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 1-20 ... 741-760761-780781-800 ... 1,181-1,195 next last
To: taxesareforever

And aliens built the pyramids.

There's a book on that too...


761 posted on 09/29/2006 11:32:19 AM PDT by stands2reason (The map is not the territory - A. Korzybski)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 357 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog

As far as I know the initial question I posed to you was settled equitably. The argument we have now is over my disagreeing with the author's statements and conclusions about Darwinism being "first and foremost a weapon against religion". You claim that you neither agree with nor support these statements, but insist on trying to tell me that I am wrong and that there does indeed exist sufficient evidence in the article to support those conclusions. This seems to be done simply to serve as a warning to anyone else who would have the termerity to express an opinion that it is not explicitly pro-Creationism.


762 posted on 09/29/2006 11:34:24 AM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 752 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason; VadeRetro
LVD claims he's not a creo. :)

Are you claiming I am? Based on what?

Evo do like empty accusations.

I am neither Evo or Crevo - I point out the BS on both sides. Although Evo's seem to be more entertaining when they squirm.

763 posted on 09/29/2006 11:35:18 AM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 756 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason
I hear Robert Redford isn't a communist. His hero-worship of Fidel Castro and hatred of conservatives just means he's a skeptic of conventional wisdom.
764 posted on 09/29/2006 11:36:55 AM PDT by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 756 | View Replies]

To: steelyourfaith
My problem is with "young-earth" creationist types. Its certainly possible to believe that God set up our natural system and let it take its course, man eventually evolved, and at one point, God breathed a soul into man (Adam and Eve) and we became thinking beings.

But that's a faith supposition, not a scientific one. I don't look for science to ever prove that, nor can it. Its certainly possible, and since I believe in God, I have no problem with the evidence for evolution, because He is the ultimate designer of the Universe. Given the vastness of the Universe, I am skeptical that God is involved in the minutiae of our everyday lives...I guess you can say that it seems to me that if one believes in God, you've got to admit that it sure looks like he let the system that He created run on its own, at least most of the time...

765 posted on 09/29/2006 11:45:05 AM PDT by Al Simmons (Finding God does not excuse you from using the analytical part of your brain... that He gave you....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 698 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
The argument we have now is over my disagreeing with the author's statements and conclusions about Darwinism being "first and foremost a weapon against religion".

I have never made any statement in support (or non-support) of that statement.

You claim that you neither agree with nor support these statements, but insist on trying to tell me that I am wrong and that there does indeed exist sufficient evidence in the article to support those conclusions.

I believe your position was there is no supporting evidence for the authors statement - you were wrong - I pointed this out.

This seems to be done simply to serve as a warning to anyone else who would have the termerity to express an opinion that it is not explicitly pro-Creationism.

You are acting like a lunatic - you cannot read my thoughts.

"anyone else who would have the termerity" - termerity sounds serious?

766 posted on 09/29/2006 11:46:06 AM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 762 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
ENOUGH tap-dancing.

Please restate your position.

767 posted on 09/29/2006 11:47:19 AM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 762 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog; All
To dispell some of the mystery about the late Dr. Gould:

He came from a family of old-line Marxist agitators, he was raised to be an atheist, and he took that belief in with him when he became a scientist.

So its not science that turned Gould into an atheist; atheism is a belief that he had previously, which he tried to further justify through his science.....

768 posted on 09/29/2006 11:48:11 AM PDT by Al Simmons (Finding God does not excuse you from using the analytical part of your brain... that He gave you....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 699 | View Replies]

To: Al Simmons
So its not science that turned Gould into an atheist; atheism is a belief that he had previously, which he tried to further justify through his science.....

OK.

Did anybody claim Gould became an atheist because of evolution?

769 posted on 09/29/2006 11:51:16 AM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 768 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name
"Why do you feel the NEED to take an authoritative stance towards me?"

Hmmmmmm......can't really understand your point....are you a woman perchance?

770 posted on 09/29/2006 11:52:04 AM PDT by Al Simmons (Finding God does not excuse you from using the analytical part of your brain... that He gave you....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 725 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog

Troll then.


771 posted on 09/29/2006 11:57:50 AM PDT by stands2reason (The map is not the territory - A. Korzybski)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 763 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
Please restate your position.

Why? Didn't you understand it well enough the first three or four times? We apparently have no disagreement over the content of the article.

You say you neither agree with nor support the statements made by the author that I am questioning. The only thing you I have done that you will not do, and seem to take issue with my doing is to challenge them publicly.

Your message is clear enough. Public criticism of pro-Creationist or anti-Evolution arguments will not be tolerated, even if those arguments are not objectively supportable. Even if you disagree with them privately, they must not be challenged publicly.

772 posted on 09/29/2006 12:03:03 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 767 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
"Examples of illogical invalid statements: Christians are not murderers Catholics are not lawbreakers Evolution is not anti-religion"

Ummm....I think I have a LITTLE experience in logical analysis, Dog.

You are comparing apples and oranges. The Theory of Evolution is NOT a person. Therefore the above analogy is invalid. The Theory of Evolution does not take any position on the existence of God or on religion.

Therefore the Theory of Evolution CANNOT be anti-religion.....it may be USED to that end by some people, but we are talking about THE THEORY here, not about THE PEOPLE who believe in it.

All clear now? You're welcome.

773 posted on 09/29/2006 12:10:56 PM PDT by Al Simmons (Finding God does not excuse you from using the analytical part of your brain... that He gave you....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 704 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason
I'm one... I KNOW God exists, beyond that, I don't know if he has a plan or not.
Sure, I do too...but neither of us can prove it!
.
774 posted on 09/29/2006 12:44:51 PM PDT by mugs99 (Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 757 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
Why? Didn't you understand it well enough the first three or four times? We apparently have no disagreement over the content of the article.

I have had enough of this nonsense - rather than state your position (whatever that might be), you find it necessary to ramble on with more tap-dancing.

Public criticism of pro-Creationist or anti-Evolution arguments will not be tolerated, even if those arguments are not objectively supportable.

You are really acting like a fool now. There is absolutely no basis for this nonsense and I challenge you to present supporting for your unsupported empty accusation. I am all but certain you are not up for the challenge.

775 posted on 09/29/2006 1:03:47 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 772 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents

Logic and reality do.


776 posted on 09/29/2006 1:07:03 PM PDT by stands2reason (The map is not the territory - A. Korzybski)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

To: Al Simmons
Ummm....I think I have a LITTLE experience in logical analysis, Dog.

whatever - why don't you demonstrate your experience rather than brag about it?

You are comparing apples and oranges.

I am not comparing anything.

The Theory of Evolution is NOT a person

Never said it was, Mr. Einstein - I did not even make a statement on evolution - I commented on a statement somebody else made.

The Theory of Evolution does not take any position on the existence of God or on religion.

I never said it did - what the heck are you rambling on about?

Therefore the Theory of Evolution CANNOT be anti-religion

Never said it was.

All clear now?

It is clear you like to make empty unsupported accusations.

So you brag about your experience in logical analysis and then you make up statements that I never said and use them to support your nonsense conclusion. What happened to all your experience?

777 posted on 09/29/2006 1:13:08 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 773 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason
Troll then.

Troll then what?

Are you speaking Cavemanese?

778 posted on 09/29/2006 1:15:51 PM PDT by Last Visible Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 771 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
You are really acting like a fool now. There is absolutely no basis for this nonsense and I challenge you to present supporting for your unsupported empty accusation. I am all but certain you are not up for the challenge.

You have stated that you don't agree with or support the author's statements that I have questioned. Tell us why you believe the author of this article is wrong.

779 posted on 09/29/2006 1:18:17 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 775 | View Replies]

To: Last Visible Dog
Will you please stop with the ad hominem attacks?

If you can dish it out, you can take it.

780 posted on 09/29/2006 1:18:18 PM PDT by stands2reason (The map is not the territory - A. Korzybski)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 723 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 741-760761-780781-800 ... 1,181-1,195 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