Skip to comments.Why Darwinism Is Doomed
Posted on 09/27/2006 9:56:09 AM PDT by SirLinksalot
click here to read article
Do you consider a quote from one evolutionist, who was in no way involved in the development of the theory, to be definitive proof of the validity of conclusions drawn about the theory and the motives of it's authors? The quote from the evolutionist is no better than the evidence upon which it is based, and that evidence is not there.
I understand I am arguing with someone's qualitative opinion. What is it in the article you disagree with, and on what basis do you disagree with it? You've implied that I have no basis to disagree with anything he's said unless I possess at least equal credentials in biology and theology.
Nobody claimed a theory has an option they were speaking of those the are big in the field. Your point is nothing but silliness and you demonstrating you don't understand the topic of the thread.
Straw man. That is evidence that a person can USE TToE to push an anti-religion agenda.
Far from a straw-man (to quote Frank Zappa) this is the crux of the biscuit. That is the point the author is making.
So if there is one false Christian minister then all of Christianity is false?
You are not even close. Your example is a bogus analogy since the statement in question does not conclude that Evolution is false.
You are trying to twist and distort. A valid example would be if there is one false Christian minister than it is invalid to claim there are no false Christian ministers.
So you think you are mind-reader and know Gould's secret motives - whatever
If there is one "pusher" of evolution that is anti-religion then it is a false statement to claim Evolution is not anti-religion. Unless you want to argue the nonsensical position that "theories have no options"
This is simple logic.
Because nobody asked me a question about a hypothetical anesthesiologist.
What are you rambling about?
1. Define "many."
2. Some Mathemetians are anti-religious. Some Bus drivers are anti-religious. Some doormen are anti-religious. There is no linkage.
Who wants to SUBSITUTE?
Ad hominem "rebuttals" also make conservatives look bad.
Ad hominem statements (creationist goons) made by EVOLUtionists are ok?!
Repeating a non sequiteur doesn't make it so. Since you have a problem understanding logic, let me do the work for you:Substitute the word "Mathematics" for "Evolution." Now lets run the statement again:
If there is one "pusher" of Mathematics that is anti-religion then it is a false statement to claim Mathematics is not anti-religion.
Well, I can guarantee you that of the hundreds of thousands of Mathemeticians there will be at least one who is anti-religion.
Thus, by your "logic" Mathematics is anti-religion. In fact, virtually every single branch of science (and all other trades and professions) are also anti-religious since almost all will have at least one anti-religious adherent.
YOU got the NUMBER!!
Who said "creatonist goons?"
I must have missed it (it doesn't sound like something I would say).
And the fact that someone who understands TToE said it doesn't change the validity of my statement.
"They did it too" is a very childish response.
LOL -- I am sure that represents a lovely symmetry for many here.
Well that was just mean.
True, but only if the original tale teller wants to appear much more pure than whom(?)ever is being told upon.
(But... sometimes very accurate!)
I prejudged him based on the fact that anti-evolutionists bring up his name every time they need a mathematician to prove that evolution can't happen.
Imagine my surprise to read his actual words and find that he says information theory proves Darwinian evolution.
At least Wells is reliable. Unless the Moonies accept evolution.
That is not how the English language works - you said "what a dumba$$" The use of "a" makes it an attack on one person (although this is not necessarily the definition of a personal attack). What you were doing is attacking the person that made the statement rather than attacking the statement - this is a textbook example of a personal / ad hominem - you are not going to be able to spin your way out of this.
But you aren't that stupid, you know that is a personal attack, just like your bozo alert was.
Alert - to warn
All I said is "warning, Evo-Bozo's may infiltrate this thread". I directed it at no one person (unlike you)
Spin all you want, you are clearly the one hurling personal ad hominem attacks
Using you warped logic - who is the person you think my "personal attack" is directed toward? That would be Evo-Bozo's so unless you think you are an Evo-Bozo than it is not directed at you. (you did not think that out, did you) See how deep of a hole you dug?
So do you also think the terms "Terrorist Alert" or "Moonbat Alert" are also personal attacks - if so, who is the person it is directed at?
what else can one expect from a creo
I don't know - I am not a creo
...then don't talk to yourself?
Evo's sure to like to use ad hominem attacks.
When the going gets tough, some Evo's turn to personal attacks as they dive for the tall grass
I would like to say "sorry to see you leave" but this thread does not need you ad hominem personal attacks.
Cool - I was just curious.