Posted on 06/13/2009 9:29:28 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Darwin-Only Advisors Hunker Down to Re-Strategize
June 12, 2009 — Strict Darwinian materialists are a minority in the United States, yet they enjoy autocracy in educational policy, complete control of scientific institutions, and nearly complete unquestioned support from the mainstream media. Nevertheless, they have to face living in a country that is predominantly religious. Once in awhile they suffer setbacks, like the recent changes in textbook policy in Texas that will require more scrutiny of the claims of evolution. What do they say amongst themselves when strategizing how to handle the public?...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
You quote a second hand source and I quote the collogen biochemist that did the research and he claims to have extracted “bone cells and blood vessels”. So you and your second hand sources know better then the Chief of the Division of Matrix Biology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center that did the research.
“The results confirmed the existence of protein. “Because I am a collagen biochemist, our lab was contacted to perform an independent analysis of this new bone find,” explains Kalluri, who is Chief of the Division of Matrix Biology at BIDMC. “We isolated the proteins – collagen, laminin and elastin – from the bone, and also extracted bone cells and blood vessels from this sample. Our findings demonstrated that it did contain basement membrane matrix.”
“You quote a second hand source and I quote the collogen biochemist that did the research and he claims to have extracted “bone cells and blood vessels”.”
Ridiculous. My source was linked directly from the research institution that performed the analysis.
You quote a biochemist that did an independent review. And you quote him out of context of the analysis performed.
Don’t you ever get tired of making stuff up?
“My source was linked directly from the research institution that performed the analysis.”
Your source actually acknowledges and quotes Raghu Kalluri, PhD, who is the collagen biochemist that I quote. Give up and at least read the articles before you drone on about no blood vessels being found.
“Give up and at least read the articles before you drone on about no blood vessels being found.”
You’ve been evo-pwned. You don’t have to like it, but you should get used to it.
No “blood vessels” were found. That much is clear and obvious and factual. You can twirl and squirm and misrepresent as much as you want - but it’s simply not true - not in the way you want it to be. So come up with another one, and I’ll be happy to swat it down again.
Examples include Hitler and Stalin
The thinking perpetuates unintelligence. When the subject arises, people have said, “we’re all descended from apes anyway.”
_______
Did their utterances inform your understanding of evolution?
Even when you see it in black and white with proper sourcing you repeat they lie - a mark of a true liberal:
“A lie told often enough becomes truth” Vladimir Lenin.
if the Creationists and IDers ever get their act together, the Temple of Darwin can kiss its monopoly over the ideology of science goodbye.
_________
This raises what may be the most interesting question you’ve yet posed, GGG.
With 150 years of Darwin’s theories in the mainstream, why is it that the creationists and IDers are unable to get their act together? What is holding them back?
The way you state seems to suggest that it is not that they are being held back by the evil Darwiniacs, so what is it?
Personally, I would not care or even be surprised if God chose to use "evolution" as a means to His purpose of creation but that does not seem to be what most evos are driving at. Disagreeing with God is far above my pay grade.
The evos seem more wedded to a purely materialistic view characterized by the magic lightning bolt striking the primordial soup and, somehow, bringing about life in all of its infinite complexity. Count me skeptical particularly since Scripture says otherwise. Pope St. Pius X was particularly critical of the notion of men being descended from apes or apelike creatures in his magnificent 1907 encyclical Pascendi Domenici Gregis and in his syllabus of errors Lamentabile Sane.
Someone who fails to place either Scripture or Tradition (papal teaching magisterium) above the likes of Darwin seems unlikely to be a Christian or a very good judge of who is a Christian.
People who take their loyalty to the notion of having simian ancestry because some failed theology student said so, as a first principle, and only then decide whether or not God exists in their subjective estimation based upon whether God's existence is consistent with their passionate desire to have furry ancestors scratching their ribcages with one paw while using the other to swing through the tree branches in between banana banquets, have an amazing degree of imagination but are neither Christian nor particularly good role models for Christians.
My children have been mostly homeschooled and privately schooled. My eldest daughter wanted to attend the local gummint skewel entering junior year of high school. The school came equipped with the obligatory set of atheist science teachers but we correctly determined that our mostly homeschooled eldest would be, as a well-catechized Catholic, too much of a challenge for mere gummint skewel teachers. As a sort of punishment, we told her she could enroll in gummint skewel but that she would graduate from that skewel and there would be no more transfers no matter what the excuse. She could also report back on the specifics of the failed attempts to launder her mind.
Short definition of Christian for this discussion: One who is perfectly capable of and dedicated to resisting the religious cult of "scientific" fantasies in loyalty to the one true God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and of the New Testament. Darwin, as his enthusiasts well know, was no Christian. He ranks rather with Karl Marx, Margaret Sanger, Havelock Ellis, H. G. Wells, Barack Insane Obama and their ilk as destroyers of Western Civilization.
Because I am one.
500 zillion??? 400 zillion???? Are those scientific terms or Darwinist terms?
They did not find blood vessels, or blood cells. What they found was the collagen fiber remannts of what was probably a blood vessel. Those collagen fiber remnants are not blood vessels, anymore than a skeleton is an animal.
Keep repeating it comrade.
“Even when you see it in black and white with proper sourcing you repeat they lie - a mark of a true liberal:”
You are a rare sociopathic specimen, even for a “creation science” type - you want it to be true so badly (that they claim actual blood vessels were found) so that you can then turn around say that they are wrong and perpetuating a lie and that Genesis is literally true.
What kind of major psychological malfunction is at work here? Do the nice men in the white coats let you play on the computer often, or just when they periodically remove the restraints?
Now it's clear that you're simply equating collagen fibers with intact organs.
“You are a rare sociopathic specimen, even for a “creation science” type - you want it to be true so badly (that they claim actual blood vessels were found) so that you can then turn around say that they are wrong and perpetuating a lie and that Genesis is literally true.
What kind of major psychological malfunction is at work here? Do the nice men in the white coats let you play on the computer often, or just when they periodically remove the restraints?”
When the insults and names start flying I know that I have scored a victory. Thanks!!!!
“When the insults and names start flying I know that I have scored a victory. Thanks!!!!”
Then you unconditionally surrendered a couple of posts ago when you started accusing folks of being liberals, and communists for not agreeing with your misinterpretation of the research that you brought to the thread. Remember, I tried to keep you from embarrassing yourself and get you to start a separate thread - but you were rather insistent.
This is really a classic illustration of “creation science” thinking. You appear to genuinely feel that everyone else is an idiot, yet you unambiguously demonstrate an inability to understand the underlying technical concepts of the research.
The difference between you and me is that I know that “creation science” advocates are idiots - because they prove it every single thread, with no effort on my part.
Do you still not understand the problem with your rationale?
You fight tooth-and-nail to try to insert your view of the research so that you can say that it is wrong.
Really, you shouldn’t have to go through so much worry and effort to prove yourself wrong.
I have seen posts on FR by 'Christians' claiming that RCs are not really Christians ...
1. You are mixing up the theory of evolution. It does not address the beginning of life.
2. The Bible says man came from 'the dust of the ground'. Soup or dust. Whatever.
3. Doesn't the Bible talk about God using lightning bolts?
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.