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 ... 251-300301-350351-400 ... 1,151-1,195 next last
To: SirLinksalot

Methinks the author took the small bus to school, and got his degree via a correspondence course in Watchtower or The Plain Truth.


301 posted on 09/27/2006 5:19:49 PM PDT by Clemenza (Dave? Dave?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #302 Removed by Moderator

To: Luka_Brazi
Wells is even loonier than Dembski, and that's saying something.

We'll be the judge of that and that will all be based on the arguments ABOUT EVOLUTION he presents. His relationship with the Unification Church is not the issue here.
303 posted on 09/27/2006 5:24:08 PM PDT by SirLinksalot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 302 | View Replies]

Comment #304 Removed by Moderator

To: SirLinksalot
Darwinism is an intellectually bankrupt 18th Century religion.

Only the most gullible and stubborn true believers still believe that the universe is ageless and without beginning, and that molecules had time and opportunity to bring something--life--into being from nothing through endless, aimless, pointless, undirected, chance collisions, couplings and decouplings.

That kind of belief requires infinitely more faith than the simple belief that a man rose from the dead.

305 posted on 09/27/2006 5:29:53 PM PDT by JCEccles ("Islam. No religion demands more of others and less of itself.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Al Simmons
Most of those posting on FR appear to be creationist/IDers
306 posted on 09/27/2006 5:31:46 PM PDT by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
The article is rubbish Mr. Evo-Bozo Alert!!!

Wow - was that an intellectual response or what!

307 posted on 09/27/2006 5:32:11 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 268 | View Replies]

To: bvw
The one statement is a gem: "The truth is Darwinism is not a scientific theory, but a materialistic creation myth masquerading as science."

Indeed. It is like a cubic zirconium gem. Those without education or a willingness to investigate it may take it as valuable, but in reality it is common and not worth much. Like cubic zirconium is to diamond, the above statement is to truth: a cheap imitation, not the real thing.
308 posted on 09/27/2006 5:32:22 PM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 296 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
The intelligent design movement is schizophrenic.

It doesn't matter how many mainstream Christians and Jews working in the biological sciences say that evolution is foundational to our understanding of modern biology and is an important scientific discipline. They are all apostates and they are all wrong.

But if someone accepts so-called "intelligent design theory" then it doesn't matter how fringe their beliefs are. They can be a member of a mind-control sex cult that believes the Lord is throwing Christianity on the ash heap of history and establishing a new body of the Church with Sun Myung Moon as the new Christ, but that's just a distraction from his arguments against evoltion.

309 posted on 09/27/2006 5:37:00 PM PDT by Liberal Classic (No better friend, no worse enemy. Semper Fi.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 303 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio

Cubic boron nitride, perhaps you may mean. Better than diamond when wearing down the iron-headed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boron_nitride.
Arguably harder than diamond as well.


310 posted on 09/27/2006 5:39:38 PM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 308 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles
Darwinism is an intellectually bankrupt 18th Century religion.

Only the most gullible and stubborn true believers still believe that the universe is ageless and without beginning, and that molecules had time and opportunity to bring something--life--into being from nothing through endless, aimless, pointless, undirected, chance collisions, couplings and decouplings.

That kind of belief requires infinitely more faith than the simple belief that a man rose from the dead.

Speaking of intellectually bankrupt...

The theory of evolution is about change in genomes, leading to speciation.

It is a lie to repeatedly associate that theory with the age of the universe, the creation of the universe, or the creation of life.

311 posted on 09/27/2006 5:40:10 PM PDT by Coyoteman (I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 305 | View Replies]

Comment #312 Removed by Moderator

To: Last Visible Dog
Re: The article is rubbish Mr. Evo-Bozo Alert!!!

" Wow - was that an intellectual response or what!"

When you quote someone, make sure you get it right. Your quote of me left out the link to your original trash remark at post #68. The article is rubbish. There's nothing intellectual about it. It's simply wrong and contains many flat out lies. You're not interested, or capable of arguing this material anyway. It's beyond your ability. That's why all you've done and have been able to do on this thread is pick nits.

313 posted on 09/27/2006 5:46:51 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
"Biology took away our status as paragons created in the image of God."

That seems to be the crux of the matter. Not just Darwin and TToE, but the reduction of man to a specimen of inquiry. It is all matters of the flesh, and doesn't take away from or add to the soul one iota. To be so vexed about it seems little more than vanity.

314 posted on 09/27/2006 5:50:12 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bvw

No, I was in fact referring to cubic zirconium.


315 posted on 09/27/2006 5:52:03 PM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 310 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
Cubic zirconium, cubic zirshmonium.

I still can't cook an egg on it.

316 posted on 09/27/2006 5:57:56 PM PDT by Hoplite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 315 | View Replies]

To: TOWER
Darwin wins!

Flawless Victory!

I was kinda hoping for a *Babality* !

Cheers!

317 posted on 09/27/2006 5:58:00 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Buck W.
OK--one more time. Although evolution is perfectly compatible with Christianity, it is not compatible with a literal reading of the Bible. You believe the literal word of the Bible. That's great, but you can't accommodate an understanding of evolution.

These passages are abundant and straightforward, all pointing to the same conclusion. Christianity is based on the revealed Word of God which consistently teaches throughout: God created man, and He did not use evolution to do it.

Where do you derive your belief?

318 posted on 09/27/2006 6:00:16 PM PDT by bondserv (God governs our universe and has seen fit to offer us a pardon. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

To: Al Simmons
You shamelessly plagiarized (in spirit) from my posts here and here.

I say to you, once again, WELL DONE!

Cheers!

319 posted on 09/27/2006 6:01:31 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: TonyRo76
I think it makes sense that God developed the whole beautiful spectrum of humans' skin tones, hair & eye colors, facial structures, body types, etc. that way.

A propos of this, DC Talk's Colored People video

Cheers!

320 posted on 09/27/2006 6:07:45 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: doc30
Now I have to scrape my boots of for a third time :(

Did I miss a joke here somewhere? Or was that a backhanded reference to the "wipe the dust off the soles of your feet" ...?

Cheers!

321 posted on 09/27/2006 6:11:39 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7

That's not what the poll asked.


322 posted on 09/27/2006 6:13:16 PM PDT by Al Simmons (Holocaust deniers and other anti-semites are the lowest form of human scum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

"Panta graphEs" is the phrase the Holy Apostle Paul uses. It means "all writings". The canon of Scripture was not fixed at that time, so it is a little odd to apply the phrase to the canon as later fixed by the Council of Carthage, and the 4th and 6th Ecumenical Councils (and shortened by Luther in imitation of the Christ-denying rabbis of the Council of Jamnia) to argue that the collection of books the Church canonized to be read in churches is the basis for the Church's way of life. A way of life that was well established by the time the last authored book, the Revelation to St. John, was written, and centuries before a decision was taken as to which books constituted Scripture.

The Revelation to St. John is contemporaneous (c. 96 AD) with St. Ignatius of Antioch's epistles (St. Ignatius' martyrdom is traditionally dated at 107 AD, but some scholars argue that it may have been as early as 98 AD). St. Ignatius' letters speak of the order of the Church and its liturgical life in a manner familiar to Orthodox Christians, as we continue the same life, albeit with the shorter Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom as the standard, and to Latin Christians, though post-Vatican II the similarity between their life and that of the ancient Church is less pronounced. And the letters speak of it as a well-established way of life, of Apostolic origin, not something being invented or discovered at the time.

In point of fact, when the Holy Apostle used the phrase, any Jew or Christian of Jewish heritage would have taken the phrase to mean the Law and the Prophets. One meets Christ in these writings, but only in prophecies and types.

I am reminded of a story from old Russia. A man had been seized by the atheism that was creeping into the intellectual classes even before the Revolution, and went to an old staretz. The man was distressed by his unbelief, and declared to the elder that he wanted to believe, but couldn't.

The elder did not send him to read the Scriptures, but gave him an icon of Christ, and bade him do 100 prostrations a day before the icon, and return in a year. The man returned a year later, joyous that he had found faith in Christ.

Indeed Our Savior is the pearl beyond price. The Scriptures are merely our primary testimony to Him.


323 posted on 09/27/2006 6:14:21 PM PDT by The_Reader_David (And when they behead your own people in the wars which are to come, then you will know. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
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?

"It proves you exist and so therefore you don't" PING!

Cheers!

324 posted on 09/27/2006 6:15:16 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: bondserv

"Where do you derive your belief?"

Same place. You hold to the literal truth and inerrancy of each word. I don't. And I'm as much a Christian as you.


325 posted on 09/27/2006 6:16:57 PM PDT by Buck W. (If you push something hard enough, it will fall over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 318 | View Replies]

To: Chuck Dent
100 years from now, science will have progressed to such a point that gene therapy will provide cures to many forms of mysticism.

Jumping to too many conclusions to count PING!

("Soma", anyone?)

Cheers!

326 posted on 09/27/2006 6:19:39 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
("Soma", anyone?)

Sacramental wine provides a better buzz.

327 posted on 09/27/2006 6:23:38 PM PDT by Chuck Dent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies]

To: Al Simmons
Read your Freeper page and was very intrigued, but I found one possible contradiction:

"- I am a Christian who believes that only the Catholic and Orthodox Churches have a claim to a lineage dating back to the time of Christ - and between the two of them, the Catholic Church is probably a better deal because its centralized structure, while having problems like any human institution, has been a better check on heresy than the more loosely organized Orthodox and Protestant churches...see my comments on John Paul The Great and ask yourself what Orthodox/Protestant figure of the past 500 years has had an impact for good in the world greater than he did...(I will help you out: the answer is "NONE")".

But a bit later you rightly praise Renaldus Magnus. I think he and the Pope worked tag-team :-)

Cheers!

328 posted on 09/27/2006 6:25:55 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies]

To: Buck W.
Same place. You hold to the literal truth and inerrancy of each word. I don't. And I'm as much a Christian as you.

I don't deny a person can believe in Jesus Christ as their Savior, and know very little about Him when they do put their trust in Him. The Gospel is a very simple message that is very supernatural (in which science has no jurisdiction):
We have unrecoverable flaws that seperate us from a relationship with God. Jesus lived a flawless life, then took the punishment we deserve on Himself so that we can be reunited in fellowship with our Creator. He also publically rose from the dead to demonstrate to mankind that this physical life is temporary and we have immortal bodies we will be resurrected to when we place our trust solely in His accomplishment for us.

The scripture is way beyond science. Science is entertaining and sometimes helpful.

329 posted on 09/27/2006 6:31:36 PM PDT by bondserv (God governs our universe and has seen fit to offer us a pardon. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 325 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

I meant religious figure. The Pope-RWR-Maggie was a 3-person tag-team that brought down communism....


330 posted on 09/27/2006 6:32:15 PM PDT by Al Simmons (Holocaust deniers and other anti-semites are the lowest form of human scum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 328 | View Replies]

To: oldleft

You owe me a new keyboard!! If God is responsible for mankind as is, He should be sued..


331 posted on 09/27/2006 6:34:59 PM PDT by ChEng (ay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Chuck Dent
("Soma", anyone?)

Sacramental wine provides a better buzz.

Actually, there is considerable evidence that Soma was the little jewel shown below. Google "Wasson" and "Soma" for details.

Buzz indeed!


332 posted on 09/27/2006 6:35:45 PM PDT by Coyoteman (I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 327 | View Replies]

To: Theo
Darwinism is absolutely not compatible with Scriptural Christianity.

Ok. Then go away. Take your scripture and go somehere else. This site is for people who will open their minds and think.

333 posted on 09/27/2006 6:37:06 PM PDT by ExtremeUnction
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: bondserv
I don't deny a person can believe in Jesus Christ as their Savior, and know very little about Him when they do put their trust in Him. The Gospel is a very simple message that is very supernatural (in which science has no jurisdiction):

So your particular interpretation means you know Him and all the other poor sots out there are just shut out? Must be nice to be able to read whereas others cannot. Sad that God would conceal His Word to some but reveal it to you and a few of your fellow churchgoers.

We have unrecoverable flaws that seperate us from a relationship with God. Jesus lived a flawless life, then took the punishment we deserve on Himself so that we can be reunited in fellowship with our Creator. He also publically rose from the dead to demonstrate to mankind that this physical life is temporary and we have immortal bodies we will be resurrected to when we place our trust solely in His accomplishment for us.

I don't think any Christian will disagree with you on this.

The scripture is way beyond science.

No, merely addressing a different part of the Universe. Scripture deals with the spirit. Science deals with the physical. Render unto Caeser...

Science is entertaining and sometimes helpful.

God provided a fantastic Universe and gave us brains to try to explore and use it. Your flippant attitude about that which feeds you, clothes you, teaches you, heals you, and allows you to make "I Am More Saved Than You" posts is to denigrate God in the extreme.

334 posted on 09/27/2006 6:42:54 PM PDT by freedumb2003 ("Critical Thinking"="I don't understand it so it must be wrong.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 329 | View Replies]

To: RobRoy

I always get a kick out of Weekly World News.


335 posted on 09/27/2006 6:45:00 PM PDT by freedumb2003 ("Critical Thinking"="I don't understand it so it must be wrong.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 251 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
I don't deny a person can believe in Jesus Christ as their Savior, and know very little about Him when they do put their trust in Him. The Gospel is a very simple message that is very supernatural (in which science has no jurisdiction):

So your particular interpretation means you know Him and all the other poor sots out there are just shut out? Must be nice to be able to read whereas others cannot. Sad that God would conceal His Word to some but reveal it to you and a few of your fellow churchgoers.

You discerned the exact opposite of what I said. Try re-reading the paragraph.

336 posted on 09/27/2006 6:47:20 PM PDT by bondserv (God governs our universe and has seen fit to offer us a pardon. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 334 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
It's propaganda.

*sigh* OK, lets dance this dance again on THIS thread. It is sad that you keep posting the same non-sequituers and bald assertions, get slapped down with facts and argumentation, then pop up on the next thread as if you hadn't already been schooled. Do you have that memory problem Dora in "Finding Nemo" had? Because they have treatment for that (courtesy of a combination of Biology and Chemistry, both of which rely on TToE).

TToE is on par with Physics, Astronomy (which is a much anti-Genesis as TToE), and Chemistry (also anti-Genesis).

337 posted on 09/27/2006 6:52:42 PM PDT by freedumb2003 ("Critical Thinking"="I don't understand it so it must be wrong.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: bondserv

I read it. You are trying to pretend to be magnanimous and say "well, as long as you accept Him it is OK. The fact you know little about Him (assumed "unlike me" and "because you understand science") isn't THAT important.

I got your meaning exactly.


338 posted on 09/27/2006 6:54:45 PM PDT by freedumb2003 ("Critical Thinking"="I don't understand it so it must be wrong.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 336 | View Replies]

To: Al Simmons
My bad! I completely overlooked Maggie.

Although if the RINOs ever had pushed through the amendment about the President no longer having to be a US citizen, she would've been near the top of the list.

Cheers!

339 posted on 09/27/2006 7:02:40 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 330 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003; My2Cents

Chemistry does not rely on the ToE. I've taken my share of college chemisty courses and the TOE never entered into them even once. It would be much more accurate to say that the ToE depended on chemistry.

As far as Bio, there's plenty to study there, too, that doesn't require the ToE at all. And I've taken those too, and while ToE is encountered more, the stuff I studied didn't *depend* on it.

So how is Astronomy and Chemistry *anti-Genesis*?


340 posted on 09/27/2006 7:04:37 PM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 337 | View Replies]

To: ExtremeUnction

So it's devolved to this, hm? Ridiculing the Christian has become the in thing on FR.

I see you've been here only a couple of years.


341 posted on 09/27/2006 7:06:00 PM PDT by Theo (Global warming "scientists." Pro-evolution "scientists." They're both wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 333 | View Replies]

To: bondserv

Your post is condescending and closed-minded. You don't have nearly the knowledge of Jesus that you claim. The spouting of memorized scripture does not equate to spirituality or closeness to God.


342 posted on 09/27/2006 7:15:36 PM PDT by Buck W. (If you push something hard enough, it will fall over.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 329 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator
Why is this in news/activism?

There is not one shred of conservative or political news or call to action (activism) in this article.

We need a science & technology forum.

343 posted on 09/27/2006 7:23:15 PM PDT by NewLand (Always Remember September 11, 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Chemistry does not rely on the ToE. I've taken my share of college chemisty courses and the TOE never entered into them even once. It would be much more accurate to say that the ToE depended on chemistry.

In the area of Parmecueticals (spell check reminder to self), the combination of Biology, Genetics, Medicine, etc. all work together and are predicated on understanding what makes A affect B, all of which are based TToE. I was over simplifying, so thanks for the chance to expand a little.

As far as Bio, there's plenty to study there, too, that doesn't require the ToE at all. And I've taken those too, and while ToE is encountered more, the stuff I studied didn't *depend* on it.

You can also be a programmer and use SQL without understanding the Relational Model. But you'll always be just a programmer. I don't know if that analogy is helpful, but the point is that to try to really understand WHY what is happening, you need to understand the foundation (in this case TToE).

So how is Astronomy and Chemistry *anti-Genesis*?

Astronomy says that stars are billions of years old and are suns similar to our own Sol. For strict literalists, this is NOT what Genesis says. Chemistry suggests that there are changes from the setup that God established. Again, not what literal Genesis says.

I was being exemplary and a bit over the top in the case of Chemistry but am serious about astronomy.

344 posted on 09/27/2006 7:29:06 PM PDT by freedumb2003 ("Critical Thinking"="I don't understand it so it must be wrong.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 340 | View Replies]

To: Buck W.

And here I said that with so many more words (see my 334 and 336).

;)


345 posted on 09/27/2006 7:30:25 PM PDT by freedumb2003 ("Critical Thinking"="I don't understand it so it must be wrong.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 342 | View Replies]

To: NewLand

I mentioned that but was explained that these ARE news worthy ideas.

The dumbing down of America by the extreme Right Wing is very much a front and center issue and should not be isolated (although it does get relegated).


346 posted on 09/27/2006 7:31:44 PM PDT by freedumb2003 ("Critical Thinking"="I don't understand it so it must be wrong.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 343 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Coll catch - but I didn't think of the Biblical connection. It was related to my post #114. I normally stay away from the creationist articles because there is simply too much pseudo-scientific mud to sort through. But I don't recall you ever getting deep into the mud pits like others have.

Cheers to you, too!


347 posted on 09/27/2006 7:33:33 PM PDT by doc30 (Democrats are to morals what and Etch-A-Sketch is to Art.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
...Chemistry, both of which rely on TToE)

Pardon my French, but WTF?

The Pauli exclusion principle, quantum mechanics, and ionic bonding (for example) do not 'rely' on TToE...

Could you be more specific, or rephrase that, please?

(I might just have misread the post, or taken it out of context.)

Cheers!

348 posted on 09/27/2006 7:36:08 PM PDT by grey_whiskers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 337 | View Replies]

To: Theo
Ridiculing the Christian has become the in thing on FR.

Using Scripture in a discussion about Science is the same as using Scripture in a discussion about auto repair.

It may be interesting to YOU, but it is not germaine to the discussion. There are many faiths, each with their own Holy Text.

From an independent standpoint, none are superior, since all depend on faith.

That does NOT mean Christianity doesn't have a lot to offer. It just means it is not in play here.

349 posted on 09/27/2006 7:36:59 PM PDT by freedumb2003 ("Critical Thinking"="I don't understand it so it must be wrong.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 341 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
I read it. You are trying to pretend to be magnanimous and say "well, as long as you accept Him it is OK. The fact you know little about Him (assumed "unlike me" and "because you understand science") isn't THAT important.

I got your meaning exactly

If my posting the pertinent passages makes you feel attacked, I apologize to you sincerely. My intention is always to highlight what the Bible actually says to remove confusion. Many people who have not spent time reading the Bible only have other peoples idea's of what the Bible says. I laid the scripture out there for all to see, rather than attempt to explain what the Bible says. The passages are abundant and straightforward in their declaration.

You are welcome to post the passages that demonstrate these mean something different than they say. I am open to having the Word of God straighten me out.

350 posted on 09/27/2006 7:39:28 PM PDT by bondserv (God governs our universe and has seen fit to offer us a pardon. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 338 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 251-300301-350351-400 ... 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