There are valid criticisms of evolution

Wichita Eagle ^ | 3/9/2005 | David berlinski

[Conspiracy Guy]

No apology will be issued. Your reply to 9 read to me like I'll see you and raise you five. English is very nuanced so interpretation is a factor.

[Tamberlane]

In the years since this theory has been presented, nobody has been able to demonstrate the evolution of a single species from one to another.

Wrong. See for instance, J. R. Weinberg et al. 1992: 'Evidence for rapid speciation following a founder event in the laboratory.' Science 46(4):1214-1220.

[Mongeaux]

"No. You did not read what I was responding to. The thank a scientist post from Mongo. He worships science so I asked why they can't take basic elements of animals and alter them."

I don't worship Science - but I like what it has done for me. Science saved my little daughters life twice and mine a few times too.

I worship Nicole Kidman! Yummmm.....

[D Edmund Joaquin]

So Judaism and Christianity are not silly? But the Genesis account of creation is? How do you reconcile that? Also, do you consider circumcision, genital mutilation?

[metacognative]

You missed the point; biochemistry, since the evidence shown in modern microscopes, show no "primitive" processes.
Chance cannot produce a single cell, let alone the human brain.

[Conspiracy Guy]

I'm not trying to make this a scripture thread. I asked simple questions about basic elements and science and they attack with jibberish and avoid my simple question.

[tfecw]

No apology will be issued.

I wouldn't think so. I could have raised him a million but either way it wasn't about religion and you are still wrong.

[metacognative]

Darwinites probably accept Global Warming. It's where the tax money is!

[metacognative]

huh....?

[Mongeaux]

"So Judaism and Christianity are not silly? But the Genesis account of creation is? How do you reconcile that? Also, do you consider circumcision, genital mutilation?"

Creation "Science" is silly. So is literal interpretation of the Bible. The Genesis account of creation in the bible is a beautful myth. But Myth it remains.

[microgood]

Scientists have a limited outlook because they want to believe in a world which exists physically and stuff happens physically and randomly, with no purpose or plan behind it all.

Science is also not good at determining things that are not testable, such as macroevolution and abiogenesis. If it cannot be empirically tested, it just will never be known with any kind of certainty. In the development of a Steam Turbine Generator, many of the initial beliefs about the values in the Energy equation were wrong as they proved by testing the theory, which cannot be done with either abiogenesis or macroevolution or the the big bang theory either.

Even radiometric dating has to make assumptions about the composition of the material when it was "Created" or "Formed" or when its timeclock was "Reset" to zero, assuming that the electron counter is telling them what they think it is telling them.

Bottom line, applying the scientific method to how we got here, however long ago that was, is a waste of time and money. And although many "scientists" say you have to believe in macroevolution to make advances in microbiology, we all know that is bunk.

It is quite the industry, with one group saying that the Yucatan Meteorite wiped out the dinosaurs and another saying the proliferation of mammals did it. Personally, I am all for the increased volcanic activity theory killing the dinosaurs and causing an ice age at the same time, but that is just me.

[D Edmund Joaquin]

bump to the top(bttt)

[Conspiracy Guy]

I can talk evolution all day but it is dull and boring so I asked you a simple question in #50 and you can't answer it. I'm not surprised.

[bondserv]

Ping!

[Conspiracy Guy]

Then answer the question dummie.

[D Edmund Joaquin]

well, you are a double -minded man and a double-minded man is unstable in all his ways

[Conspiracy Guy]

Nicole is nice.

[Matchett-PI]

"huh....?"

"bttt" means "bump to the top". I'm just bumping your thread to the top of the list. :)

[Matchett-PI]

"huh....?"

"bttt" means "bump to the top". I'm just bumping your thread to the top of the list. :)