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

Skip to comments.

Evolutionists Fear Academic Freedom
Townhall.com ^ | July 5, 2008 | Floyd and Mary Beth Brown

Posted on 07/05/2008 5:23:33 AM PDT by Kaslin

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-143 next last
To: Fichori
he forgot the on that one
101 posted on 07/05/2008 1:42:42 PM PDT by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: gusopol3

that’s supposed to read “he forgot the “sarc” on that”


102 posted on 07/05/2008 2:04:00 PM PDT by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Maybe they need a monkey-god idol, huh?


103 posted on 07/05/2008 3:08:18 PM PDT by HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns

And one could teach thermodynamics by showing the energy transfer required for it to rain for 40 days and 40 nights was not possible in any real world.


104 posted on 07/05/2008 4:49:47 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (Society is well governed when the people obey the magistrates, and the magistrates obey the law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy

sorry. I know it’s not fair, but miracles leave no tracks.


105 posted on 07/05/2008 6:23:27 PM PDT by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: gusopol3
miracles leave no tracks.

Neither do invisible pink unicorns

106 posted on 07/05/2008 6:33:50 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (Society is well governed when the people obey the magistrates, and the magistrates obey the law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy

nor a lot of overthrown science


107 posted on 07/05/2008 6:38:03 PM PDT by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Soliton; Coyoteman; xenophiles; Non-Sequitur

A list of “transitional forms” with apparent detailed descriptions seem to me like a way of getting around the fact that these are not really transitional forms.

I think this explains why pictures of transitional forms are not used, including in the link by Non-Sequitur, because a good common sense look at the general morphology of these animals would demonstrate the vastness of unfilled physical gaps and unanswered questions.


108 posted on 07/05/2008 7:18:57 PM PDT by reasonisfaith (Liberalism is service to the self disguised as service to others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

“Evolutionists use a variety of methods to silence alternate viewpoints. They say people are trying to “inject religious views into science courses.”’

I always wonder WHICH religion are they talking about. They never name a religion.

Many evolutionists don’t even want a HINT of God, and that is their problem.


109 posted on 07/05/2008 7:33:52 PM PDT by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith
I think this explains why pictures of transitional forms are not used, including in the link by Non-Sequitur, because a good common sense look at the general morphology of these animals would demonstrate the vastness of unfilled physical gaps and unanswered questions.

I posted a picture of H. ergaster in post 47, upthread.

And don't worry overmuch about laymen having to apply "common sense" looks at the general morphology of these specimens.

Scientists are applying very detailed looks, as well as multivariate statistics to remove the subjectivity.

I think all your post proves is that when it comes to science and the interpretations therein, it is no use listening to creationists.

110 posted on 07/05/2008 7:35:39 PM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith; xenophiles
I think this explains why pictures of transitional forms are not used

My post had lots of pictures, but, "none are so blind as they who will not see".

Xenophiles called it too!!

"Ah Soliton, you fail to see the cleverness of the creationist argument; now that a transitional form between fish and amphibians has been found, it's no longer transitional. It will be quietly removed from the the list of fossils that should exist but don't (like reptiles->birds or land mammals->whales) and they won't admit they ever challenged science to find it. From now on when they say that there is no (zero) evidence for transitional forms, they'll mean between fish and tiktaalik roseae, and between tiktaalik roseae and amphibians"

111 posted on 07/05/2008 8:10:00 PM PDT by Soliton (Investigate, study, learn, then express an opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Fichori
"My research comes from VERY old books and LOTS of beople believe it too. Shouldn't that be good enough? Belief does not equate truth.

And my sarcasm is sometimes missed by posters on FR

112 posted on 07/05/2008 8:14:55 PM PDT by Soliton (Investigate, study, learn, then express an opinion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman

Evolutionists are too defensive. Most if not all posts by evolutionists require some sort of character defamation against creationists—associate creationism with an emotional response, because the more rational consideration it gets, the more believable it is.

To those who haven’t made up their minds, I would say look at both sides of the argument. Read everyone from Darwin up to the contemporary biologists. And of course Gish and Behe.

I would recommend listening to Perry Marshall and what he has to say about information theory:

http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/ifyoucanreadthis.htm


113 posted on 07/05/2008 8:16:35 PM PDT by reasonisfaith (Liberalism is service to the self disguised as service to others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: L98Fiero

That’s pretty much it. I sort Creationists with 9-11 Truthers. Really the truth is irrelevant as they’re just trying to shoot down verifiable or plausible theories of what happened in order to shoehorn implausible scenarios. Yea, we’re not sure the exact evolutionary path of man...but we’re damn sure we didn’t pop up out of thin air 6,000 years ago with everything exactly as it is today. Unless you believe in a Trickster God who decided for fun he’d give us a planet that was indistinguishable from one that was hundreds of millions of years old. But then you have to throw out anything not directly verifiable by you because you never know what he’s pulling on you.


114 posted on 07/05/2008 8:25:21 PM PDT by Bogey78O (Don't call them jihadis. Call them irhabis. Tick them off, don't entertain their delusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

Evolutionists get touchy and frustrated because the inherit dishonesty by Creationists. It’s like arguing with 9-11 Truthers. Shoot down one theory they move onto the next and ignore their defeats.


115 posted on 07/05/2008 8:27:06 PM PDT by Bogey78O (Don't call them jihadis. Call them irhabis. Tick them off, don't entertain their delusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Bogey78O

“Shoot down one theory they move onto the next and ignore their defeats.”

To tell you the truth, I have never seen an ID theory “shot down.”

Can you point us to a couple of examples?


116 posted on 07/05/2008 8:49:01 PM PDT by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith
I would recommend listening to Perry Marshall and what he has to say about information theory:

http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/ifyoucanreadthis.htm

This is phenomenal! A true must-hear! I work in the IT field and this guy knows his stuff. (So far I'm almost half way through the first audio track.)

The other day I mentioned some similar things in a post here

I also did a little crude math and found that the chances of the first cell springing to life from non-life is statistically impossible.

Thanks!

-Jesse

117 posted on 07/05/2008 9:05:28 PM PDT by mrjesse (Could it be true? Imagine, being forgiven, and having a cause, greater then yourself, to live for!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Sun

“An ID theory”? Set some parameters. young Earth. shot down in a horrible defeat. Man made whole a few thousand years ago? Never stood a chance.


118 posted on 07/05/2008 9:33:19 PM PDT by Bogey78O (Don't call them jihadis. Call them irhabis. Tick them off, don't entertain their delusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns
All right, your philosophy is that any event that occurs without a human witness is unknowable. Fine. (I suspect that the reason you purport to trust witness' reports more than evidence is so that you won't have to believe in evolution, but never mind.) Doesn't it strike you as a little bit strange that I can make these predictions and be right time after time? If I'm not working from a theory that makes accurate, testable predictions (albeit with a model that you consider pure fantasy) then I must be on an amazing lucky streak.

And I'll just point out a few of your misconceptions in passing (not that I think it'll do any good).

...do [organisms] change for the better by progressively becoming more complex?

Evolution makes no such claim.

..the past is NOT subject to falsifiable experimentation and testing...

Yes, it is.

To posit a bottom line that random processes made the Universe...

This has nothing to do with evolution (and I doubt it's even meaningful).

I simply don’t... believe order “arose” from disorder, especially when a scientifically accepted law (and testable/falsifiable) on energy (2nd Law of Thermodymics) says just the opposite.

The physicist's 2nd Law of Thermodynamics ("The entropy of an isolated system does not decrease.") concerns isolated systems, which Earth's biosphere is not. The creationist's 2nd Law of Thermodynamics ("Everything gets more disorderly... or something.") is pseudo-scientific drivel.

How about this: if I discover something new about nature, I won't call that God, and if you believe something on religious grounds, you don't call that science. All right?
119 posted on 07/05/2008 9:45:36 PM PDT by xenophiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Big Government School indoctrination fanatics alert.

More evidence of the phony political liberals posing as conservatives alert.

120 posted on 07/05/2008 10:06:56 PM PDT by OriginalIntent (Undo the ACLU revision of the Constitution. If you agree with the ACLU revisions, you are a liberal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-143 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