The Evolution Fraud

[ChemEngineer]

bripat9643, you are just coming unglued here. It's why nobody should take you seriously in the S&T forum. What kind of degree do you have? HS diploma? GED?

As always, you fail to provide a shred of evidence to support your imbecile claims.

I will first address my dear friend, James Bond. Intellectualism is no indicator of rectitude or common sense. The Left pretends otherwise, but then again, they are Leftists so....

Now as to bripat9643, who continues to shreik in a manner most unseemly, you didn't respond to James Bond's question of your educational credentials, almost certainly because you have nothing worth mentioning. But then again, you talk just like the extremely hateful Richard Dawkins, a world famous evolutionary biologist with whom I have corresponded at some length regarding the numerous errors in his books on evolution. Dawkins ignored my comments on his errors and simply called me names, like his young understudy, bripat9643 does to everyone who disagrees with him. Unintelligent and unscientific, both.

 

[ChemEngineer]

Facts and logic are wasted on true believers like you. That's what it means to have faith. That's why ridicule is the only thing that has any chance of success.

Facts and logic are presented in abundance in the link you dismissed. Scholars worldwide are quoted. What professor in what university lectures with ridicule to have "any chance of success"? What scholar has recommended ridicule as a teaching instrument? Please enlighten everyone. I know it's extremely popular with the Left. It's all you have.

Now please join your Leftist friends on my Ignore List. If what some have to say is really so "idiotic," you shouldn't waste your time even reading it, should you? So I won't waste any more of my time reading your emotional rants, devoid of information, rationality, or common sense.

Arriverderci brutto

 

[bripat9643]

bripat9643, you are just coming unglued here. It's why nobody should take you seriously in the S&T forum. What kind of degree do you have? HS diploma? GED?

As always, you fail to provide a shred of evidence to support your imbecile claims.

I will first address my dear friend, James Bond. Intellectualism is no indicator of rectitude or common sense. The Left pretends otherwise, but then again, they are Leftists so....

Now as to bripat9643, who continues to shreik in a manner most unseemly, you didn't respond to James Bond's question of your educational credentials, almost certainly because you have nothing worth mentioning. But then again, you talk just like the extremely hateful Richard Dawkins, a world famous evolutionary biologist with whom I have corresponded at some length regarding the numerous errors in his books on evolution. Dawkins ignored my comments on his errors and simply called me names, like his young understudy, bripat9643 does to everyone who disagrees with him. Unintelligent and unscientific, both.

As I said previously, facts and logic are wasted on true believers like you. Faith is the rejection of facts and logic and your theories are all based on faith. The Bible is a collection of fairy tales. Whenever you quote the Bible as evidence to support some proposition, you automatically proving your claims are unjustified.

My education is irrelevant to this discussion. Your questions about it are simply an example of the fallacy known is "appeal to authority." You can have 1000 PHDs and still be wrong.

 

[Mac1958]

No one really knows where we came from, or how we got here.
Anyone who thinks they have The Answer is delusional and egotistical.

You can know. You choose not to.

Ah, so where do we come from?

Nice to know that I know someone with The Answer.
.

 

[bripat9643]

Facts and logic are wasted on true believers like you. That's what it means to have faith. That's why ridicule is the only thing that has any chance of success.

Facts and logic are presented in abundance in the link you dismissed. Scholars worldwide are quoted. What professor in what university lectures with ridicule to have "any chance of success"? What scholar has recommended ridicule as a teaching instrument? Please enlighten everyone. I know it's extremely popular with the Left. It's all you have.

Now please join your Leftist friends on my Ignore List. If what some have to say is really so "idiotic," you shouldn't waste your time even reading it, should you? So I won't waste any more of my time reading your emotional rants, devoid of information, rationality, or common sense.

Arriverderci brutto

You can't teach people who don't want to learn. Ridicule is the only thing that has any affect on the deliberately ignorant. I am not trying to teach you anything. that would be a waste of effort. All I'm trying to do is get you to feel reluctance or shame at spouting your idiocies.

The facts Bond presents are irrelevant to the subject under discussion.

 

[ChemEngineer]

“Many people don’t realize that science basically involves assumptions and faith. Wonderful things in both science and religion come from our efforts based on observations, thoughtful assumptions, faith and logic. (With the findings of modern physics, it) seems extremely unlikely (that the existence of life and humanity are ) just accidental.” – Charles Townes, Nobel Laureate and Professor of Physics at UC Berkeley

“It seems to me that when confronted with the marvels of life and the universe, one must ask why and not just how. The only possible answers are religious…. I find a need for God in the universe and in my own life.” - Arthur L. Schawlow, Professor of Physics at Stanford University, winner of the Nobel Prize in physics, believes that new scientific discoveries provide compelling evidence for a personal God.

“As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind.” ― Max Planck

"Only a rookie who knows nothing about science would say science takes away from faith. If you really study science, it will bring you closer to God." - James Tour, Professor of Biochemistry, Rice University

There is a kind of religion in science; it is the religion of a person who believes there is order and harmony in the Universe…This religious faith of the scientist is violated by the discovery that the world had a beginning under conditions in which the known laws of physics are not valid, and as a product of forces or circumstances we cannot discover. When that happens, the scientist has lost control. If he really examined the implications, he would be traumatized. - Robert Jastrow

 

[bripat9643]

“Many people don’t realize that science basically involves assumptions and faith. Wonderful things in both science and religion come from our efforts based on observations, thoughtful assumptions, faith and logic. (With the findings of modern physics, it) seems extremely unlikely (that the existence of life and humanity are ) just accidental.” – Charles Townes, Nobel Laureate and Professor of Physics at UC Berkeley

“It seems to me that when confronted with the marvels of life and the universe, one must ask why and not just how. The only possible answers are religious…. I find a need for God in the universe and in my own life.” - Arthur L. Schawlow, Professor of Physics at Stanford University, winner of the Nobel Prize in physics, believes that new scientific discoveries provide compelling evidence for a personal God.

“As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind.” ― Max Planck

"Only a rookie who knows nothing about science would say science takes away from faith. If you really study science, it will bring you closer to God." - James Tour, Professor of Biochemistry, Rice University

There is a kind of religion in science; it is the religion of a person who believes there is order and harmony in the Universe…This religious faith of the scientist is violated by the discovery that the world had a beginning under conditions in which the known laws of physics are not valid, and as a product of forces or circumstances we cannot discover. When that happens, the scientist has lost control. If he really examined the implications, he would be traumatized. - Robert Jastrow

Appeal to authority - a logical fallacy

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Arthur L. Schawlow, Professor of Physics at Stanford University, winner of the Nobel Prize in physics, believes that new scientific discoveries provide compelling evidence for a personal God.

Yes, all the discoveries you have been claiming to be fake, you embarrassing fraud. You can't even keep your shit straight. To ignore with the other Frannie sock puppets you go...

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Ah, so where do we come from?

Nice to know that I know someone with The Answer.

Weird that he just disappeared, eh?

 

[LuckyDuck]

The Insuperable Statistics of Life - Scientific Proof of Nature's God


Intelligent design has been viciously attacked, not so much for its claim that design can be detected, and not so much for the mathematical methods it uses, but because it trumps the belief system of those who consider themselves to be our ruling intellectual elite. It trumps Scientism. – Counting to God, A Personal Journey Through Science to Belief, by Douglas Ell, p 50

Dembski suggests a lower bound, a “universal probability limit,” of 1 in 10 to the 150. He gets that by taking the number of protons, neutrons and electrons in the visible universe (10 to the 80), multiplying it by the number of seconds since the creation of the universe (about 4 times 10 to the 17), and multiplying by 10 to the 43 units of “Planck time” in each second. (Planck time is theoretically the smallest time measurement that will ever be possible.) – p 52

----------------------

Now consider the universal probability limit of 1 in 10 the 150th power in comparison to any naturalistic synthesis of a modest human protein of just 300 amino acid residues in length.

1/20 x 1/20 x 1/20... 300 times is 1 chance in 20 to the 300th power, which is equal to 1 chance in 10 to the 390th power.

Titin is a protein in the muscles of everyone reading this. Titin is 34,350 amino acid residues in length. Please do the math. There are at least 5,000 different proteins in your body. Do the math. 1 chance in 10 to the 150th is statistically equivalent to 0.

Science is based on Theory until it is PROVEN factual. We keep seeing the dinosaur evolve from a slow moving reptile to a faster sauropod. Until we can figure out how to travel back in time, we will always have a theory of evolution, no facts.

Just FYI. There's a difference between an average theory and a scientific theory.
As for Evolution.....Paleontologists have a perfect example of evolution, it's called the horse. They have all the changing fossils down its lineage.
As for a deity (invisible fairy), the absurd way to look at any unknown is to, rather than continue studying the unknown, just raising both hands and saying...."the invisible thing in the sky did it!" Science doesn't have all the answers, but they have most and are continually trying to solve any unknowns.
Logic: Microbes gradually over millions of years, changing (evolving) and growing more complex.
Illogic/Ignorance: The invisible thingy in the sky whipped up everything.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

The Insuperable Statistics of Life - Scientific Proof of Nature's God


Intelligent design has been viciously attacked, not so much for its claim that design can be detected, and not so much for the mathematical methods it uses, but because it trumps the belief system of those who consider themselves to be our ruling intellectual elite. It trumps Scientism. – Counting to God, A Personal Journey Through Science to Belief, by Douglas Ell, p 50

Dembski suggests a lower bound, a “universal probability limit,” of 1 in 10 to the 150. He gets that by taking the number of protons, neutrons and electrons in the visible universe (10 to the 80), multiplying it by the number of seconds since the creation of the universe (about 4 times 10 to the 17), and multiplying by 10 to the 43 units of “Planck time” in each second. (Planck time is theoretically the smallest time measurement that will ever be possible.) – p 52

----------------------

Now consider the universal probability limit of 1 in 10 the 150th power in comparison to any naturalistic synthesis of a modest human protein of just 300 amino acid residues in length.

1/20 x 1/20 x 1/20... 300 times is 1 chance in 20 to the 300th power, which is equal to 1 chance in 10 to the 390th power.

Titin is a protein in the muscles of everyone reading this. Titin is 34,350 amino acid residues in length. Please do the math. There are at least 5,000 different proteins in your body. Do the math. 1 chance in 10 to the 150th is statistically equivalent to 0.

Science is based on Theory until it is PROVEN factual. We keep seeing the dinosaur evolve from a slow moving reptile to a faster sauropod. Until we can figure out how to travel back in time, we will always have a theory of evolution, no facts.

Just FYI. There's a difference between an average theory and a scientific theory.
As for Evolution.....Paleontologists have a perfect example of evolution, it's called the horse. They have all the changing fossils down its lineage.
As for a deity (invisible fairy), the absurd way to look at any unknown is to, rather than continue studying the unknown, just raising both hands and saying...."the invisible thing in the sky did it!" Science doesn't have all the answers, but they have most and are continually trying to solve any unknowns.
Logic: Microbes gradually over millions of years, changing (evolving) and growing more complex.
Illogic/Ignorance: The invisible thingy in the sky whipped up everything.

Really, what the fuck is a "Theory". Someone's idea of what MIGHT have happened. Just like back in the 60s' people thought Dino's were slow reptiles, now that "Theory" has changed until someone else can "PROVE" the past....

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

The Insuperable Statistics of Life - Scientific Proof of Nature's God


Intelligent design has been viciously attacked, not so much for its claim that design can be detected, and not so much for the mathematical methods it uses, but because it trumps the belief system of those who consider themselves to be our ruling intellectual elite. It trumps Scientism. – Counting to God, A Personal Journey Through Science to Belief, by Douglas Ell, p 50

Dembski suggests a lower bound, a “universal probability limit,” of 1 in 10 to the 150. He gets that by taking the number of protons, neutrons and electrons in the visible universe (10 to the 80), multiplying it by the number of seconds since the creation of the universe (about 4 times 10 to the 17), and multiplying by 10 to the 43 units of “Planck time” in each second. (Planck time is theoretically the smallest time measurement that will ever be possible.) – p 52

----------------------

Now consider the universal probability limit of 1 in 10 the 150th power in comparison to any naturalistic synthesis of a modest human protein of just 300 amino acid residues in length.

1/20 x 1/20 x 1/20... 300 times is 1 chance in 20 to the 300th power, which is equal to 1 chance in 10 to the 390th power.

Titin is a protein in the muscles of everyone reading this. Titin is 34,350 amino acid residues in length. Please do the math. There are at least 5,000 different proteins in your body. Do the math. 1 chance in 10 to the 150th is statistically equivalent to 0.

Science is based on Theory until it is PROVEN factual. We keep seeing the dinosaur evolve from a slow moving reptile to a faster sauropod. Until we can figure out how to travel back in time, we will always have a theory of evolution, no facts.

Just FYI. There's a difference between an average theory and a scientific theory.
As for Evolution.....Paleontologists have a perfect example of evolution, it's called the horse. They have all the changing fossils down its lineage.
As for a deity (invisible fairy), the absurd way to look at any unknown is to, rather than continue studying the unknown, just raising both hands and saying...."the invisible thing in the sky did it!" Science doesn't have all the answers, but they have most and are continually trying to solve any unknowns.
Logic: Microbes gradually over millions of years, changing (evolving) and growing more complex.
Illogic/Ignorance: The invisible thingy in the sky whipped up everything.

Okay, PROVE there isnt a God......

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Really, what the fuck is a "Theory".

Oops, you meant "scientific theory". Why not try looking it up, like a big boy?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Okay, PROVE there isnt a God......

Maybe there is. Why can't you be satisfied just to point at everything and say, "God did that?"

You can't, not because anything about science contradicts a belief in God, but because it contradicts your narrow, preferred dogma. So stop trying to spin it the wrong way.

 

[ChemEngineer]

Just FYI. There's a difference between an average theory and a scientific theory.

You pretend that *science* has a patina which is virtually perfect, and you further pretend that you Godless Leftists have exclusive rights to all of the virtues of *science*. Both of your claims are nonsensical.

As for Evolution.....Paleontologists have a perfect example of evolution, it's called the horse. They have all the changing fossils down its lineage.

You call a series of horse fossils of varying size "a perfect example"?
Examine the skeletons of chihuahuas and terriers and other dogs of varying sizes up to the largest one and tell me about that "evolution".
They're all DOGS. HELLO! And chihuahuas are not noticeably less intelligent than the largest dog with the biggest brain. So much for the "evolution" of big-brained humans. The biggest brained animal on earth is the sperm whale. Are they building computers? Communicating with us?

As for a deity (invisible fairy), the absurd way to look at any unknown is to, rather than continue studying the unknown, just raising both hands and saying...."the invisible thing in the sky did it!" Science doesn't have all the answers, but they (sic) have most and are continually trying to solve any unknowns.

As if only *science* seeks solutions and has this fantastic "self-correcting mechanism" you Godless Leftists swoon about.
1. Every animal has a "self-correcting mechanism."
2. Every PLANT has a "self-correcting mechanism." They seek sunlight and water. They heal cut branches. They respond to various stimuli.
3. BACTERIA even have this wondrous "self-correcting mechanism" you pretend and claim is so magical a property of *science*.

Logic: Microbes gradually over millions of years, changing (evolving) and growing more complex.
Illogic/Ignorance: The invisible thingy in the sky whipped up everything.

4. Nature's God is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence.
Your childish talk of "invisible thingy in the sky" is condescending ignorance. This visible universe is a product of Nature's God, Who is outside of it and time and matter.
5. If microbes continue to "evolve," then why do we still see them everywhere when Darwin CLAIMED they were replaced by the Magic Wand of Selection? They *evolved* into something far superior and more "fit" but they're still here? That is your illogic and ignorance working overtime.

http://ProofThereIsNoGod.blogspot.com

 

[Hollie]

Just FYI. There's a difference between an average theory and a scientific theory.

You pretend that *science* has a patina which is virtually perfect, and you further pretend that you Godless Leftists have exclusive rights to all of the virtues of *science*. Both of your claims are nonsensical.

As for Evolution.....Paleontologists have a perfect example of evolution, it's called the horse. They have all the changing fossils down its lineage.

You call a series of horse fossils of varying size "a perfect example"?
Examine the skeletons of chihuahuas and terriers and other dogs of varying sizes up to the largest one and tell me about that "evolution".
They're all DOGS. HELLO! And chihuahuas are not noticeably less intelligent than the largest dog with the biggest brain. So much for the "evolution" of big-brained humans. The biggest brained animal on earth is the sperm whale. Are they building computers? Communicating with us?

As for a deity (invisible fairy), the absurd way to look at any unknown is to, rather than continue studying the unknown, just raising both hands and saying...."the invisible thing in the sky did it!" Science doesn't have all the answers, but they (sic) have most and are continually trying to solve any unknowns.

As if only *science* seeks solutions and has this fantastic "self-correcting mechanism" you Godless Leftists swoon about.
1. Every animal has a "self-correcting mechanism."
2. Every PLANT has a "self-correcting mechanism." They seek sunlight and water. They heal cut branches. They respond to various stimuli.
3. BACTERIA even have this wondrous "self-correcting mechanism" you pretend and claim is so magical a property of *science*.

Logic: Microbes gradually over millions of years, changing (evolving) and growing more complex.
Illogic/Ignorance: The invisible thingy in the sky whipped up everything.

4. Nature's God is mentioned in the Declaration of Independence.
Your childish talk of "invisible thingy in the sky" is condescending ignorance. This visible universe is a product of Nature's God, Who is outside of it and time and matter.
5. If microbes continue to "evolve," then why do we still see them everywhere when Darwin CLAIMED they were replaced by the Magic Wand of Selection? They *evolved* into something far superior and more "fit" but they're still here? That is your illogic and ignorance working overtime.

http://ProofThereIsNoGod.blogspot.com

It’s stereotypical that religious extremists get angry and emotive when their sacred cows are challenged.

 

[Hollie]

“Many people don’t realize that science basically involves assumptions and faith. Wonderful things in both science and religion come from our efforts based on observations, thoughtful assumptions, faith and logic. (With the findings of modern physics, it) seems extremely unlikely (that the existence of life and humanity are ) just accidental.” – Charles Townes, Nobel Laureate and Professor of Physics at UC Berkeley

“It seems to me that when confronted with the marvels of life and the universe, one must ask why and not just how. The only possible answers are religious…. I find a need for God in the universe and in my own life.” - Arthur L. Schawlow, Professor of Physics at Stanford University, winner of the Nobel Prize in physics, believes that new scientific discoveries provide compelling evidence for a personal God.

“As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind.” ― Max Planck

"Only a rookie who knows nothing about science would say science takes away from faith. If you really study science, it will bring you closer to God." - James Tour, Professor of Biochemistry, Rice University

There is a kind of religion in science; it is the religion of a person who believes there is order and harmony in the Universe…This religious faith of the scientist is violated by the discovery that the world had a beginning under conditions in which the known laws of physics are not valid, and as a product of forces or circumstances we cannot discover. When that happens, the scientist has lost control. If he really examined the implications, he would be traumatized. - Robert Jastrow

Cutting and pasting a few opinions serves what purpose?

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Really, what the fuck is a "Theory".

Oops, you meant "scientific theory". Why not try looking it up, like a big boy?

Scientific Theory again is someone's theory until someone else proves it wrong. At one time the Earth was flat to shitfucks dumbasses like you, then Chris Columbus, you know that racist proved you dumbasses wrong, and again, so am I.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Okay, PROVE there isnt a God......

Maybe there is. Why can't you be satisfied just to point at everything and say, "God did that?"

You can't, not because anything about science contradicts a belief in God, but because it contradicts your narrow, preferred dogma. So stop trying to spin it the wrong way.

So what you are saying is that you cant prove that there isnt a God? Look in the mirror and see how symmetrical you face is. Random chance on chromosomes would look like this.

 

[Hollie]

The Insuperable Statistics of Life - Scientific Proof of Nature's God


Intelligent design has been viciously attacked, not so much for its claim that design can be detected, and not so much for the mathematical methods it uses, but because it trumps the belief system of those who consider themselves to be our ruling intellectual elite. It trumps Scientism. – Counting to God, A Personal Journey Through Science to Belief, by Douglas Ell, p 50

Dembski suggests a lower bound, a “universal probability limit,” of 1 in 10 to the 150. He gets that by taking the number of protons, neutrons and electrons in the visible universe (10 to the 80), multiplying it by the number of seconds since the creation of the universe (about 4 times 10 to the 17), and multiplying by 10 to the 43 units of “Planck time” in each second. (Planck time is theoretically the smallest time measurement that will ever be possible.) – p 52

----------------------

Now consider the universal probability limit of 1 in 10 the 150th power in comparison to any naturalistic synthesis of a modest human protein of just 300 amino acid residues in length.

1/20 x 1/20 x 1/20... 300 times is 1 chance in 20 to the 300th power, which is equal to 1 chance in 10 to the 390th power.

Titin is a protein in the muscles of everyone reading this. Titin is 34,350 amino acid residues in length. Please do the math. There are at least 5,000 different proteins in your body. Do the math. 1 chance in 10 to the 150th is statistically equivalent to 0.

Science is based on Theory until it is PROVEN factual. We keep seeing the dinosaur evolve from a slow moving reptile to a faster sauropod. Until we can figure out how to travel back in time, we will always have a theory of evolution, no facts.

Just FYI. There's a difference between an average theory and a scientific theory.
As for Evolution.....Paleontologists have a perfect example of evolution, it's called the horse. They have all the changing fossils down its lineage.
As for a deity (invisible fairy), the absurd way to look at any unknown is to, rather than continue studying the unknown, just raising both hands and saying...."the invisible thing in the sky did it!" Science doesn't have all the answers, but they have most and are continually trying to solve any unknowns.
Logic: Microbes gradually over millions of years, changing (evolving) and growing more complex.
Illogic/Ignorance: The invisible thingy in the sky whipped up everything.

Okay, PROVE there isnt a God......

I have definitive proof the gods don’t exist.

Prove I don’t.

Thanks.