than the first paragraph).


229 posted on 09/27/2006 2:56:56 PM PDT by MeanWestTexan (Kol Hakavod Lezahal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason
Exactly. Which is why the origin of life is not a part of ToE.

Yeap.

So why do Evo's enter cosmology debates?

230 posted on 09/27/2006 2:57:22 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: Names Ash Housewares
"We know the stars are very far away and took a very long time for that light to reach us."

Um, we don't *know* that light took a 'very long time' to reach us.

We calculate that it did based on an *assumption* that the speed of light is unchanged over time. In some cases, we add that *assumption* to another *assumption* that redshift equals distance for even older age calculations.

This quite a different thing than 'knowing'.

231 posted on 09/27/2006 2:59:23 PM PDT by GourmetDan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason
We are talking about species -- groups -- not individuals.

Well I am guessing you have not reproduced with Pussy Cat Dolls (a group) (even though you could) - me neither - we are a group - what do you want to call out species?

....jeeze, it's a joke - lighten up.

232 posted on 09/27/2006 3:01:46 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: Cinnamon Girl
Well, of course Tiktaalik roseae is not a "missing" link. It's a FOUND link. It's an excellent and obvious transitional between fish and amphibians.
233 posted on 09/27/2006 3:04:18 PM PDT by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
I did not take anything out of context.
Yes you did. You cherry picked that sentence from a discussion I'm having with another...dishonest of you, to say the least.
234 posted on 09/27/2006 3:07:07 PM PDT by mugs99 (Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: mugs99
Yes you did. You cherry picked that sentence from a discussion I'm having with another...dishonest of you, to say the least.

Enough of the unsupported accusations - can you explain what you think I took out of context rather than spew personal insults?

235 posted on 09/27/2006 3:10:32 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan

So porn is completely compatible with Chrisianity too? I think we need a more definitive answer, although I agree with you. Maybe the wrong question is being asked.

How about this, "define, based on what is in the Bible Christianities teaching about the origin of life."

And then this: "Does the Bible specifically say that types of living things were made "as is" or does it give 'wiggle room' for the idea that some species came from others?"


236 posted on 09/27/2006 3:12:04 PM PDT by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
"The truth is Darwinism is not a scientific theory, but a materialistic creation myth masquerading as science. It is first and foremost a weapon against religion – especially traditional Christianity."

Glory glory hallelujah
Glory glory hallelujah
Glory glory hallelujah
His farse goes marching on.

Mine eyes have seen the ramblings of a moron PhD
He was posted in the pages of the wing nut daily site
A real nut case and bozo he did surly turn out to be
A whack job sure is he

Glory glory hallelujah
Glory glory hallelujah
Glory glory hallelujah
His farse goes marching on.

from the institute where morons gather screachings were a heard
They were bothered by the judges and the first Amendment of
The Bill of Rights the Country was a founded on before
Their heads they did explode

Glory glory hallelujah
Glory glory hallelujah
Glory glory hallelujah
His farse goes marching on.

The evolution theory that the scientists did propose
Was backed by evidence so good the institute was formed
to whine and scream and throw the tantrums widely heard right know
It's BS through and through

Glory glory hallelujah
Glory glory hallelujah
Glory glory hallelujah
His BS flies right on.

237 posted on 09/27/2006 3:13:35 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mugs99
Yes you did. You cherry picked that sentence from a discussion I'm having with another...dishonest of you, to say the least.

You are a real blow-hard. I went back to the post of which you claim I took you out of context - you are so full of it - I quoted the entire paragraph.

Lets review:

#160

mugs99: "I'm a Deist. We are agnostics. We believe that the question of God's existence isn't answerable. To answer the question of God's existence would require proof. Do you have that proof?"

LVD: "God by definition is a matter of faith - I think you are barking up the wrong tree"

If sure looks like you are the one being dishonest because I clearly did not take your statement out of context.

238 posted on 09/27/2006 3:16:49 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
Glory glory hallelujah

Evo's take personal insults to a whole new level.

239 posted on 09/27/2006 3:18:36 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
Glory glory hallelujah

Evo Strategy: if you can't intellectually challenge someone's positions - you can always spew personal insults (and they are so cute when you put them into a little song, like a preschooler)

240 posted on 09/27/2006 3:23:27 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: Chuck Dent; RobRoy
ID 'tards are an embarrassment to conservatism. They fit every stereotype the left paints of uneducated mouth-breathers.

While, ironically enough, Rev. Jesse Jackson is a creationist and gets a free pass from the media. I believe Rev. Al Sharpton is a creationist too, (he is a Pentecostal preacher), but I couldn't find any references on-line. There are a lot of creationists in the Dhimmie party: rather conservative, church going blacks.

241 posted on 09/27/2006 3:24:41 PM PDT by Virginia-American (What do you call an honest creationist? An evolutionist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: GourmetDan
But the light from those stars we capture and study is direct evidence. Observable, repeatable, quantifiable and thus theory's can be extrapolated and put forth to the world community to apply scientific process and put those theory's to the test.

The evidence alone separates it from faith.
And in my opinion the scientific process is the best tool humanity has in "knowing" and explaining about our world and everything around us and it. yes there are still mysteries. Faith and science both seek similar goals at times, to solve those mysteries.
But you must have faith to believe in any of earths thousands of current religions.

Theology and philosophy is a different study then science.
And rightly so. If someone finds faith through science good for them. If someone finds no evidence of the supernatural in all our scientific endeavors good for them too. It is a personal choice in the end. Both sides would serve them well to be more respective of the other, and most certinaly do I believe. I think it is a small number from both sides the stir the pot.
242 posted on 09/27/2006 3:25:12 PM PDT by Names Ash Housewares
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
" they are so cute when you put them into a little song, like a preschooler"

Thank ye kindly kind sir.

243 posted on 09/27/2006 3:26:47 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
Whatever they are, you have a host of closely related animals ranging from zebras to quarter horses, and they can, to a degree, interbreed ~ but rarely do they have fertile offspring.

I would imagine early herdsmen attempted to interbreed every variety of goat to every variety of cow, or deer, or whathaveyou "just to see what happens".

Today, with modern science at our command, we will succeed in creating a kosher pig.

244 posted on 09/27/2006 3:27:55 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason

Sure it does ~ that's why they are a vanishing group. Due to their unwillingness to treat their women right and give them many sons, they will wither away and hide in corners.


245 posted on 09/27/2006 3:29:03 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
Thank ye kindly kind sir.

Well, if you take pride in spewing personal insults...to each his own.

246 posted on 09/27/2006 3:29:42 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 243 | View Replies]

To: Cinnamon Girl

Naw, sometimes mudskippers were something else ~


247 posted on 09/27/2006 3:30:00 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: finnman69

Hell hath no fury like a Darwinist denied


248 posted on 09/27/2006 3:30:07 PM PDT by bornacatholic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
It is a scientific field.

It's propaganda.

Evolution is a scientific field. Your misrepresentations will not change that.

249 posted on 09/27/2006 3:30:41 PM PDT by Coyoteman (I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: Theo
Yes, your brain has sortation and filing capabilities so it does tend to categorize critters even if they're not different.
250 posted on 09/27/2006 3:31:04 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 151-200201-250251-300 ... 1,151-1,195 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