Posted on 09/03/2008 3:47:09 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Darwinism is ultimately the creation story of naturalism and atheism...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationontheweb.com ...
After that speech tonight, she will have a lot to say about a great many things. :)
She wants both evolution and creation taught in the schools and not one or the other.
I suppose they did the same with atronomy, meteorology, physiscs, and all those other 'Godless sciences' that dare conflict with the Bible?
As more and more people wake up to the bait and switch perpetrated by your fellow Temple of Darwin fanatics, it is only a matter of time before your atheology will be banned from our public schools and confined to places of Darwin worship.
Then you can burn the books and reintroduce alchemy. Won't that be a fine day for education?
So then if McCain came down on the side of Evolution, and Obama supported creationism then you'd be out there voting for Obama?
It should be a clue that the points and evidence supporting Creationism stand individually, independently, simply and concisely, while the so-called "evidence" supporting evolution is hopelessly complicated and intertwined in circular reasoning, no doubt in an attempt to distract people from the fact that 'the Emperor has no clothes'.
The Lord is not the author of confusion. (1 Cor 14:33) If only 'scientists' would rely on the infallible Word in lieu of their own 'wisdom', it would save them the embarrassment they are experiencing now.
That is a creationist talking point, and an outright lie. You should be ashamed to lie so blatantly.
...the so-called "evidence" supporting evolution is hopelessly complicated and intertwined in circular reasoning, no doubt in an attempt to distract people from the fact that 'the Emperor has no clothes'.
Another creationist talking point. And another lie.
If only 'scientists' would rely on the infallible Word in lieu of their own 'wisdom', it would save them the embarrassment they are experiencing now.
They would not then be doing science, but religious apologetics. Much as you are doing.
Remember, this was tried. They called it the Dark Ages.
Science is based on the philosophy of naturalism and evolution is nothing more that just-so storytelling, or 'naturalistic apologetics'.
"Remember, this was tried. They called it the Dark Ages."
Use of the logical fallacy of Appeal to Consequences of a Belief as support for evolution/naturalism is noted.
Consistent use of the logical fallacy of Appeal to Consequences of a Belief as support for evolution/naturalism among naturalists is noted.
Whether is a valid claim not withstanding, it’s at least a relief to see someone on theology side of the debate with a grasp of logical fallacy that extends beyond everthing they disagree with being a “stawman” or “elephant hurling”.
It is always interesting to see what irrational contortions the naturalists will go through to undermine a valid argument and twist a weakness in their position into an insult against their rivals.
Simply amazing.
It’s interesting to see how the militant theologists try to turn vain pride in their own faith into some kind of virtue and elevate it to the status of self-evident truth.
Apparently, speaking the truth is now 'militancy' and bringing attention to the irrational contortions that naturalists go through to avoid the obvious use of logical fallacy to support their beliefs can be turned into 'vain pride' on the part of their rivals by using even more irrational contortions.
Same song, same verse, repeat ad infinitum.
You want a religious war, and you have to claim science is a religion so you can make it look like they started it. You’re not pursuing science, you’re looking for heretics to burn.
Nonsense, Hysterical Strawman alert.
In case you have not figured it out, what you evolutionists do here on these threads does not qualify even remotely as science, nor do you come off as professional scientists.
You are fanatical defenders about your evolutionary beliefs, and you are compelled to engage your contortions and logical fallacies.
If it was just evolution, you wouldn’t have to make up wild conspiracy theories about how the geologists, physicists and biologists are all working together to destroy Christianity.
"Keep posting your nonsense."When an evo screams 'nonsense', you know they just got pwned.
I want a religious war??? No way. And I'm trying to make it look like science started it??? That's rather insane, isn't it? Do you have to go to that extreme to demonize your rival?
"You’re not pursuing science..."
Of course I am. Pure science. Not philosophical naturalism.
"...you’re looking for heretics to burn."
Didn't we just talk about the fallacy of Appeal to Consequences of a Belief? Have you forgotten already?
Dude, you're freaking out. Calm down.
I'm not the one imaging massive conspiracies about one guy's theory, going back centuries before he was born.
Me neither.
Nor am I suggesting anyone wants to start 'religious wars' or are looking for 'heretics to burn'.
You are.
Of course not. This “house of cards” you speak of all came about quite by accident, I’m sure.
The Creationists are simply passionate about their beliefs. The "Evos" are "fanatics" engaged in "contortions and logical fallacies". You guys could be a perfect example of a textbook study in propaganda techniques.
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.