Creationists

[daws101]

Does anyone believe that? Really, that poster has less understanding of biology than a third grader.

no it's just a fun way to watch the bullshit pile up.

Yeah you guys have laid it on kinda thick.

Big pile of pooh.

wrong again ! you're the pile and we're the shovels!

 

[daws101]

You can lead horses to water but you can't make them drink it.

A day will come that we will clearly see who was right

their's that loosely veiled threat again.
BTW who's we? ....you got a mouse in your pocket?

 

[Youwerecreated]

You can lead horses to water but you can't make them drink it.

A day will come that we will clearly see who was right

their's that loosely veiled threat again.
BTW who's we? ....you got a mouse in your pocket?

No threat, just a promise given a long time ago.

Joh 1:3 All things came into existence through him, and without him nothing was.

Eph 3:9 and to bring to light what is the fellowship of the mystery which from eternity has been hidden in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ;

Rev 4:11 O Lord, You are worthy to receive glory and honor and power, because You created all things, and for Your will they are and were created.

Rev 6:15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every freeman, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains.
Rev 6:16 And they said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him sitting on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb;
Rev 6:17 for the great day of His wrath has come, and who will be able to stand?

I definitely have more faith in God over sinful man.

 

[LOki]

You can lead horses to water but you can't make them drink it.

A day will come that we will clearly see who was right

their's that loosely veiled threat again.
BTW who's we? ....you got a mouse in your pocket?

No threat, just a promise given a long time ago.

Joh 1:3 All things came into existence through him, and without him nothing was.

Eph 3:9 and to bring to light what is the fellowship of the mystery which from eternity has been hidden in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ;

Rev 4:11 O Lord, You are worthy to receive glory and honor and power, because You created all things, and for Your will they are and were created.

Rev 6:15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every freeman, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains.
Rev 6:16 And they said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him sitting on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb;
Rev 6:17 for the great day of His wrath has come, and who will be able to stand?

I definitely have more faith in God over sinful man.

Yet you still cite the Bible rather than the WORD.

What a tool.

 

[daws101]

You can lead horses to water but you can't make them drink it.

A day will come that we will clearly see who was right

their's that loosely veiled threat again.
BTW who's we? ....you got a mouse in your pocket?

No threat, just a promise given a long time ago.

Joh 1:3 All things came into existence through him, and without him nothing was.

Eph 3:9 and to bring to light what is the fellowship of the mystery which from eternity has been hidden in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ;

Rev 4:11 O Lord, You are worthy to receive glory and honor and power, because You created all things, and for Your will they are and were created.

Rev 6:15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every freeman, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains.
Rev 6:16 And they said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him sitting on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb;
Rev 6:17 for the great day of His wrath has come, and who will be able to stand?

I definitely have more faith in God over sinful man.

any way you spin it it's still a threat...
as to sin it's conceived by man practiced by man...

 

[Youwerecreated]

their's that loosely veiled threat again.
BTW who's we? ....you got a mouse in your pocket?

No threat, just a promise given a long time ago.

Joh 1:3 All things came into existence through him, and without him nothing was.

Eph 3:9 and to bring to light what is the fellowship of the mystery which from eternity has been hidden in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ;

Rev 4:11 O Lord, You are worthy to receive glory and honor and power, because You created all things, and for Your will they are and were created.

Rev 6:15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every freeman, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains.
Rev 6:16 And they said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him sitting on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb;
Rev 6:17 for the great day of His wrath has come, and who will be able to stand?

I definitely have more faith in God over sinful man.

Yet you still cite the Bible rather than the WORD.

What a tool.

Not sure what you mean by this post ? the bible is the word of God.

 

[Youwerecreated]

their's that loosely veiled threat again.
BTW who's we? ....you got a mouse in your pocket?

No threat, just a promise given a long time ago.

Joh 1:3 All things came into existence through him, and without him nothing was.

Eph 3:9 and to bring to light what is the fellowship of the mystery which from eternity has been hidden in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ;

Rev 4:11 O Lord, You are worthy to receive glory and honor and power, because You created all things, and for Your will they are and were created.

Rev 6:15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every freeman, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains.
Rev 6:16 And they said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him sitting on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb;
Rev 6:17 for the great day of His wrath has come, and who will be able to stand?

I definitely have more faith in God over sinful man.

any way you spin it it's still a threat...
as to sin it's conceived by man practiced by man...

I don't spin i speak to the point that is why you guys disagree with me so. I call things the way I see it.

That is a promise through prophecy if you take it as a threat then that is on you.

God say's how it is gonna be and there is no changing that.

Man can use philosophy all they like to rid their thoughts of God ,but GOD doesn't go away and is always in the back of your mind even with the ones who reject him.

 

[FurthurBB]

Well thats the opinion of someone that doesnt understand evolution, so its understandable how you would think its impossible.

You have danced around the question yet again by trying to act witty and smart. Your not, and you fail.

You might have missed the point of the post, i think you skipped the last half, because it addressed the problem of complexity.

At what point in the sequence (greatest to least complexity): Eukaryote > Prokaryote > Virus > Viroid > Nucleotide, does it become too complex?

Is the ring of carbon atoms (nucleotide) too complex to form alone? Evidence would say otherwise.

Is a viroid too complex to form alone? Well a viroid is just a strand of nucleotides, so it shouldnt be much more complex than just one nucleotide.

How about a virus? A virus is just a viroid that has evolved more advanced structures, like a icosahedral capsid made of repeating proteins. So it cant really be too much more complex than a viroid.

See the picture here??

Which of those is too complex? The Virus? The Viroid? The Nucleotide?

You need to start understanding that the organism doesnt control the DNA, the DNA controls the organism.

Nope,but that is what you did.

I do understand that and have stated it so many times that the DNA of the parents and their parents will determine what the offspring will be.

It's not the gene itself,it is the information contained in the DNA. That is what makes us vastly different then chimps.

OK, what? "Its not the gene itself, its the information contained in the DNA." What?

You probably have some nuanced explanation for that but its a retarded statement.

A gene is just a sequence of nucleotides that code for a protein. Those nucleotides are the information. The gene is the information, the nucleotides are the units of information.

You clearly avoided the question again.

Which of those is too complicated to form alone???????

I mean, seriously, how can one continue to lie about their knowledge in the face of not knowing what genes are, what polymerase is, what gene pools are, how mutations work, how if the basics of DNA evolution were wrong, then so would paternity testing be, I could go on but isn't this enough to show the poster never even took anything more than middle school biology and doesn't even understand that?

 

[Youwerecreated]

I would like to introduce you to someone and his argument against your theory.

Can Neo-Darwinism Survive?
(This article comes from JohnDePoe.com to whom we are grateful).


In 1859 Charles Darwin published his seminal work, On the Origin of the Species. This publication sent the public in an uproar and has continued to do so to the present day. Why all the commotion over one book?

EDIT: SEE LINK / COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL SHOULD NOT EXCEED 3 PARAGRAPHS

Are you willing to follow the evidence where it points?


Can Neo-Darwinism Survive?: The Evidence Against Evolution


The author.

John M. DePoe


I am an Assistant Professor at Marywood University’s philosophy department. I have spent a lot of time pondering questions about knowledge, mind, and God. I may have even worked out some constructive answers to those questions.


Curriculum Vitae


EDIT: SEE LINK / COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL SHOULD NOT EXCEED 3 PARAGRAPHS





Education


EDIT: SEE LINK / COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL SHOULD NOT EXCEED 3 PARAGRAPHS



Publications


EDIT: SEE LINK / COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL SHOULD NOT EXCEED 3 PARAGRAPHS


For his research.

Philosophical Research & Interests

 

[FurthurBB]

Still no one offering a list of beneficial mutations that did not lead to a loss of the origional genetic information.

All organisms experience mutations but yet we don't see new morpohlogical change ,why ? If mutations are the answer for new genetic data.

I am warning you a day will come where there will be a new theory for macro-evolution because mutations are a deadend.

Mutations are not a dead end. Your a retard.

OK since your a molecular biologist you must understand how mutations in DNA are translated to physical deformities or benefits, right? Its a sequence a enzyme-catalyzed reactions transcribing DNA to RNA and RNA to protein

The structure of a protein is a sequence of a amino acids strung together and folded first into primary, then into secondary, and then into tertiary structures, sometimes even quaternary structures. The function of the protein is defined by its structure, most specifically the receptor site.

Mutations arent just "bad things". Mostly theyre just a small alteration in this giant structure of thousands of amino acids in a complex structure of hydrogen bonds. So most mutations dont do much. A mutation that doesnt do anything cant get weeded out, the its just part of the new offsprings DNA like any other nucleotide. When it reproduces, it may pass it on. Therefore neutral mutations become part of a gene pool when introduced, as long as that lineage doesnt die for other reasons. So over time, neutral mutations add up in a gene pool. This is fact.

Beneficial mutations therefore must be the same, except that organisms with these organisms may dominate a gene pool.

Getit?

Not to mention whole genome or even just gene duplications http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2447450/pdf/CFG-05-281.pdf, or horizontal transfer Horizontal gene transfer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia or plasmids, or viral DNA remnants. All things that only add to the genetic information. Then there are mutations that affect alternative splicing, no information is lost, none is gained, but function can definitely be lost or gained. It really does not matter what you say though, they cannot understand it and are guided by others who also either don't know what they are talking about or are deliberately dishonest.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Nope,but that is what you did.

I do understand that and have stated it so many times that the DNA of the parents and their parents will determine what the offspring will be.

It's not the gene itself,it is the information contained in the DNA. That is what makes us vastly different then chimps.

OK, what? "Its not the gene itself, its the information contained in the DNA." What?

You probably have some nuanced explanation for that but its a retarded statement.

A gene is just a sequence of nucleotides that code for a protein. Those nucleotides are the information. The gene is the information, the nucleotides are the units of information.

You clearly avoided the question again.

Which of those is too complicated to form alone???????

I mean, seriously, how can one continue to lie about their knowledge in the face of not knowing what genes are, what polymerase is, what gene pools are, how mutations work, how if the basics of DNA evolution were wrong, then so would paternity testing be, I could go on but isn't this enough to show the poster never even took anything more than middle school biology and doesn't even understand that?

Because my presuppositions are different then yours and my presuppositions give a different explanation then yours, does not prove your hate filled and insulting comment.

I posted just the guy for you he hits the nail squarely on the head.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Nope,but that is what you did.

I do understand that and have stated it so many times that the DNA of the parents and their parents will determine what the offspring will be.

It's not the gene itself,it is the information contained in the DNA. That is what makes us vastly different then chimps.

OK, what? "Its not the gene itself, its the information contained in the DNA." What?

You probably have some nuanced explanation for that but its a retarded statement.

A gene is just a sequence of nucleotides that code for a protein. Those nucleotides are the information. The gene is the information, the nucleotides are the units of information.

You clearly avoided the question again.

Which of those is too complicated to form alone???????

I mean, seriously, how can one continue to lie about their knowledge in the face of not knowing what genes are, what polymerase is, what gene pools are, how mutations work, how if the basics of DNA evolution were wrong, then so would paternity testing be, I could go on but isn't this enough to show the poster never even took anything more than middle school biology and doesn't even understand that?

This guy describes you to a T.

Am I Some Whacked Out Fundamentalist?

"Too many people believe that the only kind of person who could reject evolution must be some fundamentalist who reads the Genesis creation account in the most literal way. First, that is an ad hominem argument. That means such a point pokes fun at the person making the argument, and does not address whether or not that person has offered good or bad reasons for accepting or rejecting the argument. Secondly, that is simply false. There are many evangelical Christians who hold a high view of the Bible and believe the earth is more than 10,000 years old"

 

[LOki]

No threat, just a promise given a long time ago.

Joh 1:3 All things came into existence through him, and without him nothing was.

Eph 3:9 and to bring to light what is the fellowship of the mystery which from eternity has been hidden in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ;

Rev 4:11 O Lord, You are worthy to receive glory and honor and power, because You created all things, and for Your will they are and were created.

Rev 6:15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every freeman, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains.
Rev 6:16 And they said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him sitting on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb;
Rev 6:17 for the great day of His wrath has come, and who will be able to stand?

I definitely have more faith in God over sinful man.

Yet you still cite the Bible rather than the WORD.

What a tool.

Not sure what you mean by this post ? the bible is the word of God.

The Bible is the word of men. Literally. Moses, Matthew, John, etc...; men.

In their words--words of men, not the WORD of God--is where you have placed your conviction of certainty. You're just wrong again. So terribly, terribly, wrong again. Always, always, wrong; yet so certain you're right. Such is the nature of faith: the conviction of absolute certainty in the of the reality of some thing for which no support in valid verifiable evidence and/or valid logic has been established; the obstinate strength of resolute denial of valid verifiable evidence and valid logic is the "validating" quality of faith.

Your mind is so shut by obdurate faith, that it is shut also to God.

Sorry about your superstitious luck, retard.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Yet you still cite the Bible rather than the WORD.

What a tool.

Not sure what you mean by this post ? the bible is the word of God.

The Bible is the word of men. Literally. Moses, Matthew, John, etc...; men.

In their words--words of men, not the WORD of God--is where you have placed your conviction of certainty. You're just wrong again. So terribly, terribly, wrong again. Always, always, wrong; yet so certain you're right. Such is the nature of faith: the conviction of absolute certainty in the of the reality of some thing for which no support in valid verifiable evidence and/or valid logic has been established; the obstinate strength of resolute denial of valid verifiable evidence and valid logic is the "validating" quality of faith.

Your mind is so shut by obdurate faith, that it is shut also to God.

Sorry about your superstitious luck, retard.

They were inspired by God.

2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

Now let's consider contradictions of your theory.

Evolution Contradictions - Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums

Contradictions to the theory of Evolution

Caught in Contradictions, PZ Myers Claims "Evolutionary Theory Predicts Differences as well as Similarities" (and Therefore Predicts Nothing) (Updated) - Evolution News & Views

Does Entropy Contradict Evolution?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hV-rqCDhew]Evolution Bloopers Hoaxes and Contradictions - YouTube[/ame]

There you go you mental midget.

 

[LOki]

Not sure what you mean by this post ? the bible is the word of God.

The Bible is the word of men. Literally. Moses, Matthew, John, etc...; men.

In their words--words of men, not the WORD of God--is where you have placed your conviction of certainty. You're just wrong again. So terribly, terribly, wrong again. Always, always, wrong; yet so certain you're right. Such is the nature of faith: the conviction of absolute certainty in the of the reality of some thing for which no support in valid verifiable evidence and/or valid logic has been established; the obstinate strength of resolute denial of valid verifiable evidence and valid logic is the "validating" quality of faith.

Your mind is so shut by obdurate faith, that it is shut also to God.

Sorry about your superstitious luck, retard.

They were inspired by God.

2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

The Bible is the word of men. Literally. Moses, Matthew, John, etc...; men. Inspired by God or otherwise, you still prefer to place your conviction of certainty in the words of men rather than the WORD.

You're just wrong again. So terribly, terribly, wrong again. Always, always, wrong; yet so certain you're right. Such is the nature of faith: the conviction of absolute certainty in the of the reality of some thing for which no support in valid verifiable evidence and/or valid logic has been established; the obstinate strength of resolute denial of valid verifiable evidence and valid logic is the "validating" quality of faith.

Your mind is so shut by obdurate faith, that it is shut also to God.

Now let's consider contradictions of your theory.

Evolution Contradictions - Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums

Contradictions to the theory of Evolution

Caught in Contradictions, PZ Myers Claims "Evolutionary Theory Predicts Differences as well as Similarities" (and Therefore Predicts Nothing) (Updated) - Evolution News & Views

Does Entropy Contradict Evolution?

Evolution Bloopers Hoaxes and Contradictions - YouTube

There you go you mental midget.

All strawmen.

Sorry about your superstitious luck, retard.

But since you brought up contradictions, do care to straighten this one out Chucklefuck?

Once again you can see traits from both sides because genes have become fixed in each breed. That is because they only have genetic data to produce what they are.

Lions and tigers are not different sub-species, or breed, of a species ... they are DIFFERENT species, and the lack of reproductive potency between ligers due to their genetics literally PROVES it.

Is this from mutations or evolution or simply cross breeding ?

CHRIST! AGAIN? Obviously what we're looking at is the result of a hybrid cross between different species; a lion and a tiger in this case.

No problem at all for evolution, completely expected and thoroughly consistent with the theory; but another insurmountable problem for Creationism as ligers fail to "bring forth in ... ahem ... "kind""--that is to say that though male lions and female tigers ARE the same ... ahem ... "kind" of cat, apparently male ligers and female ligers are strangely NOT the same ... ahem ... "kind" of cat.​

​

 

[Youwerecreated]

The Bible is the word of men. Literally. Moses, Matthew, John, etc...; men.

In their words--words of men, not the WORD of God--is where you have placed your conviction of certainty. You're just wrong again. So terribly, terribly, wrong again. Always, always, wrong; yet so certain you're right. Such is the nature of faith: the conviction of absolute certainty in the of the reality of some thing for which no support in valid verifiable evidence and/or valid logic has been established; the obstinate strength of resolute denial of valid verifiable evidence and valid logic is the "validating" quality of faith.

Your mind is so shut by obdurate faith, that it is shut also to God.

Sorry about your superstitious luck, retard.

They were inspired by God.

2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

The Bible is the word of men. Literally. Moses, Matthew, John, etc...; men. Inspired by God or otherwise, you still prefer to place your conviction of certainty in the words of men rather than the WORD.

You're just wrong again. So terribly, terribly, wrong again. Always, always, wrong; yet so certain you're right. Such is the nature of faith: the conviction of absolute certainty in the of the reality of some thing for which no support in valid verifiable evidence and/or valid logic has been established; the obstinate strength of resolute denial of valid verifiable evidence and valid logic is the "validating" quality of faith.

Your mind is so shut by obdurate faith, that it is shut also to God.

Now let's consider contradictions of your theory.

Evolution Contradictions - Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums

Contradictions to the theory of Evolution

Caught in Contradictions, PZ Myers Claims "Evolutionary Theory Predicts Differences as well as Similarities" (and Therefore Predicts Nothing) (Updated) - Evolution News & Views

Does Entropy Contradict Evolution?

Evolution Bloopers Hoaxes and Contradictions - YouTube

There you go you mental midget.

All strawmen.

Sorry about your superstitious luck, retard.

Those are facts,face it your side is so desperate for evidence to support your wild unsupported theory they jump to the wrong conclusions and make stuff up.

Who is the retard ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

The Bible is the word of men. Literally. Moses, Matthew, John, etc...; men.

In their words--words of men, not the WORD of God--is where you have placed your conviction of certainty. You're just wrong again. So terribly, terribly, wrong again. Always, always, wrong; yet so certain you're right. Such is the nature of faith: the conviction of absolute certainty in the of the reality of some thing for which no support in valid verifiable evidence and/or valid logic has been established; the obstinate strength of resolute denial of valid verifiable evidence and valid logic is the "validating" quality of faith.

Your mind is so shut by obdurate faith, that it is shut also to God.

Sorry about your superstitious luck, retard.

They were inspired by God.

2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

The Bible is the word of men. Literally. Moses, Matthew, John, etc...; men. Inspired by God or otherwise, you still prefer to place your conviction of certainty in the words of men rather than the WORD.

You're just wrong again. So terribly, terribly, wrong again. Always, always, wrong; yet so certain you're right. Such is the nature of faith: the conviction of absolute certainty in the of the reality of some thing for which no support in valid verifiable evidence and/or valid logic has been established; the obstinate strength of resolute denial of valid verifiable evidence and valid logic is the "validating" quality of faith.

Your mind is so shut by obdurate faith, that it is shut also to God.

Now let's consider contradictions of your theory.

Evolution Contradictions - Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums

Contradictions to the theory of Evolution

Caught in Contradictions, PZ Myers Claims "Evolutionary Theory Predicts Differences as well as Similarities" (and Therefore Predicts Nothing) (Updated) - Evolution News & Views

Does Entropy Contradict Evolution?

Evolution Bloopers Hoaxes and Contradictions - YouTube

There you go you mental midget.

All strawmen.

Sorry about your superstitious luck, retard.

One other thing you posted to quickly to look at everything to call them all strawmen you LIAR

 

[cbirch2]

You can lead horses to water but you can't make them drink it.

A day will come that we will clearly see who was right

Yea when your on year death bed and jesus hasnt come back youll realize you lived your entire life for no reason.

Your last neuron will cease firing and your thoughts will stop. No soul will not depart, because everything about you is an electrical impulse in your brain.

 

[LOki]

Those are facts,face it your side is so desperate for evidence to support your wild unsupported theory they jump to the wrong conclusions and make stuff up.

Who is the retard ?

Again. Those are strawmen, and you're the retard.

One other thing you posted to quickly to look at everything to call them all strawmen you LIAR

Nonsense. I read the articles, but I'll admit that I didn't watch the whole vid; it's bullshit first minutes were enough evidence that it was nothing but the same disingenuous quote-mined strawmen that you typically produce.

And as usual, you and these Creationists cannot refute Evolution on any evidential or validly logical basis; so you create these strawmen, refute these strawmen, and then claim you refuted Evolution.

This process of yours has been demonstrated repeatedly, and this instance is just more evidence of it.

CONGRATULATIONS RETARD! BRAVO!

Again, since you brought up contadictions, why don't you straighten this one out Mr. Potato-head?

Once again you can see traits from both sides because genes have become fixed in each breed. That is because they only have genetic data to produce what they are.

Lions and tigers are not different sub-species, or breed, of a species ... they are DIFFERENT species, and the lack of reproductive potency between ligers due to their genetics literally PROVES it.

Is this from mutations or evolution or simply cross breeding ?

CHRIST! AGAIN? Obviously what we're looking at is the result of a hybrid cross between different species; a lion and a tiger in this case.

No problem at all for evolution, completely expected and thoroughly consistent with the theory; but another insurmountable problem for Creationism as ligers fail to "bring forth in ... ahem ... "kind""--that is to say that though male lions and female tigers ARE the same ... ahem ... "kind" of cat, apparently male ligers and female ligers are strangely NOT the same ... ahem ... "kind" of cat.

Care to explain that, Mr. Bible-Degree-in-Bible-Molecular-Bible-Biology?

Another delivered

to Youwerecreated and his superstitious "theory." POW!

 

[cbirch2]

The author.

John M. DePoe


I am an Assistant Professor at Marywood University’s philosophy department. I have spent a lot of time pondering questions about knowledge, mind, and God. I may have even worked out some constructive answers to those questions.


Curriculum Vitae


(shortened online version, last updated 6/7/2011)
Professional Employment


Fall 2011—Current: Assistant Professor, Marywood University
Fall 2010—Spring 2011: Visiting Instructor, Black Hawk College





Education


Ph.D. Philosophy, University of Iowa (2010)
Dissertation: “A Defense of the Knowledge Argument”
Director: Richard A. Fumerton


M.A. Philosophy, Western Michigan University (2006)


M.A. Religion, Hardin-Simmons University (2004)
Thesis: “Human Freedom and Divine Foreknowledge: An Analysis of Selected Solutions”
Director: Dan R. Stiver


B.A. Philosophy and Theology, Hardin-Simmons University (2002)



Areas of Specialization


Epistemology, Metaphysics, Philosophy of Mind, Philosophy of Religion



Areas of Competence


History of Modern Philosophy, Logic, Ethics



Publications


Peer-Reviewed Journal Articles


“Williamson on the Evidence for Skepticism,” Southwest Philosophical Studies, forthcoming.


“Defeating the Self-Defeat Argument for Phenomenal Conservatism,” Philosophical Studies 152, no. 3 (2011): 347-359.


“Vindicating a Bayesian Approach to Confirming Miracles: A Response to Jordan Howard Sobel’s Reading of Hume,” Philosophia Christi 10, no. 1 (2008): 229-38.


“In Defense of Classical Foundationalism: A Critical Evaluation of Plantinga's Argument that Classical Foundationalism is Self-Refuting,” The South African Journal of Philosophy 26, no. 3 (2007): 245-51.


“Theism, Atheism, and the Metaphysics of Free Will,” Southwest Philosophical Studies 27 (2005): 36-44.



For his research.

Philosophical Research & Interests

Ignorance! Pure ignorance!

Cambrian explosion

The consensus on the cambrian explosion is quite different then you understand. Its not the evolution of most animals we see today. Its the evolution of things like crustaceans and fish, not dogs and cats.

Darwins black box

Irreducible complexity? Really? How many times does that have to be disproved? The flagella is partially a Type III secretion system, 10 of the proteins function as a "needle" to inject toxin in some bacteria. So its not an example of irreducible complexity.

Usually tackling the problem of irreducible complexity requires knowledge of how proteins, cells, and even the human body work (remember when i had to teach you about the brain?). I think thats the problem were running into with this argument.

Genetics

UGH! The genetic mutation behind darwins finches isnt known??? really??

Bmp4 and Morphological Variation of Beaks in Darwin's Finches

protein BMP4 controls the structure of the beak during gestation. Again, the claim that "mutations in developmental genes are always harmful" is a giant simplification. more likely a change in the protein leads to a small change in the structure of some skeletal feature.

Note: I deleted everything but your sources, because i think they might say something about the quality of your copy-pasta. Esta no muy bueno señor....