Creationists

[Youwerecreated]

If you could be honest, you might consider some introspection and ask yourself why your failed arguments which are intended to vilify science are cut and pasted with your knowledge that those articles are fraudulent.

There's no reason to blame science for the failure of supernaturalism to be useful as a tool for knowledge.

I have been waiting on your rebuttal

I provided that rebuttal.

I provided you with a rebuttal to the comment you posted by Crick. Have you forgotten already?

I provided you with the portion of of Crick's comment you fraudently and dishonestly omitted in your post.

I've had an extensive and interesting discussion of this very topic (evolution), on another board. The major difference being that although there were disagreements, there was never anything like the fraudulent copying and pasting, childish insults and juvenile name-calling that typifies your posts and the posts of your alternate log-in.

I discovered early on that the discussion in this thread representing the creationist side was contrived and phony.

Kid, your ignorance is starting to bother me.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Ah, YWC, why do you things like this? Things keep getting better and better.....first, better is entirely subjective. Second, evolution is not about improvement so much as change. An organism might have a feature which makes it better suited to survive and reproduce in it's current environment, but that same creature might not be as well suited if the environment changes. You make it sound as though everything is supposed to be better than everything which came before, all on some sort of path to perfection. That's not the idea at all.

I have heard different spins on this many times. I've even been accused of building a strawman by Loki when I made the claim evolutionists believe we came from a single cell organism. I've done some internet reading on common descent and it seems the overwhelming consensus among evolutionists is that we came from a bacteria. I posted a few Wiki links (gag ) a few back that talk about common ancestry. Would you not agree we Homo Sapiens are "better" than an E coli? What am I missing in what the common belief among evolutionary "scientist" regarding this topic?

As I said to YWC, by what scale are humans better than a bacteria? Are bacteria unable to survive and reproduce sufficiently?

No, I don't think humans are better, in the context of this conversation. Different and better are not the same; more complex and better are not the same.

Really monty ? come on now, there is no comparison to any living creature on this planet to a human. We are far superior to any organism on this planet.

 

[UltimateReality]

I will assert right now, that it is your religious fundamentalism that disallows you to examine evolution honestly, because, as I said, it is not a very hard concept to grasp. I hate to break into this, but I can't help it. As I explain such simple concepts, it is obvious that you are simply resisting the use of your intellect, in applying it to these concepts. Therefore, they never seem to make sense to you. You must, by the nature of your belief, deflect any and all implications that might intrude or contradict your version of reality which is informed by a literal interpretation of the bible. Am I wrong? In other words, you won't allow it to make sense, even to yourself. Sure, you could say the same of me with respect to god

No, not with respect to God, but with respect to the TOE. The theory is falling down around you even as I type this, yet you refuse to confront the evidence, lost in your ignorance and holding tight to your materialist beliefs. I predict the theory of evolution as we know it today will have totally ceased to exist 10 years from now. There just won't be any scientific evidence to support it and very intelligent people will ask themselves, "How could we have been so foolish?".

Here is the funny thing. I am the one trying to keep religion out of these scientific discussions but you and Holly keep interjecting it back in with every post. Your post above is quite childish really. You presuppose that you are immune from your beliefs and prejudices and are making untainted, un-influenced and un-biased observations. It is this false belief that you are immune to such things that makes you the most lost of all. Not realizing your own weaknesses or influences, you think everyone else is messed up, but you never turn the light of introspection back on yourself.

I challenged you with questions on the "common ancestor" or "common ancestry". I am not the one always quoting this terminology so therefore, it is not my responsibility to define it. Even though it is YOU who doesn't even know the correct terminology, what you are describing above is the Last Universal Ancestor, not ancestor of two distinct species. What I do find laughable is that major advances in genetics were supposed to support Darwinism, support the tree. So when they didn't, when it was obvious there was no scientific evidence for the tree of life, they come up with a preposterous band aid addition to the theory. Now we have the theory of, and I do mean theory, of horizontal gene transfer. So now individual organisms somehow exchanged genetic material? So let's see the study. Let's see the experiment that shows this occurring in the lab in anything other than viruses(are viruses alive??).

So while you call me blind, do you see how pathetic this is for you? The tree of life is totally shredded by genetic evidence, but it is still in the textbooks, still taught in school, and even you are still referring to the tree!!!! Now we have another un-provable speculation about why the genome of multiple species won't cooperate with Darwin's tree of life. Yeah, gene trading. That's must have been what causes this. Yep, its gene trading. You know its the only logical explanation for why real science doesn't prove this sad materialistic theory I cling to.

I'm sorry but it is you that refuses to look at the scientific evidence.

The fact is they have been onto horizontal gene transfer since 1985 but their religion wouldn't let them give up on the tree, as in your ignorance, calling others ignorant, you haven't either.

Will this link suffice for Holly. Most surely not. She doesn't actually do any reading..

http://www.vme.net/hgt/

 

[Youwerecreated]

What if God is an alien being that looks like ET?
What will folks think then?

I suppose God could look anyway he wants.

 

[Youwerecreated]

1. TOE is After abiogensis: after the creation of self-replicating organic matter, or the formation of the first primitive cells containing RNA that could replicate themselves. Once reproduction occurs and is self-acting, then you can have evolution, I would think (I'm no expert). I don't actually know, but this is my intuition, evolution is merely change in allele frequencies.


2. Common ancestry can go back as far back as you like. If You are talking about the common ancestry for all living things, then it would likely be a proto-cell as described above, but I don't know, and neither does anyone else. We'd hope to find evidence, but it is unlikely we ever will, in my opnion. If you are talking about common ancestry for all mammals, then you don't go back as far. It depends on who's common ancestor you are talking about.

Regarding the common ancestor, I guess I was really looking for the mythical creature the evolutionists always refer to in their arguments. There is info on the web like the wiki links I posted, but I was just wondering if there is really a consensus. And if there isn't, why would anyone refer to the "common ancestor" in an argument (Holly)?

Common ancestor for who? You have to specify. A common ancestor for two closely related animals will be have existed relatively recently, such as for man and chimp, being in the last few million years. Yet, if you picked two distantly related species you will only find a common ancestor much farther back in time, for instance, a human and a fish. We shared a common ancestor a very, very long time ago. This really isn't that hard to imagine. Just picture a tree diagram. Same idea. Evolution is pretty simple as an idea. I don't understand how it gives creationists such a hard time, yet they seem to muck it up and present a strawman for it without meaning to. Maybe if you actually tried to understand it.

Will you pass the bong to someone else please.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I will assert right now, that it is your religious fundamentalism that disallows you to examine evolution honestly, because, as I said, it is not a very hard concept to grasp. I hate to break into this, but I can't help it. As I explain such simple concepts, it is obvious that you are simply resisting the use of your intellect, in applying it to these concepts. Therefore, they never seem to make sense to you. You must, by the nature of your belief, deflect any and all implications that might intrude or contradict your version of reality which is informed by a literal interpretation of the bible. Am I wrong? In other words, you won't allow it to make sense, even to yourself. Sure, you could say the same of me with respect to god, but what is there to understand about the religious version? God did it... okay. I get it. Evolution actually takes applied brain power to understand, much more so than "god did it." Yet, creationists want to kick and scream and I postulate, simply do not let the information in. Evolution is a highly intuitive and logical process that makes perfect sense and is backed by evidence. To deny it is simply to show your own resistance to the idea. I can understand, being that your faith rests on a certain body of information, and that is highly threatened by evolution, so you must actively counteract it. I think this is sad. The bible doesn't say "interpret me literally." There are plenty of christians who believe in evolution and the big bang. Why do fundies think they have it right? Being literal isn't virtuous or a sign of faith that god will reward, but rather, indiscretion with deciding what is true. In other words, it is the easy route. I would think that in this age of science, science itself would have garnered some credibility being that the computers we are all using were produced by it, and the incredible progression we have seen technologically, since the enlightenment, has been simply astounding, and entirely due to scientific exploration. But, seemingly, religious fundamentalists, while existing in world surrounded by technology and utilizing it daily, deny its application to our past. I find it intellectually dishonest, at the very least.

I'm sorry to level these kind of statements, but this discussion has been going on for 384 pages. It's time someone calls a spade a spade. You're rejection of evolution and support of ID is absolutely contingent upon your belief that a book written 2,000 years ago is completely inerrant. If you are ever able to step back and look at this objectively someday, you will see how silly it is to any non-fundamentalists.

B.S. I was educated in a secular college,the crazies had a shot at me, I just saw through the nonsense as many have.

 

[Youwerecreated]

According to your theory life went from one single celled organism to complex organisms, the rest of what we see on this planet. Have humans always existed ? humans are the most advanced organism through your theory things do improve over time.How can you deny what I said ?

By what scale are humans the 'most advanced'? Sure, we might be the most intelligent, but we aren't the fastest, the strongest, we don't have armor, we don't fly, etc. etc.

Maybe this is you attempting to put an intelligence behind the workings of life even when you discuss evolution. Evolution does not attempt to do anything. It is just a description of the changes life undergoes. Something might change and be better suited to the current environment, but then change back at a future date because of a difference in the environment.

So let me get this straight, you don't think intelligent beings are a higher life form? Last time I checked, ants were building spaceships and sending people to the moon. (but they are darn good tunnel diggers.)

 

[UltimateReality]

According to your theory life went from one single celled organism to complex organisms, the rest of what we see on this planet. Have humans always existed ? humans are the most advanced organism through your theory things do improve over time.How can you deny what I said ?

By what scale are humans the 'most advanced'? Sure, we might be the most intelligent, but we aren't the fastest, the strongest, we don't have armor, we don't fly, etc. etc.

Maybe this is you attempting to put an intelligence behind the workings of life even when you discuss evolution. Evolution does not attempt to do anything. It is just a description of the changes life undergoes. Something might change and be better suited to the current environment, but then change back at a future date because of a difference in the environment.

Thanks for more evidence we didn't evolve. Man has the ability to destroy every predator on this planet.

Look Ma!! Opposable thumbs!!

 

[Youwerecreated]

By what scale are humans the 'most advanced'? Sure, we might be the most intelligent, but we aren't the fastest, the strongest, we don't have armor, we don't fly, etc. etc.

Maybe this is you attempting to put an intelligence behind the workings of life even when you discuss evolution. Evolution does not attempt to do anything. It is just a description of the changes life undergoes. Something might change and be better suited to the current environment, but then change back at a future date because of a difference in the environment.

Thanks for more evidence we didn't evolve. Man has the ability to destroy every predator on this planet.

Look Ma!! Opposable thumbs!!

Vivid imaginations,don't you just love them.

 

[Youwerecreated]

By what scale are humans the 'most advanced'? Sure, we might be the most intelligent, but we aren't the fastest, the strongest, we don't have armor, we don't fly, etc. etc.

Maybe this is you attempting to put an intelligence behind the workings of life even when you discuss evolution. Evolution does not attempt to do anything. It is just a description of the changes life undergoes. Something might change and be better suited to the current environment, but then change back at a future date because of a difference in the environment.

Thanks for more evidence we didn't evolve. Man has the ability to destroy every predator on this planet.

Look Ma!! Opposable thumbs!!

Do you know how they catch monkeys in africa ? they put a banana in a box with holes in it and the monkey sticks his hand in there and grabs that banana and they just walk up and net him, the monkey won't let go of the banana.

 

[Hollie]

I have been waiting on your rebuttal

I provided that rebuttal.

I provided you with a rebuttal to the comment you posted by Crick. Have you forgotten already?

I provided you with the portion of of Crick's comment you fraudently and dishonestly omitted in your post.

I've had an extensive and interesting discussion of this very topic (evolution), on another board. The major difference being that although there were disagreements, there was never anything like the fraudulent copying and pasting, childish insults and juvenile name-calling that typifies your posts and the posts of your alternate log-in.

I discovered early on that the discussion in this thread representing the creationist side was contrived and phony.

Kid, your ignorance is starting to bother me.

Doesn't Christianity have commandments that disallow lying?

At the very least, I would have thought that your mommy or at least your 1st grade teacher would told you what lying is and why it's bad.

But here we are with you not being able to make a connection between copying and pasting falsified "quotes" that define the entirety of your argument and the poverty of your argument.

 

[Hollie]

Thanks for more evidence we didn't evolve. Man has the ability to destroy every predator on this planet.

Look Ma!! Opposable thumbs!!

Do you know how they catch monkeys in africa ? they put a banana in a box with holes in it and the monkey sticks his hand in there and grabs that banana and they just walk up and net him, the monkey won't let go of the banana.

We are left to assume that you are have given up copying and pasting falsified quotes in favor of spamming.

 

[Hollie]

By what scale are humans the 'most advanced'? Sure, we might be the most intelligent, but we aren't the fastest, the strongest, we don't have armor, we don't fly, etc. etc.

Maybe this is you attempting to put an intelligence behind the workings of life even when you discuss evolution. Evolution does not attempt to do anything. It is just a description of the changes life undergoes. Something might change and be better suited to the current environment, but then change back at a future date because of a difference in the environment.

Thanks for more evidence we didn't evolve. Man has the ability to destroy every predator on this planet.

Look Ma!! Opposable thumbs!!

This represents the sum total of your education?

 

[Hollie]

I have heard different spins on this many times. I've even been accused of building a strawman by Loki when I made the claim evolutionists believe we came from a single cell organism. I've done some internet reading on common descent and it seems the overwhelming consensus among evolutionists is that we came from a bacteria. I posted a few Wiki links (gag ) a few back that talk about common ancestry. Would you not agree we Homo Sapiens are "better" than an E coli? What am I missing in what the common belief among evolutionary "scientist" regarding this topic?

As I said to YWC, by what scale are humans better than a bacteria? Are bacteria unable to survive and reproduce sufficiently?

No, I don't think humans are better, in the context of this conversation. Different and better are not the same; more complex and better are not the same.

Really monty ? come on now, there is no comparison to any living creature on this planet to a human. We are far superior to any organism on this planet.

As usual, you are clueless. Far superior in what way?

Many animals have a far superior sense of smell than humans, many animals have superior running speed, many animals have superior strength, many animals have superior eyesight, etc.

You open yourself to ridicule because you haven't a clue as to the subject matter you blather on about.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I provided that rebuttal.

I provided you with a rebuttal to the comment you posted by Crick. Have you forgotten already?

I provided you with the portion of of Crick's comment you fraudently and dishonestly omitted in your post.

I've had an extensive and interesting discussion of this very topic (evolution), on another board. The major difference being that although there were disagreements, there was never anything like the fraudulent copying and pasting, childish insults and juvenile name-calling that typifies your posts and the posts of your alternate log-in.

I discovered early on that the discussion in this thread representing the creationist side was contrived and phony.

Kid, your ignorance is starting to bother me.

Doesn't Christianity have commandments that disallow lying?

At the very least, I would have thought that your mommy or at least your 1st grade teacher would told you what lying is and why it's bad.

But here we are with you not being able to make a connection between copying and pasting falsified "quotes" that define the entirety of your argument and the poverty of your argument.

You have no idea of what you are talking about. I don't lie I give you my opinions which happen to be some what in aghreement with creationist and IDer's. I have told you for eleven years I worked in mutation and cell research. Things I talk about don't just come from a book or wiki.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Look Ma!! Opposable thumbs!!

Do you know how they catch monkeys in africa ? they put a banana in a box with holes in it and the monkey sticks his hand in there and grabs that banana and they just walk up and net him, the monkey won't let go of the banana.

We are left to assume that you are have given up copying and pasting falsified quotes in favor of spamming.

Are you gonna do a rebuttal to what I wrote or are you gonna continue to be an ignorant tool ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

As I said to YWC, by what scale are humans better than a bacteria? Are bacteria unable to survive and reproduce sufficiently?

No, I don't think humans are better, in the context of this conversation. Different and better are not the same; more complex and better are not the same.

Really monty ? come on now, there is no comparison to any living creature on this planet to a human. We are far superior to any organism on this planet.

As usual, you are clueless. Far superior in what way?

Many animals have a far superior sense of smell than humans, many animals have superior running speed, many animals have superior strength, many animals have superior eyesight, etc.

You open yourself to ridicule because you haven't a clue as to the subject matter you blather on about.

Hollie, why didn't those traits get passed onto humans ?there would be no reason for natural selection to eliminate them from our gene pool. We are far more intelligent. List goes on and on how we are superior.

 

[Hollie]

Kid, your ignorance is starting to bother me.

Doesn't Christianity have commandments that disallow lying?

At the very least, I would have thought that your mommy or at least your 1st grade teacher would told you what lying is and why it's bad.

But here we are with you not being able to make a connection between copying and pasting falsified "quotes" that define the entirety of your argument and the poverty of your argument.

You have no idea of what you are talking about. I don't lie I give you my opinions which happen to be some what in aghreement with creationist and IDer's. I have told you for eleven years I worked in mutation and cell research. Things I talk about don't just come from a book or wiki.

Have you forgetting about the bastardized "quote" from Crick? Apparently you have. To jig your memory, a substantial part of the commentary offered by Crick was deleted, thus altering the context of his comments.

That is just more of the lies and dishonest tactics coming from the creationist crowd.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Doesn't Christianity have commandments that disallow lying?

At the very least, I would have thought that your mommy or at least your 1st grade teacher would told you what lying is and why it's bad.

But here we are with you not being able to make a connection between copying and pasting falsified "quotes" that define the entirety of your argument and the poverty of your argument.

You have no idea of what you are talking about. I don't lie I give you my opinions which happen to be some what in aghreement with creationist and IDer's. I have told you for eleven years I worked in mutation and cell research. Things I talk about don't just come from a book or wiki.

Have you forgetting about the bastardized "quote" from Crick? Apparently you have. To jig your memory, a substantial part of the commentary offered by Crick was deleted, thus altering the context of his comments.

That is just more of the lies and dishonest tactics coming from the creationist crowd.

Ask yourself why Crick made such a comment without having an explanation about the origins for the genetic code ?

 

[Hollie]

Really monty ? come on now, there is no comparison to any living creature on this planet to a human. We are far superior to any organism on this planet.

As usual, you are clueless. Far superior in what way?

Many animals have a far superior sense of smell than humans, many animals have superior running speed, many animals have superior strength, many animals have superior eyesight, etc.

You open yourself to ridicule because you haven't a clue as to the subject matter you blather on about.

Hollie, why didn't those traits get passed onto humans ?there would be no reason for natural selection to eliminate them from our gene pool. We are far more intelligent. List goes on and on how we are superior.

Among the most basic precepts of evolution is fitness for survival. I've spent considerable time detailing this subject elsewhere but that was among people who had a much more honest and knowledgeable approach. In no way are humans "far superior to any organism on the planet".

Yours was a misunderstanding and/or a purposeful falsification of the facts.