Skip to comments.Texas State Board of Education Votes To Require Students to Analyze and Evaluate Evolution
Posted on 01/23/2009 9:39:39 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
click here to read article
Where we (me the creationist and what I understand to be the typical Macor-Evolutionist) disagree is in the arrival of the different kinds, e.g. frogs, cats, dogs, ducks, finches, camels, etc. I believe they were created from dust on the 5th & 6th days, the Macro Evo believe they all descended from a common ancestor. Whenever I do the research, if one ignores the dating of rocks, the whole hierarchal tree of life system, IMHO, is completely arbitrary and circular, based on the premise that evolution occured. I am not questioning taxonomy per se, but rather the arrangement of "ancestor" and "offsrping" genus'. Amphibians are a good exampl of that.
The lack of a coghesive gelogic column in one place, the overthrusting of "older" layers on top of "younger", and the discovery of "living fossils" (amongst other things) gives me serious concerns about the validity of said system. Hence, my desire to research this whole dating methodology for myself.
[[That’s the kind of info evolutionary scientists are trying to discover, and it’s the thing I want ID to tell me.]]
you’re in luck- ID does show this
[[Without that, I’ll continue to think it’s a really weak hypothesis, no matter how often you and others assure me nature couldn’t do it—or, if you prefer,]]
You can continue ignoring hte fact that they do do this if you like- no skin off my nose.
[[So now we have all these creationists bleating about trying to claim that “oh yeah, microevolution happens, but not macro.”]]
This is far superior and far more scientific than bleating about how microevolution is hte same as macroevolution when it clearly isn’t.
[[Really? Wow. Although you continue to explain to me how it’s been shown a billion times right here on Free Republic, bastion of top flight scientists, I still don’t understand.]]
No- you can do your own homework- sick and tired of carying your weight for you only to have you simply ignore it
[[Your odd hangup with evolution is borne solely from your particular brand of Christianity]]
Hmmm- Semms my myraid posts would argue otherwise- but agian- you’re free to ignore hte evidneces if you like- just don’t expect to make such false claims and get away with it.
[[You accept the creationist construct of “microevolution” but refuse to acknowledge that such things (which is what all of evolution is based upon - that is, tiny changes in allele frequencies) over sufficient time yield larger, more noticeable changes.]]
These ALL still fall under microevolution- if you don’t understand the difference between Micro and macroevolution, I’m not goign to waste time here explaining it to you when it’s been explained many many many times here on FR.
[[Again, you and your ilk damn well didn’t accept what you now call microevolution 10 yrs ago;]]
Were you born a liar? Or did you just grow into it gradually? Micvroevolution was discovered before Darwin even began to ponder it himself- By a relgious person no less. I’d say that puts acceptance at well over 10 years ago-
[[But then the science became simply overwhelming for the creationists so two things happened: 1) A subset made up ID/IC, mostly for profit of course and 2) Accepted parts of the TOE, careful to snip out those parts which would - for whatever goofy reason - chip away at their idea of their God, mostly for profit of course.]]
This ignorant statement deserves only a pointing out that it’s ignorant and detached fro mthe facts and fro mreality- When you feel you want to step it up a little bit, and discuss issues civily- you just lemme know- till then I’m writing you off as irreleventto any serious discussions about science- Perhaps you can go play with your friends over on DC, and you can all spew ignroant statements al lday long and slap each other on the back pretending it amounts to soemthing- but here- we discuss science
[[What I meant by “how” they were constructed is more than that—i.e., not just “the mousetrap is made of a hammer with a spring and a bar to hold down the hammer and a trigger to flip the bar,” but “first a wire is bent to make the hammer, then more wire is wound around it to make a spring, then the hammer is attached to a block of wood...”]]
So basically what you want to nkow is how an evolutionist constructs intelligent design to explain away intelligent design? Miller did that very hting- I explained how he constructed intelligently designed constructs while trying to dismiss intelligently designed IC.
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.