Evolution is preposterous

The Irish Independent ^ | July 7, 2007 | CIARAN FARRELL,

[shuckmaster]

I only meant to paste the first letter. The second is Darwinist garbage.

Ha Ha Ha!!! It must really suck to get up in the morning knowing you're going to have to spend the whole day being you.

[Natural Law]

Why do so many denounce the concept of God using natural processes to introduce and perpetuate his living creations in a dynamic environment, but defend the use of natural processes of rain and flood in Noah story? Couldn’t God have just as easily used the same original process to recreate all life as in Genesis if that was the way He worked?

[burzum]

Darwin also said that “if it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my THEORY would absolutely break down”. Well, Behe in “Darwin’s Black Box” describes numerous such organs, such as the blood clotting mechanism, the cilium, bacterial flagellum, etc. These structures are irreducibly complex and the darwinsits cannot answer any of this with their religion.

The Creationists also said the same about the eye. That was until the scientists demonstrated the step by step evolution of every component from photosensors to lenses. The 'irreducible complexity' of the eye turned out to be not irreducibly complex. If the eye can be shown to not be irreducibly complex, your little examples don't have much of a chance.

[razzle]

Show me the Step by Step “evolution” of the eye that “scientists demonstrated” not to be irreducibly complex. (hint: you might need some help on this one). And don’t tell me that the light sensitive receptor of early creatures “evolved” into the human eye by random mutations, while your at it, also tell me how the early light sensitive receptor “eye” came about in the first place.

[burzum]

I’m not going to tell you anything. That is your own job. I’m not your personal researcher. Evolution of the eye is justified and there is plenty of literature on the topic if you actually decide to read it rather than continue spouting your Creationism in this echo chamber. I’ll give you some hints:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye
What Evolution Is, Ernst Mayr (you can find it on Amazon.com)

[razzle]

I just read all your BS and it is unconvincing. Your reaction also shows you are clueless in how to defend your religion. But being the nice guy that I am, I’ll give you some free advice. Go out and read some more; try Darwins Black Box for starters.

[upcountryhorseman]

Coyoteman, I am still waiting for your explanation of the
fossils found in the Cambrian Layer. This is one of the
questions I posed to you previously.

[burzum]

I just read all your BS and it is unconvincing. Your reaction also shows you are clueless in how to defend your religion. But being the nice guy that I am, I’ll give you some free advice. Go out and read some more; try Darwins Black Box for starters.

Clueless to defend the theory? Hardly. I just don't feel like handholding you. I post on evolution threads for fun, not because I personally care that some random Young Earth Creationist FReeper will understand a little of the science behind evolution. That chance is as likely as they will understand the science behind the Big Bang or geology. They won't--it directly conflicts with their religious views. It is verboten.

[Coyoteman]

Coyoteman, I am still waiting for your explanation of the fossils found in the Cambrian Layer. This is one of the questions I posed to you previously.

From the Index of Creationist Claims

• CC300: Fossil Record
  • CC300. The Cambrian explosion shows all kinds of life appearing suddenly.
    • CC301. Cambrian explosion contradicts evolutionary "tree" pattern.

Hope this suffices.

I hope you have not been relying on those creationist websites for your information. They have been known to misrepresent, distort, and flat-out lie about science and what science has discovered.

[SirLinksalot]

AW JEEZ, NOT THIS SH**again !!

AW JEEZ, NOT THIS TIRESOME PIC again

[fish hawk]

I’m only here to let you read my tag line.

[editor-surveyor]

"Over the last few years hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent in an attempt by scientists to find evidence for God's handy work in the natural world."

Is this humor? - You couldn't take a stroll around the block without walking on considerable evidence.

[Coyoteman]

I’m only here to let you read my tag line.

OK. Me too.

[balch3]

I know, I included the second pro Darwinist letter by accident.

[editor-surveyor]

")A thousand years ago everybody KNEW the Earth was the centre of the universe. Five hundred years ago everybody KNEW the Earth was flat..."

Poor analogy.

Humphreys' equations fairly well prove that the Earth is the center of the universe, give or take a few hundred thousand miles, but there has never been any serious belief that the Earth was flat held by any that navigated it's surface. No serious hiker could ever have held such a belief, since from as small a mountan as 3000 feet the curvature is plainly visible. School teacher talk is insipidly ignorant.

[editor-surveyor]

"Question is, how do you get people (evolutionites in this case) who are massively wrong to stop acting arrogant about it?"

You can't; the ignorant have always been arrogant.

[editor-surveyor]

"The God I know is powerful enough to do that."

But the God that I know is powerful enough to do exactly what he said he did: Speak the universe into being by his word, and he also said in his word that he didn't allow any 'evolution.' (more than 100 times)

[Coyoteman]

Humphreys' equations fairly well prove that the Earth is the center of the universe, give or take a few hundred thousand miles

You have got to be kidding!

[Tribune7]

Ann rocks.

She still has the evo-zealots upset.

[Swordfished]

lol!