Blowing Up Darwin

[PoliticalChic]

Well, not to derail the thread but in passing I'll mention that poofing species into existence is a fundamental misreading of the Bible. It's not Christianity's fault, it's institutional doctrine much like was pushed by the Church in the Middle Ages.

This particular version of it is dangerous though. Denial of scientific evidence is a very bad thing. It's bad for everyone, including the deniers. It smacks of Christian Science, where practitioners refuse to see a doctor because they claim faith cures all ills. The fundies aren't quite that bad, but some of them trend in the same direction.

"Denial of scientific evidence is a very bad thing."


Are you pretending that there is actual evidence?


The Royal Society conference exposed the fact that there isn't evidence.


"The new mechanisms offered by the critics of neo-Darwinism at the conference — whether treated as part of an extended neo-Darwinian synthesis or as the basis of a fundamentally new theory of evolution — did not attempt to explain how the information necessary to generating genuine novelty might have arisen. Instead, the mechanisms that were discussed produce at best minor microevolutionary changes, such as changes in wing coloration of butterflies or the celebrated polymorphisms of stickleback fish."

Why the Royal Society Meeting Mattered, in a Nutshell | Evolution News

The proceedings confirmed something that advocates of intelligent design, including Stephen Meyer and others, have been saying for years.

evolutionnews.org

Other scientists have admitted why they advance the hoax:

Professor Richard Lewontin, a geneticist (and self-proclaimed Marxist), is certainly one of the world’s leaders in evolutionary biology. He wrote this very revealing comment:

“‘We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.” Lewontin explains why one must accept absurdities: “…we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”



Why do you fear admitting that there may be a God?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

So you admit that peers do not matter.

Another lie. You're a very bad faith poster.

Every one of your posts requires a correction of your bad faith lies.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Are you pretending that there is actual evidence?

So embarrassing. Damn. Do yourself a favor and stay anonymous.

 

[scruffy]

So you admit that peers do not matter.

Go tell the OP.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So embarrassing. Damn. Do yourself a favor and stay anonymous.

Are you pretending that there is actual evidence?


The Royal Society conference exposed the fact that there isn't evidence.


"The new mechanisms offered by the critics of neo-Darwinism at the conference — whether treated as part of an extended neo-Darwinian synthesis or as the basis of a fundamentally new theory of evolution — did not attempt to explain how the information necessary to generating genuine novelty might have arisen. Instead, the mechanisms that were discussed produce at best minor microevolutionary changes, such as changes in wing coloration of butterflies or the celebrated polymorphisms of stickleback fish."

Why the Royal Society Meeting Mattered, in a Nutshell | Evolution News​

The proceedings confirmed something that advocates of intelligent design, including Stephen Meyer and others, have been saying for years.

evolutionnews.org




Other scientists have admitted why they advance the hoax:

Professor Richard Lewontin, a geneticist (and self-proclaimed Marxist), is certainly one of the world’s leaders in evolutionary biology. He wrote this very revealing comment:

“‘We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.” Lewontin explains why one must accept absurdities: “…we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”



Why do you fear admitting that there may be a God?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Go tell the OP.

Why?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Are you pretending that there is actual evidence?

Poor fool.

 

[scruffy]

So embarrassing. Damn. Do yourself a favor and stay anonymous.

That's what I told her too.

Maybe she's a masochist or something.

Keeps coming back for more lashes.

 

[scruffy]

.

Why do you fear admitting that there may be a God?

Why are you so thick?

You sling shit like a leftard.

You sure you're conservative?

 

[Robert W]

Another lie. You're a very bad faith poster.

Every one of your posts requires a correction of your bad faith lies.

I am to give an apology for your lies?

Are you pretending that there is actual evidence?


The Royal Society conference exposed the fact that there isn't evidence.


"The new mechanisms offered by the critics of neo-Darwinism at the conference — whether treated as part of an extended neo-Darwinian synthesis or as the basis of a fundamentally new theory of evolution — did not attempt to explain how the information necessary to generating genuine novelty might have arisen. Instead, the mechanisms that were discussed produce at best minor microevolutionary changes, such as changes in wing coloration of butterflies or the celebrated polymorphisms of stickleback fish."

Why the Royal Society Meeting Mattered, in a Nutshell | Evolution News​

The proceedings confirmed something that advocates of intelligent design, including Stephen Meyer and others, have been saying for years.

evolutionnews.org




Other scientists have admitted why they advance the hoax:

Professor Richard Lewontin, a geneticist (and self-proclaimed Marxist), is certainly one of the world’s leaders in evolutionary biology. He wrote this very revealing comment:

“‘We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.” Lewontin explains why one must accept absurdities: “…we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”



Why do you fear admitting that there may be a God?

We have a number of Mr. Failures to contend with. Sadly their tactics are that of common communists.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I am to give an apology for your lies?

Another bad faith oost.

Baby Jesus is not impressed with your lying.

 

[Robert W]

Another lie. You're a very bad faith poster.

Every one of your posts requires a correction of your bad faith lies.

So you still preach that the Sun orbits the Earth. How dumb are you?

 

[Robert W]

Another bad faith oost.

Baby Jesus is not impressed with your lying.

Thank god I don't have to apologize for your lies.

So you believe in Jesus!!!! Very revealing.

 

[Robert W]

the difference is, I presented verifiable, peer review data. You offered nothing by vaucous claims to gods.

Name the peers. Even you make claims that are not peer reviewed.

 

[Hollie]

"Denial of scientific evidence is a very bad thing."


Are you pretending that there is actual evidence?


The Royal Society conference exposed the fact that there isn't evidence.


"The new mechanisms offered by the critics of neo-Darwinism at the conference — whether treated as part of an extended neo-Darwinian synthesis or as the basis of a fundamentally new theory of evolution — did not attempt to explain how the information necessary to generating genuine novelty might have arisen. Instead, the mechanisms that were discussed produce at best minor microevolutionary changes, such as changes in wing coloration of butterflies or the celebrated polymorphisms of stickleback fish."

Why the Royal Society Meeting Mattered, in a Nutshell | Evolution News

The proceedings confirmed something that advocates of intelligent design, including Stephen Meyer and others, have been saying for years.

evolutionnews.org

Other scientists have admitted why they advance the hoax:

Professor Richard Lewontin, a geneticist (and self-proclaimed Marxist), is certainly one of the world’s leaders in evolutionary biology. He wrote this very revealing comment:

“‘We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.” Lewontin explains why one must accept absurdities: “…we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”



Why do you fear admitting that there may be a God?

As you probably don't know, the tabloid 'evolution news'' is aligned with the Disco'tute. A bunch of hack religious extremists who are unfit for anything regarding science.

 

[Hollie]

Name the peers. Even you make claims that are not peer reviewed.

You science denying religious extremists are laughable. If you're having trouble finding sources for peer review, you can find any number of science oriented publications or you can look at the curriculum of most any research university with a biology program.

 

[PoliticalChic]

That's what I told her too.

Maybe she's a masochist or something.

Keeps coming back for more lashes.

Did you actually write this????



“You are lying AGAIN.

Darwin did not offer to explain life on earth.”

Blowing Up Darwin Post #896




AI Overview
Learn more

Yes, Charles Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection was specifically designed to explain the variety of life on Earth, proposing that all living organisms descended from a common ancestor and diversified over time through adaptations to their environment, resulting in the vast array of species we see today.


You have brought into doubt everything you have written.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Why are you so thick?

You sling shit like a leftard.

You sure you're conservative?

Vulgarity?

Seems I have upset you......revealing that you lie about any "proof" for Darwin's thesis.


There is no "gradual speciation by small changes in organisms."


The fact that many organisms suddenly appear remains the fact to this day, over 150 years after Darwin admitted that this fact " may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained."

a. Evolutionary biologist and supporter of the theory, Stephen Gould admits same: "Stephen Jay Gould’s popular 1989 account of this work, Wonderful Life,[16]brought the matter into the public eye and raised questions about what the explosion represented. While differing significantly in details, both Whittington and Gould proposed that all modern animal phyla had appeared rather suddenly." Cambrian explosion - Wikipedia

 

[PoliticalChic]

I am to give an apology for your lies?

We have a number of Mr. Failures to contend with. Sadly their tactics are that of common communists.

I believe that a lot of the obfuscations and outright lies are their defense against embarrassment.

They have been tricked into believing in the bogus explanations for evolution.....and now they've been exposed.

 

[scruffy]

Did you actually write this????

You tell me. You seem to be the expert

“You are lying AGAIN.

I never lie.

I bring receipts.

I'm just the messenger.

Think of me like the FedEx guy.

Darwin did not offer to explain life on earth.”

Blowing Up Darwin Post #896




AI Overview
Learn more

Yes, Charles Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection was specifically designed to explain the variety of life on Earth, proposing that all living organisms descended from a common ancestor and diversified over time through adaptations to their environment, resulting in the vast array of species we see today.


You have brought into doubt everything you have written.

Doubt from you doesn't bother me.

You have yet to address the evidence.

Maybe grow up. That's what adults do.

Should I show you more naturally occurring Hox gene mutations?

You're not grossed out yet?

These occur in your perfectly designed world you know. Maybe the designer isn't so perfect after all?