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

Skip to comments.

Are You Too Dumb to Understand Evolution?
CreationEvolutionHeadlines ^ | September 10, 2008

Posted on 09/11/2008 9:55:10 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts

Sept 10, 2008 — Astrobiologist David Deamer believes that life can spontaneously emerge without design, but he thinks lay people are too uneducated to understand how this is possible, so he gives them the watered-down version of Darwin’s natural selection instead, which he knows is inadequate to explain the complexity of life. That’s what he seemed to be telling reporter Susan Mazur in an interview for the Scoop (New Zealand). Is the lay public really too dense for the deeper knowledge of how evolution works?...

(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: 2smart2fall4it; atheistagenda; creation; crevo; darwin; evolution; god; intelligentdesign; scientism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 951-1,0001,001-1,0501,051-1,100 ... 2,051-2,064 next last
To: allmendream

The basis for all their fears is that they do not see God’s power as limitless. They limit his powers based on their limited ability to understand.


1,001 posted on 09/17/2008 4:40:11 PM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 998 | View Replies]

To: MrB
Since, in one passage, the English translation was inadequate, he’d prefer to throw the whole bible out, or at least require that it not be published in English (like the Chicoms do),

Of course you are misrepresenting my preference. I think that comes under the heading of bearing false witness, one of the sins for which you will be held accountable for.

1,002 posted on 09/17/2008 4:44:34 PM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 989 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande
“Fichori why don’t you point out specifically what I said that you disagree with? This arguing through a proxy is pointless.”
You mean, what specifically I am referring to whey I say 'your wacky science'?

Your idea that the sun's apparent and actual positions are off by 2.1 degrees.

I can try to find the first/last places you asserted that, or you could just make the claim again if you like.

And, its not that I disagree, it just that you were standing behind a totally unscientific and completely absurd claim.

Oh, yeah, and calling it science.
1,003 posted on 09/17/2008 4:44:56 PM PDT by Fichori (ironic: adj. 1 Characterized by or constituting irony. 2 Obamy getting beat up by a girl.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 999 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater
Yes, a God who set everything up to happen by natural forces somehow seems too distant and divine. They seem to prefer the man behind the curtain pulling levers and pushing buttons, he is a lovable cuss who is easy to understand, and the mechanics are not quite so frighteningly complex.
1,004 posted on 09/17/2008 4:46:17 PM PDT by allmendream (Sa-RAH! Sa-RAH! Sa-RAH! RAH RAH RAH! McCain/Palin2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1001 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater
Since you cannot specify how I altered scripture, one must conclude that I did not alter scripture. Thanks.”
I never said you were altering scripture!
1,005 posted on 09/17/2008 4:46:48 PM PDT by Fichori (ironic: adj. 1 Characterized by or constituting irony. 2 Obamy getting beat up by a girl.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1000 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

Not false witness, just inference based on your posts.

You never did answer what your solution to the “translation problem” would be because you didn’t want to give away your position (like leftists do, they hide their intent),

and, from your apparent hostility towards the authority of scripture, I’d have to infer that you would prefer that it not be looked at authoritatively at all.

So, answer the [] question, or my inference stands.


1,006 posted on 09/17/2008 4:55:56 PM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1002 | View Replies]

To: Fichori
Your idea that the sun's apparent and actual positions are off by 2.1 degrees.

When you see the light from the Sun, is the Sun exactly where you see the light coming from it or is the Suns position off by the amount of time it took for the light to get to the Earth from the Sun (8.3 minutes) and the angular rotation of the earth, 2.1 degrees (your frame of reference) that occurs in 8.3 minutes?

1,007 posted on 09/17/2008 4:57:36 PM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1003 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

For anyone interested in how a debate can be conducted, here’s on in progress:

http://www.opposingviews.com/questions/does-intelligent-design-have-merit/comments


1,008 posted on 09/17/2008 8:20:29 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1001 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande; mrjesse; Ethan Clive Osgoode
“When you see the light from the Sun, is the Sun exactly where you see the light coming from it or is the Suns position off by the amount of time it took for the light to get to the Earth from the Sun (8.3 minutes) and the angular rotation of the earth, 2.1 degrees (your frame of reference) that occurs in 8.3 minutes?”

Now, can you back that claim up?

Wikipedia should have something on it, right?

Diurnal aberration perhaps?
1,009 posted on 09/17/2008 8:29:01 PM PDT by Fichori (ironic: adj. 1 Characterized by or constituting irony. 2 Obamy getting beat up by a girl.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1007 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande; Fichori; Ethan Clive Osgoode
Said LeGrande: When you see the light from the Sun, is the Sun exactly where you see the light coming from it or is the Suns position off by the amount of time it took for the light to get to the Earth from the Sun (8.3 minutes) and the angular rotation of the earth, 2.1 degrees (your frame of reference) that occurs in 8.3 minutes?

But wouldn't that also mean that when Pluto was at the part of its orbit which brought it the most distance from the earth, at which point the time of light travel is 6.8 hours in which time the earth rotates 102 degrees -- does that mean then that if I look up through my telescope and see pluto overhead it actually won't even be in the night sky at that time, but rather 102 degrees away from where I see it?

And what about a heavenly body that was 12 light hours away - would it appear to be exactly in the opposite side of the sky of where it really was? Would it's gravity be 180 degrees out of phase with its apparent position?

Thanks,

-Jesse
1,010 posted on 09/17/2008 11:29:57 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 1007 | View Replies]

To: Fichori
"From politicians to posters here on FR, there are specimens that make you we did get humans from chimps."

I used to be in a newsgroup with this one guy who called the evos 'the Bandar Log'. :-)

1,011 posted on 09/18/2008 5:21:06 AM PDT by GourmetDan (Eccl 10:2 - The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 993 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
"You are rather silly. Of course I know the difference between a protein and DNA. Central dogma of Molecular Biology is DNA -> RNA -> Protein. And what do you think determines the proteome if not the genome? You cannot make a protein without a gene to code for it."

You are rather silly. You missed a step between DNA and RNA. Do you know what it is? And how can a proteome be 3x the size of the genome if genes code 1 for 1? They don't. What's the missing step that allows genes to code for more than 1 protein?

"Every GENE in a chimp could be mutated so that it forms a fully functioning protein that is identical to a human protein."

Reference please.

"You have not yet said how you think DNA mutation is “constrained” nor do I hold out much hope of hearing a mechanism."

Of course I did. You either didn't read the article or didn't understand it. Here's what is concludes: "Epigenetic mechanisms constrain expression by adapting regions of the genome to maintain either gene silencing or gene activity." No expression, no 'selection', no 'evolution'.

"SEEING AS IN HUNDREDS OF POSTS YOU STILL FAIL TO POINT OUT WHAT MECHANISM YOU THINK PULLS THE SUN AROUND A MOTIONLESS EARTH!"

You either don't understand or you frame the question in a fallacious manner such that there can be no correct answer. That is the argument from fallacy, also known as argumentum ad logicam or fallacy fallacy. It is a logical fallacy which assumes that if an argument is fallacious, its conclusion must be false.

"I'll quit wasting my time with you, even though you finally did see the truth of the matter that a bacteria increases its mutation rate in response to stress in order to better survive that stress. Baby steps. Baby steps."

No 'finally' to it. I have known for years that bacteria increase their mutation rate when survival is threatened. As I already explained to you, your 'outcome' presuming that this ability arose through 'evolution' is purely philosophical and no more empirical than the opposite 'outcome' of presuming that this ability was created.

You've got to crawl before you can even take that first baby step and I don't see you even crawling yet.

1,012 posted on 09/18/2008 5:47:03 AM PDT by GourmetDan (Eccl 10:2 - The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 995 | View Replies]

To: Fichori
Now, can you back that claim up?

Simple math and geometry. Try it sometime.

1,013 posted on 09/18/2008 6:22:25 AM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1009 | View Replies]

To: MrB
Not false witness, just inference based on your posts.

If it is your inference, please make that clear. Do NOT post inferences as fact. You KNOW that that is bearing false witness.

You never did answer what your solution to the “translation problem” would be because you didn’t want to give away your position (like leftists do, they hide their intent),

I didn't know you asked for my "solution".

1,014 posted on 09/18/2008 6:25:12 AM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1006 | View Replies]

To: GourmetDan
already explained to you, your 'outcome' presuming that this ability arose through 'evolution' is purely philosophical and no more empirical than the opposite 'outcome' of presuming that this ability was created.

Perhaps it was "created" through "evolution". Now, can we all be happy?

1,015 posted on 09/18/2008 6:26:12 AM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1012 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

oh, at least twice, now three times.

However, I take your position to be that of one of those petty little snipers that sits smugly shooting at the ideas of others without ever putting forth an idea of his own.

Go ahead, though, prove me wrong on that. You haven’t, even though you have had ample opportunity.


1,016 posted on 09/18/2008 6:27:17 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1014 | View Replies]

To: LeGrande; tpanther; Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus; GodGunsGuts; Fichori; MrB; hosepipe; YHAOS; ...

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literal%5B1%5D

Main Entry: lit·er·al (adjective)

1 a: according with the letter of the scriptures

b: adhering to fact or to the ordinary construction or primary meaning of a term or expression : actual {liberty in the literal sense is impossible — B. N. Cardozo}

c: free from exaggeration or embellishment {the literal truth}

d: characterized by a concern mainly with facts {a very literal man} 2: of, relating to, or expressed in letters 3: reproduced word for word : exact , verbatim {a literal translation}

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/true

Main Entry: 2true Function:adverb
2 a (1): being in accordance with the actual state of affairs

Main Entry: 2true Function:adverb
1: in accordance with fact or reality

Yes, I believe that the Bible is the literal Word of God. It is free from exaggeration or embellishment {the literal truth}; it is reproduced word for word as God gave it.

I believe that the Word of God is true as well.

Accepting that the Bible is the “literal Truth” is not the same as interpreting everything in it literally and demanding that it be followed as such.

Only someone not interested in honest debate would demand that people violate common sense rules of literary reading. Poetry is poetry, song is song, allegory, metaphor, analogy, are all literary devices that are legitimately used in Scripture.

Anyone who is incapable of recognizing those differences shows an appalling lack of understanding of English. Anyone unwilling to recognize those differences is not debating honestly.

It’s alarming that science is in the hands of people so uneducated that they are unable to recognize the distinct differences in literary forms; or so biased that they are unwilling to recognize those differences. I certainly would not trust someone with that much of a lack of basic education to write any kind of reliable paper.

For someone who prides themselves on objectivity, for those who call themselves scientists who stoop to such unethical tactics, calls into question their judgment on virtually any other matter. They have clearly shown that they are not able to keep their personal biases out of any reasoning process. If they can’t do that in one area, then I see no reason to expect them to do it in others and it makes everything they say suspect.

So, since evos demand that Scripture be taken “literally” and interpreted as such, what do they have to say about the latest scientific pronouncements? Are we to take them literally?

So is it punctuated equilibrium or phyletic gradualism?

Are origins part of evolution or not?

Is it the pre-Cambrium explosion or that life evolved slowly from simpler forms?

Did life arise from non-living matter or is spontaneous generation is impossible?

So, are you a scientist, LeGrande? What field is your degree in? What scientific endeavors have you participated in?


1,017 posted on 09/18/2008 6:27:57 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 997 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Only someone not interested in honest debate would demand that people violate common sense rules of literary reading. Nutshell. Nailed it right here.
1,018 posted on 09/18/2008 6:29:58 AM PDT by MrB (You can't reason people out of a position that they didn't use reason to get into in the first place)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1017 | View Replies]

To: GourmetDan
You do not understand the clear meaning of words.

“Epigenetic mechanisms constrain expression by adapting regions of the genome to maintain either gene silencing or gene activity.”

Nothing about mutation, or mutation being “constrained”. EXPRESSION is being constrained. You do know what expression is don't you? It is the DNA gene being transcribed into RNA and then being translated into a protein. THAT is gene expression, and it is controlled by epigenetic mechanisms.

NOTHING about epigenetic mechanisms of DNA methylation and histone modification constrain mutation. Once again you simply have no idea what your talking about.

1,019 posted on 09/18/2008 6:33:16 AM PDT by allmendream (Sa-RAH! Sa-RAH! Sa-RAH! RAH RAH RAH! McCain/Palin2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1012 | View Replies]

To: GourmetDan
And do you think “Random” is synonymous with “Out of the control of God”?

And how are you going to demonstrate that mutation is non random when every experiment with error prone DNA polymerase or mutatagens show that mutations create unique genetic variation rather than making the same mutations every time?

1,020 posted on 09/18/2008 6:35:52 AM PDT by allmendream (Sa-RAH! Sa-RAH! Sa-RAH! RAH RAH RAH! McCain/Palin2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1012 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe
No monkey/primate ever worshipped a God.. if man evolved from primates to finally invent God then not believing in God is devolution.. and a throwback..

It's merely an extension of magical thinking, which is based on intuition. Intuition and associating events together (which may turn out unrelated) is how the mind learns new things and allows for the creation of scientific theories that can then be tested, and it can help self-preserve when the intuition hits a positive, but there's the bad side as well. Primates learn about their world the same as we do, the same as babies do, just at a simpler level. I have every confidence that evolved primates would be inclined to be sentimental or superstitious. Superstition makes people cautious, and caution improves the likelihood of spreading your genes.

1,021 posted on 09/18/2008 6:48:38 AM PDT by GraniteStateConservative (...He had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here...-- Worst.President.Ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Yes, I believe that the Bible is the literal Word of God.

Which Bible? We have already had a discussion of the merits of the English version and its inadequacies. Not my word but the word of one of the anti-evolutionists posting here.

1,022 posted on 09/18/2008 6:56:02 AM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1017 | View Replies]

To: metmom
So, since evos demand that Scripture be taken “literally” and interpreted as such,

I think you have that backwards. I have no problem with interpreting the Bible. I have problems with people that say that the Bible must be taken literally word for word but then saying that it must be interpreted. For example, when the Bible says that God observed that man was alone and needed a help-meet then God made the animals does not mean (when properly interpreted) that man was alone and did not create the animals after God realized Adam needed a help-meet.

1,023 posted on 09/18/2008 7:01:44 AM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1017 | View Replies]

To: mrjesse
Why are you ignoring my question? "When you see the light from the Sun, is the Sun exactly where you see the light coming from it or is the Suns position off by the amount of time it took for the light to get to the Earth from the Sun (8.3 minutes) and the angular rotation of the earth, 2.1 degrees (your frame of reference) that occurs in 8.3 minutes?"

Can I safely assume that you agree that the apparent position of the sun is off by apx. 8.3 minutes?

But wouldn't that also mean that when Pluto was at the part of its orbit which brought it the most distance from the earth, at which point the time of light travel is 6.8 hours in which time the earth rotates 102 degrees -- does that mean then that if I look up through my telescope and see pluto overhead it actually won't even be in the night sky at that time, but rather 102 degrees away from where I see it?

The angular correction factor depends on "when" you look at Pluto. During a night of observing Pluto, Pluto will appear to move apx 180 degrees in the sky if we are using earth as the frame of reference.

To answer your question I will give you a thought experiment. From the time when the reflected light from Pluto just appears at Earths horizon from our point of view, how long and how many degrees of the Earths rotation do we need to wait before we actually see the light that was reflected by Pluto at the precise time we first saw Pluto at the horizon?

I am trying to keep this simple just for you : ) This is really a question of whether or not you understand what a frame of reference is. MrJesse had a hard time understanding the 'frame of reference' concept. Everything is relative to the 'frame of reference' : )

1,024 posted on 09/18/2008 7:11:06 AM PDT by LeGrande
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1010 | View Replies]

To: metmom
There's also the mathematics of factoring multiple mutations simultaneously. Several esteemed mathematicians say it is incomprehensible.
1,025 posted on 09/18/2008 7:19:15 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (DRILL HERE! DRILL NOW! NO STRINGS! You guys are great! FReep on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1017 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

What really ticks me off is that people get sued when they want to think beyond evolution to teach children about it’s warts.


1,026 posted on 09/18/2008 7:22:01 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (DRILL HERE! DRILL NOW! NO STRINGS! You guys are great! FReep on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1023 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Please direct me to your one of your queries so I may address it or query me again on what you desire my opinion on.


1,027 posted on 09/18/2008 7:23:15 AM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1016 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
What really ticks me off is that people get sued when they want to think beyond evolution to teach children about it’s warts.

I no of no one that gets sued for that. In fact, there are lots of home schoolers and private (religious) schools that teach that and are not sued. In fact, there are published textbooks that do just that and no one is trying to get them banned by court order.

1,028 posted on 09/18/2008 7:24:56 AM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1026 | View Replies]

To: GraniteStateConservative
Superstition makes people cautious, and caution improves the likelihood of spreading your genes.

Can you explain? I would have thought that those with less caution would more likely spread their genes. I am very cautious about spreading my genes; my wife would remove my gene spreader if she ever thought that I was out spreading my genes.

1,029 posted on 09/18/2008 7:28:06 AM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1021 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

Ann Coulter’s ‘Godless’, page 200:

The ACLU sued a school district in Cobb County, Georgia, merely for putting stickers in biology textbuooks that urged students to study evolution with ‘an open mind’.

That’s one example. More coming.


1,030 posted on 09/18/2008 7:30:30 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (DRILL HERE! DRILL NOW! NO STRINGS! You guys are great! FReep on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1028 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater
In Lebec, California, parents represented by Americans United for Separation of Church and State sued to prevent the school from even offering an elective philosophy class on intelligent design. In Dover, Pennsylvania, a small group of parents backed by the ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State sued to prevent any discussion of intelligent design in a ninth grade biology class. The school had to pay their legal fees — $1 million.

“So that's that. after Dover, no school district will dare breathe a word about “intelligent design,” unless they want to risk being bankrupted by ACLU lawsuits. The Darwinists have saved the secular sanctity of their temples: the public schools.” — Ann Coulter, Godless, page 200.

1,031 posted on 09/18/2008 7:37:03 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (DRILL HERE! DRILL NOW! NO STRINGS! You guys are great! FReep on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1028 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

“In fact, there are lots of home schoolers and private (religious) schools that teach that and are not sued.”

School choice is the only fair way to have children educated. Christians are tax payers too.


1,032 posted on 09/18/2008 7:38:57 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (DRILL HERE! DRILL NOW! NO STRINGS! You guys are great! FReep on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1028 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March

“School choice is the only fair way to have children educated. Christians are tax payers too.” — in this current political climate, that is.


1,033 posted on 09/18/2008 7:41:15 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (DRILL HERE! DRILL NOW! NO STRINGS! You guys are great! FReep on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1032 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
School choice is the only fair way to have children educated. Christians are tax payers too.

I am for school choice. We sent our daughter to one of the best Christian schools in the area. OTOH, the tax breaks for churches should be limited. I have no problem with giving small churches a break but not the mega-churches that that are more business than religion. The biggest example of them all is Obama's church.

1,034 posted on 09/18/2008 7:47:32 AM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1032 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

So you don’t have a problem with tax paying parents deciding what their kids are taught?


1,035 posted on 09/18/2008 7:51:21 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (DRILL HERE! DRILL NOW! NO STRINGS! You guys are great! FReep on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1034 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
The ACLU sued a school district in Cobb County, Georgia, merely for putting stickers in biology textbuooks that urged students to study evolution with ‘an open mind’.

Why do you suppose they singled out evolution for stickers? Does that imply that other subjects are to be studied with a closed mind?

1,036 posted on 09/18/2008 7:52:40 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1030 | View Replies]

To: js1138

What does it matter? Darwin’s Theory was a great launching pad to help in higher levels of thinking, I admit. But there are flaws in the theory now. When schools want to advance their students beyond a flawed dogma, I think they should be commended, not sued.


1,037 posted on 09/18/2008 7:55:12 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (DRILL HERE! DRILL NOW! NO STRINGS! You guys are great! FReep on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1036 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
In Lebec, California, parents represented by Americans United for Separation of Church and State sued to prevent the school from even offering an elective philosophy class on intelligent design.

Oh, you mean the class taught by a phys ed instructor that had no training in the sciences or philosophy and the course used only video-tapes which presented the creationist's side as fact and did not present both sides and the course that argued against evolution by presenting 'facts' to the contrary which would make it a 'science' course not a philosophy course. Oh yeah, this was not about philosophy but a crude attempt to put out garbage by an unqualified phys ed instructor (who by the way, just happened to be the wife of a local minister and a proponent of creationism). You can teach the garbage all you want. That does not mean you have the right to use taxpayer dollars for that and put out garbage to students in the public school system.

1,038 posted on 09/18/2008 7:58:29 AM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1031 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
What does it matter? Darwin’s Theory was a great launching pad to help in higher levels of thinking, I admit. But there are flaws in the theory now.

Right. Darwin's theory was flawed. We all know that. He didn't even know about genetics at that time! Science has gradually updated his original theory based on the accumulated knowledge science has collected over the decades.

1,039 posted on 09/18/2008 8:00:23 AM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1037 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
But there are flaws in the theory now.

Let's hear about a flaw. Give us the single biggest flaw that you see.

1,040 posted on 09/18/2008 8:01:36 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1037 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
So you don’t have a problem with tax paying parents deciding what their kids are taught?

That is a stupid question but then I think you were not really asking a question but trying to make an inference so that other readers would think I had made such a position.

Yes, parents should have input and part of that input is ensuring that the kids are taught a proper curriculm and not ID video tape garbage pretending to be scientific fact.

1,041 posted on 09/18/2008 8:03:49 AM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1035 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

>> Are You Too Dumb to Understand Evolution?

Well your great, great, great... great Grandmother was a hairy caveman. So there!


1,042 posted on 09/18/2008 8:05:10 AM PDT by Gene Eric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

I would rather be on that phys-ed teacher’s side than the side that sued over bumper stickers about keeping an open mind.

America is supposed to be a free country. If the government wants to force kids to school, then fine— but when the government wants to undermine a child’s faith against the parents’ wishes, I would only agree with regard to countering murder cults.

People get really impatient with Christians. But DAMMIT, it’s Christians who are making the world a better place. It’s the enemies of Christianity who cause most of the world’s problems.


1,043 posted on 09/18/2008 8:06:01 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (DRILL HERE! DRILL NOW! NO STRINGS! You guys are great! FReep on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1038 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March

Interesting that you bring up the Dover case. Isn’t that where the ID experts testified that it should be taught in clase that the Intelligent Designer was most probably dead? Would you want your kid coming home from school crying saying that he was taught in school that God was dead?


1,044 posted on 09/18/2008 8:09:43 AM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1031 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater
“Science has gradually updated his original theory based on the accumulated knowledge science has collected over the decades.”

Scientists have discovered that their fundamental belief is flawed. Having several simultaneous mutations is a near-impossibility unless there is some kind of intelligent force behind the occurrence. But they still want to ‘disprove’ the Bible with their own religious superstitions.

1,045 posted on 09/18/2008 8:10:05 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (DRILL HERE! DRILL NOW! NO STRINGS! You guys are great! FReep on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1039 | View Replies]

To: js1138

The biggest flaw is having several simultaneous mutations. But there’s the other flaw, the Cambrian period.


1,046 posted on 09/18/2008 8:12:11 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (DRILL HERE! DRILL NOW! NO STRINGS! You guys are great! FReep on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1040 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March

Would you not agree that the phys ed teacher with no credentials in either science or philosophy is unqualified to teach a philosophy course about science?


1,047 posted on 09/18/2008 8:14:19 AM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1043 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March

We can observe simultaneous mutations. If you are a typical person you have several alleles not found in your parents. This is a fact.


1,048 posted on 09/18/2008 8:15:40 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1046 | View Replies]

To: ColdWater

“That is a stupid question but then I think you were not really asking a question but trying to make an inference so that other readers would think I had made such a position.”

I have to ask stupid questions sometimes. Sorry, but when Neal Boortz tried to equate Christian parents as committing ‘child abuse’ through education sources, that’s the kind of fanaticism that forces me to ask stupid questions, not having studied your entire posting history.


1,049 posted on 09/18/2008 8:16:23 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (DRILL HERE! DRILL NOW! NO STRINGS! You guys are great! FReep on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1041 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March
Scientists have discovered that their fundamental belief is flawed.

False

Having several simultaneous mutations is a near-impossibility unless there is some kind of intelligent force behind the occurrence.

Please explain where you are coming from.

But they still want to ‘disprove’ the Bible with their own religious superstitions.

I think you are paranoid. Nothing in evolution 'disproves' the Bible. It only threatens those that have minds closed due to years of brainwashing by other humans that have their own agenda of keeping you slave to their particular distorted philosophy of religion. After all, I would guess that your particular denomiation didn't even exist when the Bible was written.

1,050 posted on 09/18/2008 8:19:01 AM PDT by ColdWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1045 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 951-1,0001,001-1,0501,051-1,100 ... 2,051-2,064 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