1 registered members (Russ),
1,966
guests, and 26
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
Only The Best Herbs!
Your best source of world-class herbal information! More... |
#1 Book We've Found!
"Silver" fillings, mercury detox, & much more. More... |
For Mercury Detox
Prevent mercury reabsorption in the colon during detox. More... |
Softcover & Kindle
Excellent resource for mercury detox. More... |
For Mercury Chelation
For calcium chelation and heart health. More... |
Must for Every Parent
The most complete vaccine info on the planet. More... |
Finally.
Relief! More... |
Dr. Sherri Tenpenny
Get the info you need to protect yourself. More... |
What everyone's talking about!
Safe, powerful, timely! More... |
There is a difference!
A powerful brain antioxidant for use during Hg detox. More... |
This changed my life!
This book convinced me remove my fillings. More... |
This is what we use!
The only multi where you feel the difference. More... |
Hair Tests Explained!
Discover hidden toxicities, easily. More... |
Have Racing Thoughts?
Many use GABA for anxiety and better sleep. More... |
Help Them!
Natural health for pets. More... |
The Bible We Use!
King James with study notes by Bullinger. More... |
The Bible We Use!
King James with study notes by Bullinger. More... |
Food Additives
Protect your family from toxic food! More... |
|
|
|
|
Another mole? Big Whup...
#55987
03/01/10 03:20 AM
03/01/10 03:20 AM
|
OP
Master Elite Member
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,315
|
|
Evolution is not a theory in crisis. It is not teetering on the verge of collapse. It has not failed as a scientific explanation. There is evidence for evolution, gobs and gobs of it. It is not just speculation or a faith choice or an assumption or a religion. It is a productive framework for lots of biological research, and it has amazing explanatory power. There is no conspiracy to hide the truth about the failure of evolution. There has really been no failure of evolution as a scientific theory. It works, and it works well. (bold in the original) http://toddcwood.blogspot.com/2009/09/truth-about-evolution.htmlInternet evopushers are trying to make hay because the author of the above claims to be a "Creation Scientist". So what? Is any of it true as he claims? I say these things not because I'm crazy or because I've "converted" to evolution. I say these things because they are true. I'm motivated this morning by reading yet another clueless, well-meaning person pompously declaring that evolution is a failure. People who say that are either unacquainted with the inner workings of science or unacquainted with the evidence for evolution. (Technically, they could also be deluded or lying, but that seems rather uncharitable to say. Oops.) Well mole-man, I and several honest, very well-informed people have said as much and more that must break your little evopushing heart. Name-calling is no substitute for evidence, and all evidence found in the real world will always be consistent with the truth. -Which is why you must resort to the tactics invariably associated with the religion you support. "Evolution is not a theory in crisis." Only technically true, since there is no "Theory of Evolution". Most people aren't thinking about the vaporware status of this "theory", promised over 150 years ago and never delivered; most people equate evolutionism with some sort of "theory", and I take the liberty of assuming both the author and the target audience to be such. By that interpretation, evolutionism has always been in crisis, for it cannot bear any scrutiny whatsoever. It is an enormous argument-from-spam, the biggest ever compiled. Yet no element in the entire dungheap has any merit. Who can help thinklng "Duh! That's why they need so much spam."? At no point in history has it been the case that an informed, honest assessment of the facts would lead one to conclude the stories of evolutionism might even possibly be true. Evolutionism relies on ignorance and emotion exclusively, and this must be the case if one considers the implications of logic: that which is untrue cannot be proven true, and that which is true cannot be proven false. "It has not failed as a scientific explanation." Possibly the funniest line in the whole spiel. Evolutionism fails to be scientific and fails to explain anything. Evolutionism cannot explain emotion, rational thought, instinct, communication, sex, DNA, recombination, epigenetics, any organ you can name, or any other observed feature of life. Not a single one. Oh they can tell stories, but such stories always cheat. Ask how the eye evolved, and they'll tell you it started as a primitive eye and added feature after feature. That doesn't explain where the primitive eye came from. Neither is there any evidence whatsoever that life adds features over time - just sheer, flagrant, unscientific speculation. "There is evidence for evolution, gobs and gobs of it." Uh-huh. Is this one of those trick equivocations? Does "evolution" here mean "change in allele frequencies"? If so, the author simply is being in-your-face flat-out dishonest. Now if it is meant that there is evidence supporting the common evostories like fish evolving into amphibians evolving into reptiles evolving into birds and mammals, etc. then we may most confidently conclude it to be untrue. If there were such evidence, with all the billions plus being spent hyping the religion, someone somewhere would be presenting a little of it. Instead, all we ever get is super stupid propaganda and lies. "Gobs and gobs" - what a joke! I've been practicing evolutionology for a few years now, and I haven't seen them present anything at all that supports their case when honestly evaluated. Special assumptions must always be introduced, or (most often) smuggled in with statements that take them for granted. Again, consider the implications of logic. Where could such evidence come from? Perhaps the author, like his kinsmen, considers conclusions to be evidence? "It is not just speculation or a faith choice or an assumption or a religion." Just a silly assertion. Even a dabbler investigating the issue cannot help but see the religious aspects. And circular reasoning amounts to blind faith, in case you never noticed. Assuming that which you claim to prove is just a childish way of claiming you have power or authority to dictate reality, blasphemous if you think about it, and an outright contradiction of any claims not to believe in a supreme being. "It is a productive framework for lots of biological research, and it has amazing explanatory power." Oh some of us are quite aware of the attempts to apply the religious beliefs in the real world. "Vestigial" organs removed from patients are but the tip of the iceberg. Genocide, abortion, eugenics, all sorts of stuff have come from attempting to implement the "lessons of evolution". It has amazing power as an excuse for evil, but even evopushers have admitted no positive practical applications can be found. Only by taking credit for the benefits of understanding evolutionism's antithesis, Mendelian Genetics, have propagandists put forward claims of useful practical applications in biology. "There is no conspiracy to hide the truth about the failure of evolution. There has really been no failure of evolution as a scientific theory. It works, and it works well." Modern evolutionism was a matter of conspiracy from the word go! The general public doesn't learn about the doings of the X Club in school, but anyone can easily research the history. Things bog down a bit when the story is followed to other countries, simply because so many became involved. I think 'collaboration' is a better term than conspiracy. And it continues to this day. Every extant "trust" or "foundation" founded by a robber baron is pushing it right now. Carnagie, Ford, Rockefeller - you name it. All the facts stand arrayed against the assertion. It's nothing but a play on ignorance. Not only do they involve themselves directly, they also work to influence the governments of the world, and they've had some success getting funding for pro-evolutionism propaganda over the years, in case nobody's noticed. But really, what was the point of the piece in question? Is any informed creationist going to read it and say "Hey, maybe reality's not real after all"? Results 1 - 50 of about 179 http://www.google.com/search?num=50&hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&q=%22There+is+evidence+for+evolution%2C+gobs+and+gobs+of+it.%22&btnG=Search What a waste. I haven't surveyed 'em all - not even close, but without even following the links it's easy to see that this message has simply been one to comfort the evopushers of the world. I don't see any creationists questioning creationism at all. And the author even forgot to plug wiki and talkdeceptions as "honest, reliable, trustworthy sources", or some such - not a very thorough job. Man, what a waste of time! Think about it. Go to the trouble to infiltrate and get people thinking you're a creationist, only to blow the investment on a ridiculous propaganda piece like this. (Okay, he's written another, but it ain't much better and will have zero impact.) That's all? Evolutionism truly is bankrupt. One wishes just such success to all moles!
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
Re: Another mole? Big Whup...
[Re: CTD]
#55988
03/01/10 03:38 AM
03/01/10 03:38 AM
|
OP
Master Elite Member
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,315
|
|
Not a religion? From the vaporware thread: In science, how a conclusion is reached is every bit as important as the conclusion itself. That's what makes it science. In every religion invented by the men of this world, maintaining the conclusion is the ultimate issue, regardless of how it is obtained.
From the indifference of evolutionists (not just locally, but everywhere I discuss it), it is clear as crystal that Evolutionism falls squarely within the category of Religions invented by men.
I couldn'tve said it better myself. They can't make any of it work out and they very well know it; yet they still insist it has to be their way. It's not only a religion - it's one of the most fanatical religions ever!
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
Re: Another mole? Big Whup...
[Re: CTD]
#55989
03/01/10 04:58 AM
03/01/10 04:58 AM
|
OP
Master Elite Member
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,315
|
|
There was more, of course It is my own faith choice to reject evolution, because I believe the Bible reveals true information about the history of the earth that is fundamentally incompatible with evolution. That's one approach. It is taken by Christians who see origins as insignificant. It is not taken by creationists - or anyone else - who takes the time to actually investigate. This is the very same kind of "faith" evolutionists themselves possess: "I believe it's so because I believe it's so - end of story." But rejecting 2 + 2 = 871 need not be a matter of faith. Things that are untrue can be rejected on other grounds, and evolutionism is clearly and unambiguously untrue. There have been many atheistic evolutionists who took the time to actually look at the cock-eyed junk for what it is, and guess what? Go on guess. They ain't atheistic evolutionists any more. Know something else? Nowhere in scripture is there a requirement for anyone to have faith in order to know God exists - quite the opposite. Faith is required for salvation. Satan knows God exists, doesn't he? Cain knew. Pharoah knew. Balaam knew. The premise is totally bogus. For a person to claim to be knowledgeable, and claim faith is somehow required to reject a religion that demands more blind faith than any other, bar none ...is logically absurd. Even to imply it, as we have seen in this case, is irrational. Scriptures regarding the matter are well known. Evidence is all around and the scoffers are willfully ignorant. Why would anyone want you thinking otherwise? There's a link to still more on down the page. http://toddcwood.blogspot.com/2009/10/nature-of-faith.htmlIt seems to me that Jesus does not want us relying on evidence. What? What!!! 'Nuf said. This mole wants to comfort the enemy by saying the Christian's faith is just as lame as their own. He does not want us to rely on the evidences that He graciously supplies but instead He wants us to have confidence in His voice alone. And from his reaction to the Pharisees and Sadducees, it would appear that any scoffer's demand for evidence will be rebuffed. If they will not believe Moses and the prophets (i.e. the Word of God), no amount of miracles will convince them. Know what? The fulfillment of what Moses and the prophets predicted is evidence. Fer cryin' out loud, who can this propaganda be targeting? As a point of application, I think modern creationists would be much better served if we stopped coddling their every doubt and fear with new "evidence for creation" and instead helped to wean them off evidence altogether. Ha ha - somehow I don't think providing evidence which would lead people to understand truth was ever on the agenda - do you? Of course that's not all. How could he stop without slandering honest people? After many years in this debate, I've come to the uncomfortable conclusion that we creationists have made an idol of our own arguments. Insisting the 2 + 2 = 4 , insisting that the law of noncontradiction always applies - this is not idolatry. True is true and false is false; the two are mutually exclusive. Not terribly original either - he's just parroting another famous mole. Also relevant: http://toddcwood.blogspot.com/2009/11/nature-of-idolatry.htmlLet's just look at the most basic point of all: When Adam and Eve sinned, why didn't God just wipe them out and start over again? Scoffers just love second-guessing God, don't they? Why curse the creation then become a part of it and suffer a humiliating death in order to fix it? How does that make any sense? It doesn't. Uh-huh - not to some people. Where do we commonly see such arrogance, hmmm? It is the foolishness of God, and it is wiser than any human wisdom. How do I know? I know by faith. Double-talking twisting of scripture. Wonder who inspired that... - not! Origins discussions do tend toward Genesis quite a bit, and we all know who was the first to twist God's words. I greatly fear that our faith in Christ has been replaced with an idolatry of apologetics. We are to always be prepared to give what? C'mon, you remember... The clown's whole gist is that we are (or should be) just what the liars all say we are: a bunch of idiots blindly believing whatever we want to believe - in other words, just like themselves. Then again, maybe I'm mistaken? I'M A CREATIONIST! reaffirms my doctrinal commitments so I can't be written off as an evolutionist in disguise or some other nonsense like that. Oops! I should've read further, shouldn't I? One especially amusing person suggested that I was stupid, possibly bipolar, or just a liar (scroll down here to Lester10's post). So much for that whole "love your enemies" thing. Yep - still tryin' to take bogus pokes at Christians. I guess if someone lies through their teeth for all the world to see, the "loving" response is to just shut up and let it go... I'm not so "charitable" these days as to write it off as possible stupidity when people go far beyond the bounds of what can be accomplished with innate stupidity. Nobody believes it for an instant - nobody on either side. I do not pretend to think it's stupidity; that would be highly inconsistent with the facts available, and impossible even in theory - like I say, there are limits to what can be accomplished naturally; some thing take deliberate effort. Anyone claiming 2 + 2 = anything other than 4 , for example, is not just naturally stupid. What an Evolander! No, Todd, you ain't foolin' nobody. It would be wise to just give up on the project, but you've demonstrated fairly well your relationship vs. wisdom. I expect to see plenty more - that is, if I take the time to look.
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
Re: Another mole? Big Whup...
[Re: CTD]
#56085
03/05/10 10:24 PM
03/05/10 10:24 PM
|
OP
Master Elite Member
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,315
|
|
I am not pleased to note that there are some Christian creationists who are predisposed to gullibility, or underestimate the fanatical dedication of the enemy - or both. The mask is off, people, if you read and pay careful attention. Thinking otherwise merely because you don't want to believe moles exist is no better than believing anything else simply because you want to believe it. Desire generally needs to be excluded from evaluations. Indeed, Todd is making it hard for you to maintain your delusion even if you want to. He has now decided to arrogantly talk down to real men-of-science quite directly. I just flipped through the latest Acts & Facts (March 2010).
Oh my.
Let's go over some basics on transposable elements and their relationship to the argument for evolution, specifically the common ancestry of humans and chimpanzees. http://toddcwood.blogspot.com/2010/03/primer-on-transposable-elements.htmlI read his blibber-blabber, and the Acts & Facts article on transposable elements. http://www.icr.org/article/5177/Now I have some basics to go over. Assertions don't mean diddly. Brian Thomas says there are functions for transposable elements and presents specific examples. The arrogant one simply asserts that they don't really have any function. Assertions don't mean diddly. Assertions don't mean diddly. Assertions don't mean diddly. Got that basic? Truly pathetic, and inexcusable for anyone claiming to be an informed participant. We know from over 100 years of "vestigial organ" lies that ignorance is not a sound basis for conclusions. Not knowing what something does does not mean it does nothing. Another basic: Similarity does not prove biological relationships. "Homology" is broken everywhere one looks. It has never worked as a scientific system of evaluation at any point in history - not for one single minute. There can be no "powerful" evidence from "homology" of any type until someone invents a rule that corresponds to the real world. These are very fundamental issues, things even a dabbler knows. Even his evo-buddies must blush if they consider his lame attempt to belittle Mr. Thomas. He presents neither actual fact or sound reasoning which would lead anyone to doubt a single thing Mr. Thomas said. He appeals entirely to emotion, since his "opposition" consists of nothing but substanceless smoke. Go ahead little boy, talk down to your betters some more. See how long the erroneously "charitable" will continue to be fooled by your act.
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
Re: Another mole? Big Whup...
[Re: CTD]
#56784
04/22/10 01:49 AM
04/22/10 01:49 AM
|
OP
Master Elite Member
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,315
|
|
Speaking of moles, I was amused to observe the NCSE whining when one got caught. A noted evangelical Old Testament scholar resigned from his faculty position at a seminary in the wake of a controversy over his public acceptance of evolution. ...
...Milton explained that Reformed Theological Seminary's faculty members are allowed to have different views on creation, but "Darwinian views, and any suggestion that humans didn't arrive on earth directly from being created by God (as opposed to having evolved from other forms of life), are not allowed, he said, and faculty members know this." Evolanders may choose to whine and try to pretend their agent was wronged, but it doesn't work. Expressing regret for the turmoil, he added, "I find no fault with the RTS administration; in fact, I think they did the right thing." They're slipping as propagandists, too. Notice the somewhat unflattering picture? Can't say it doesn't fit - if anything it looks too appropriate.
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
|