Why is naturalism considered scientific and creationism is not ?

[Youwerecreated]

Darwin was a real soft spoken and a nice guy. He was also wrong.

Darwins book.

Was Darwin racist, and did evolution push racism? (souls, grace, America) - Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Atheism, God, Universe, Science, Spirituality, Faith, Evidence - City-Data Forum

 

[Hollie]

Darwin was a real soft spoken and a nice guy. He was also wrong.

Darwins book.

Was Darwin racist, and did evolution push racism? (souls, grace, America) - Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Atheism, God, Universe, Science, Spirituality, Faith, Evidence - City-Data Forum

"Darwin was a racist" is a typical claim coming from fundie creationists. It's a tactic borne of desperation. As the claims to supermagical events performed by the gawds have been refuted as nothing more than appeals to fear and superstition, Christian extremists are left with nothing more than personal attacks.

"Evolution is racist", is another canard of creationist. It's unfortunate that creationist, being wholly ignorant of the TOE, tend to make such ignorant claims. It's actually part ignorance and part hate, self-hate that drives their agenda.

In the time since publication of "Origin of Species", the TOE has only become better supported. With advancements in the biological sciences, paleontology, chemistry, etc., the methods of analysis have become more exacting. This enrages the angry fundamentalists and leaves them with no options but to thump their bibles and increase their strident wailing.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Darwin was a real soft spoken and a nice guy. He was also wrong.

Darwins book.

Was Darwin racist, and did evolution push racism? (souls, grace, America) - Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Atheism, God, Universe, Science, Spirituality, Faith, Evidence - City-Data Forum

"Darwin was a racist" is a typical claim coming from fundie creationists. It's a tactic borne of desperation. As the claims to supermagical events performed by the gawds have been refuted as nothing more than appeals to fear and superstition, Christian extremists are left with nothing more than personal attacks.

"Evolution is racist", is another canard of creationist. It's unfortunate that creationist, being wholly ignorant of the TOE, tend to make such ignorant claims. It's actually part ignorance and part hate, self-hate that drives their agenda.

In the time since publication of "Origin of Species", the TOE has only become better supported. With advancements in the biological sciences, paleontology, chemistry, etc., the methods of analysis have become more exacting. This enrages the angry fundamentalists and leaves them with no options but to thump their bibles and increase their strident wailing.

The fact is, his comments and theory lead to racial prejudice and the bible was correct by saying we are all brothers and came from the same parents and children of God.

Science has proven why the different features exist and it had nothing to do with evolution. Don't look like some races are inferior and are being wiped out by the superior race. Hmm the proof is they all still exist and we are all equal. Score one for the bible over Darwin and his theory.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Darwin was a real soft spoken and a nice guy. He was also wrong.

Darwins book.

Was Darwin racist, and did evolution push racism? (souls, grace, America) - Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Atheism, God, Universe, Science, Spirituality, Faith, Evidence - City-Data Forum

"Darwin was a racist" is a typical claim coming from fundie creationists. It's a tactic borne of desperation. As the claims to supermagical events performed by the gawds have been refuted as nothing more than appeals to fear and superstition, Christian extremists are left with nothing more than personal attacks.

"Evolution is racist", is another canard of creationist. It's unfortunate that creationist, being wholly ignorant of the TOE, tend to make such ignorant claims. It's actually part ignorance and part hate, self-hate that drives their agenda.

In the time since publication of "Origin of Species", the TOE has only become better supported. With advancements in the biological sciences, paleontology, chemistry, etc., the methods of analysis have become more exacting. This enrages the angry fundamentalists and leaves them with no options but to thump their bibles and increase their strident wailing.

Darwin might have been less of a racist but it was his words that you ignore heck it was written in his book. Many people around Darwin were most certainly racists though.

 

[Hollie]

Darwin was a real soft spoken and a nice guy. He was also wrong.

Darwins book.

Was Darwin racist, and did evolution push racism? (souls, grace, America) - Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Atheism, God, Universe, Science, Spirituality, Faith, Evidence - City-Data Forum

"Darwin was a racist" is a typical claim coming from fundie creationists. It's a tactic borne of desperation. As the claims to supermagical events performed by the gawds have been refuted as nothing more than appeals to fear and superstition, Christian extremists are left with nothing more than personal attacks.

"Evolution is racist", is another canard of creationist. It's unfortunate that creationist, being wholly ignorant of the TOE, tend to make such ignorant claims. It's actually part ignorance and part hate, self-hate that drives their agenda.

In the time since publication of "Origin of Species", the TOE has only become better supported. With advancements in the biological sciences, paleontology, chemistry, etc., the methods of analysis have become more exacting. This enrages the angry fundamentalists and leaves them with no options but to thump their bibles and increase their strident wailing.

Darwin might have been less of a racist but it was his words that you ignore heck it was written in his book. Many people around Darwin were most certainly racists though.

It’s actually comical to watch as you backslide from post to post.

The fact is, it doesn’t make a great deal of difference what Darwin’s personal beliefs were. It’s the strength of his theory that extremist Christian nut-bars take issue with. The theory has only been better supported and confirmed as the methods of scientific testing have become more exacting. I’ve always it laughable that creationist spend such enormous amounts of time and energy attacking Charles Darwin as a cover for their wholly inadequate appeals to gawds and supernaturalism. Were he able to see the results of his theory today, I have to believe that Darwin would be quite surprised at the many fields of science now brought into service that support his theory.

 

[Youwerecreated]

"Darwin was a racist" is a typical claim coming from fundie creationists. It's a tactic borne of desperation. As the claims to supermagical events performed by the gawds have been refuted as nothing more than appeals to fear and superstition, Christian extremists are left with nothing more than personal attacks.

"Evolution is racist", is another canard of creationist. It's unfortunate that creationist, being wholly ignorant of the TOE, tend to make such ignorant claims. It's actually part ignorance and part hate, self-hate that drives their agenda.

In the time since publication of "Origin of Species", the TOE has only become better supported. With advancements in the biological sciences, paleontology, chemistry, etc., the methods of analysis have become more exacting. This enrages the angry fundamentalists and leaves them with no options but to thump their bibles and increase their strident wailing.

Darwin might have been less of a racist but it was his words that you ignore heck it was written in his book. Many people around Darwin were most certainly racists though.

It’s actually comical to watch as you backslide from post to post.

The fact is, it doesn’t make a great deal of difference what Darwin’s personal beliefs were. It’s the strength of his theory that extremist Christian nut-bars take issue with. The theory has only been better supported and confirmed as the methods of scientific testing have become more exacting. I’ve always it laughable that creationist spend such enormous amounts of time and energy attacking Charles Darwin as a cover for their wholly inadequate appeals to gawds and supernaturalism. Were he able to see the results of his theory today, I have to believe that Darwin would be quite surprised at the many fields of science now brought into service that support his theory.

Hollie he was wrong for thinking that some races were not equal and that natural selection would eliminate the subspecies of humans. His assumption was wrong then and it is still wrong today.

 

[Hollie]

Darwin might have been less of a racist but it was his words that you ignore heck it was written in his book. Many people around Darwin were most certainly racists though.

It’s actually comical to watch as you backslide from post to post.

The fact is, it doesn’t make a great deal of difference what Darwin’s personal beliefs were. It’s the strength of his theory that extremist Christian nut-bars take issue with. The theory has only been better supported and confirmed as the methods of scientific testing have become more exacting. I’ve always it laughable that creationist spend such enormous amounts of time and energy attacking Charles Darwin as a cover for their wholly inadequate appeals to gawds and supernaturalism. Were he able to see the results of his theory today, I have to believe that Darwin would be quite surprised at the many fields of science now brought into service that support his theory.

Hollie he was wrong for thinking that some races were not equal and that natural selection would eliminate the subspecies of humans. His assumption was wrong then and it is still wrong today.

As expected, you are clueless regarding the ToE. There is nothing in the theory that requires natural selection will eliminate a subspecies of humans.

Taking your science from Harun Yahya makes you look like quite the fool.

 

[Youwerecreated]

It’s actually comical to watch as you backslide from post to post.

The fact is, it doesn’t make a great deal of difference what Darwin’s personal beliefs were. It’s the strength of his theory that extremist Christian nut-bars take issue with. The theory has only been better supported and confirmed as the methods of scientific testing have become more exacting. I’ve always it laughable that creationist spend such enormous amounts of time and energy attacking Charles Darwin as a cover for their wholly inadequate appeals to gawds and supernaturalism. Were he able to see the results of his theory today, I have to believe that Darwin would be quite surprised at the many fields of science now brought into service that support his theory.

Hollie he was wrong for thinking that some races were not equal and that natural selection would eliminate the subspecies of humans. His assumption was wrong then and it is still wrong today.

As expected, you are clueless regarding the ToE. There is nothing in the theory that requires natural selection will eliminate a subspecies of humans.

Taking your science from Harun Yahya makes you look like quite the fool.

Do you have this short of a memory or is this on purpose?

Was Darwin racist, and did evolution push racism? (souls, grace, America) - Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Atheism, God, Universe, Science, Spirituality, Faith, Evidence - City-Data Forum

 

[Hollie]

Hollie he was wrong for thinking that some races were not equal and that natural selection would eliminate the subspecies of humans. His assumption was wrong then and it is still wrong today.

As expected, you are clueless regarding the ToE. There is nothing in the theory that requires natural selection will eliminate a subspecies of humans.

Taking your science from Harun Yahya makes you look like quite the fool.

Do you have this short of a memory or is this on purpose?

Was Darwin racist, and did evolution push racism? (souls, grace, America) - Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Atheism, God, Universe, Science, Spirituality, Faith, Evidence - City-Data Forum

Cutting and pasting links to competing message boards does nothing to support your case for gawds and magic. As with so many religious zealots, you hope to vilify Darwin. However, your limited science background and your failure to understand the basic model of the ToE leaves you ill prepared to criticize the specifics.

With your limited understanding of science and the natural world, I’m sure it comes as a crushing blow to your fundamentalist views that evolution does disprove ID’ism. As we know, ID’ism is a remanufactured theology for those like you who contend that will insist that mankind has reached the limits of knowledge and so must confine all the rest of our unanswered questions to the mind-numbing "the gawds did it" explanation.

The real engine of hate driving the religious extremist agenda revolves around your gawds being left out of science. Since science cannot investigate the supernatural, religious extremists hope to redefine science. You and the extremists like you perceive science and knowledge as a direct threat to your imposition of fear and superstition. Remarkably, you and those like you are totally in denial about the damage you have inflicted on humanity with the imposition of such fear and superstition. Your objections to the ToE are not scientific, but theological. You rail against the ToE with not a whit of understanding of the basic model.

Ultimately, shouldn't the question be, "How does ID disprove Evolution"? It doesn't, of course. And despite objections from the Christian extremists, evolution still happens. If the hand of one or more gawds (and there is no reason why your gawds are necessarily included in that roll call) is behind existence, there is no evidence of it. In any case, Science cannot investigate the supernatural. There may be things science can never explain, and it accepts that limitation. But the Kansas school board notwithstanding, Science investigates natural phenomena, natural causes, natural effects. The supernatural is not in view.

The Dover case and other humiliating defeats of the Christian extremist aganda amply proved that ID is nothing but a theological attempt to put Christian fundamentalism into the public schools. The goals of the Discovery Institute and fundamentalist charlatans like them are to impose Christian fundamentalism upon schools and government. They wish to transform this nation into a theocracy, intolerant of non-Christians or Christians who do not agree with them, and imposing their concept of "morality" upon the population.


I hope to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won’t have any public schools. The churches will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy day that will be.

- Jerry Falwell



There will never be world peace until Gods house and Gods people are given their rightful place of leadership at the top of the world.

- Pat Robertson

 

[Youwerecreated]

Your IGNORANCE is astounding. There is nothing in evolution that makes any such claim. You probably got that canard from one of your idiotic "creationist" sources.

Not up on your history of the theory are ya ? Your ignorance knows no bounds.


The Biology of Skin Color: Black and White



The evolution of race was as simple as the politics of race is complex
By Gina Kirchweger

Ten years ago, while at the university of Western Australia, anthropologist Nina Jablonski was asked to give a lecture on human skin. As an expert in primate evolution, she decided to discuss the evolution of skin color, but when she went through the literature on the subject she was dismayed. Some theories advanced before the 1970s tended to be racist, and others were less than convincing.

The following is what follows your abbreviated "quote". Something I've noticed with certainty is that just as your Christian creationist ministries will edit, falsify and parse "quotes", you employ the same dishonest and sleazy tactics.

The Biology of . . . Skin Color | DiscoverMagazine.com

No longer. Jablonski and her husband, George Chaplin, a geographic information systems specialist, have formulated the first comprehensive theory of skin color. Their findings, published in a recent issue of the Journal of Human Evolution, show a strong, somewhat predictable correlation between skin color and the strength of sunlight across the globe. But they also show a deeper, more surprising process at work: Skin color, they say, is largely a matter of vitamins.

Did you notice her speak of theories being racists. You need to quit resorting to dishonesty ,and that is what you're doing when people are showing you are wrong.

 

[Youwerecreated]

As expected, you are clueless regarding the ToE. There is nothing in the theory that requires natural selection will eliminate a subspecies of humans.

Taking your science from Harun Yahya makes you look like quite the fool.

Do you have this short of a memory or is this on purpose?

Was Darwin racist, and did evolution push racism? (souls, grace, America) - Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Atheism, God, Universe, Science, Spirituality, Faith, Evidence - City-Data Forum

Cutting and pasting links to competing message boards does nothing to support your case for gawds and magic. As with so many religious zealots, you hope to vilify Darwin. However, your limited science background and your failure to understand the basic model of the ToE leaves you ill prepared to criticize the specifics.

With your limited understanding of science and the natural world, I’m sure it comes as a crushing blow to your fundamentalist views that evolution does disprove ID’ism. As we know, ID’ism is a remanufactured theology for those like you who contend that will insist that mankind has reached the limits of knowledge and so must confine all the rest of our unanswered questions to the mind-numbing "the gawds did it" explanation.

The real engine of hate driving the religious extremist agenda revolves around your gawds being left out of science. Since science cannot investigate the supernatural, religious extremists hope to redefine science. You and the extremists like you perceive science and knowledge as a direct threat to your imposition of fear and superstition. Remarkably, you and those like you are totally in denial about the damage you have inflicted on humanity with the imposition of such fear and superstition. Your objections to the ToE are not scientific, but theological. You rail against the ToE with not a whit of understanding of the basic model.

Ultimately, shouldn't the question be, "How does ID disprove Evolution"? It doesn't, of course. And despite objections from the Christian extremists, evolution still happens. If the hand of one or more gawds (and there is no reason why your gawds are necessarily included in that roll call) is behind existence, there is no evidence of it. In any case, Science cannot investigate the supernatural. There may be things science can never explain, and it accepts that limitation. But the Kansas school board notwithstanding, Science investigates natural phenomena, natural causes, natural effects. The supernatural is not in view.

The Dover case and other humiliating defeats of the Christian extremist aganda amply proved that ID is nothing but a theological attempt to put Christian fundamentalism into the public schools. The goals of the Discovery Institute and fundamentalist charlatans like them are to impose Christian fundamentalism upon schools and government. They wish to transform this nation into a theocracy, intolerant of non-Christians or Christians who do not agree with them, and imposing their concept of "morality" upon the population.


I hope to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won’t have any public schools. The churches will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy day that will be.

- Jerry Falwell



There will never be world peace until Gods house and Gods people are given their rightful place of leadership at the top of the world.

- Pat Robertson

Why because it's making you look bad for trying to defend his comments ?

Those quotes are from darwins books heck what I was saying is right there in the title of the book and confirmed later in the his book. Then he showed other examples of racism by evolutionists in the early 1,900's but I showed a more recent claim that blacks were less intelligent according to an english geneticist.

Face it the theory promoted racism and they made false predictions and faulty assumptions.

You are a fine one to talk heck you copy and paste from the words of Ruggedtouch from other forums and we are not positive that is you.

 

[Hollie]

Not up on your history of the theory are ya ? Your ignorance knows no bounds.


The Biology of Skin Color: Black and White



The evolution of race was as simple as the politics of race is complex
By Gina Kirchweger

Ten years ago, while at the university of Western Australia, anthropologist Nina Jablonski was asked to give a lecture on human skin. As an expert in primate evolution, she decided to discuss the evolution of skin color, but when she went through the literature on the subject she was dismayed. Some theories advanced before the 1970s tended to be racist, and others were less than convincing.

The following is what follows your abbreviated "quote". Something I've noticed with certainty is that just as your Christian creationist ministries will edit, falsify and parse "quotes", you employ the same dishonest and sleazy tactics.

The Biology of . . . Skin Color | DiscoverMagazine.com

No longer. Jablonski and her husband, George Chaplin, a geographic information systems specialist, have formulated the first comprehensive theory of skin color. Their findings, published in a recent issue of the Journal of Human Evolution, show a strong, somewhat predictable correlation between skin color and the strength of sunlight across the globe. But they also show a deeper, more surprising process at work: Skin color, they say, is largely a matter of vitamins.

Did you notice her speak of theories being racists. You need to quit resorting to dishonesty ,and that is what you're doing when people are showing you are wrong.

Did you notice that you still cannot offer a single reference to anything in the ToE that addresses race?

You again offer nothing more than self-refuting argumentation when you cut and paste what you don't understand.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Both comments are from nuts and I have very little respect for both pastors. That day will never come until God comes and has the resurrection and judges mankind.

See God shows you some of these characters were speaking and doing for themselves and not truly representing God in the way they should have.

Mat 7:18 It is not possible for a good tree to give bad fruit, and a bad tree will not give good fruit.
Mat 7:19 Every tree which does not give good fruit is cut down and put in the fire.
Mat 7:20 So by their fruits you will get knowledge of them.
Mat 7:21 Not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord, will go into the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the pleasure of my Father in heaven.
Mat 7:22 A great number will say to me on that day, Lord, Lord, were we not prophets in your name, and did we not by your name send out evil spirits, and by your name do works of power?
Mat 7:23 And then will I say to them, I never had knowledge of you: go from me, you workers of evil.

 

[Youwerecreated]

The following is what follows your abbreviated "quote". Something I've noticed with certainty is that just as your Christian creationist ministries will edit, falsify and parse "quotes", you employ the same dishonest and sleazy tactics.

The Biology of . . . Skin Color | DiscoverMagazine.com

Did you notice her speak of theories being racists. You need to quit resorting to dishonesty ,and that is what you're doing when people are showing you are wrong.

Did you notice that you still cannot offer a single reference to anything in the ToE that addresses race?

You again offer nothing more than self-refuting argumentation when you cut and paste what you don't understand.

Do you not understand the father of your theory and his cronies were racists ? Of course today a biologist will not teach those lies because they know better. They know skin color was not passed on through evolution but their assumptions and predictions were wrong then and some of them are wrong today.

Darwin made a great observation but gave a very poor explanation ,and made the explanation worse by his assumptions and predictions.

The fossil record has not done what he said it should do if his theory be correct either. Slow gradual changes and we know that didn't happen and that is why gould and eldredge created a theory to explain the evidence that was not supporting Darwin.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Did you notice her speak of theories being racists. You need to quit resorting to dishonesty ,and that is what you're doing when people are showing you are wrong.

Did you notice that you still cannot offer a single reference to anything in the ToE that addresses race?

You again offer nothing more than self-refuting argumentation when you cut and paste what you don't understand.

Do you not understand the father of your theory and his cronies were racists ? Of course today a biologist will not teach those lies because they know better. They know skin color was not passed on through evolution but their assumptions and predictions were wrong then and some of them are wrong today.

Darwin made a great observation but gave a very poor explanation ,and made the explanation worse by his assumptions and predictions.

The fossil record has not done what he said it should do if his theory be correct either. Slow gradual changes and we know that didn't happen and that is why gould and eldredge created a theory to explain the evidence that was not supporting Darwin.

Darwin's finches are classic examples of "slow gradual changes" caused by environmental conditions altering. You have obviously never even seen a copy of his book let alone opened one and actually read anything of what he wrote on the subject.

 

[Hollie]

Do you have this short of a memory or is this on purpose?

Was Darwin racist, and did evolution push racism? (souls, grace, America) - Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Atheism, God, Universe, Science, Spirituality, Faith, Evidence - City-Data Forum

Cutting and pasting links to competing message boards does nothing to support your case for gawds and magic. As with so many religious zealots, you hope to vilify Darwin. However, your limited science background and your failure to understand the basic model of the ToE leaves you ill prepared to criticize the specifics.

With your limited understanding of science and the natural world, I’m sure it comes as a crushing blow to your fundamentalist views that evolution does disprove ID’ism. As we know, ID’ism is a remanufactured theology for those like you who contend that will insist that mankind has reached the limits of knowledge and so must confine all the rest of our unanswered questions to the mind-numbing "the gawds did it" explanation.

The real engine of hate driving the religious extremist agenda revolves around your gawds being left out of science. Since science cannot investigate the supernatural, religious extremists hope to redefine science. You and the extremists like you perceive science and knowledge as a direct threat to your imposition of fear and superstition. Remarkably, you and those like you are totally in denial about the damage you have inflicted on humanity with the imposition of such fear and superstition. Your objections to the ToE are not scientific, but theological. You rail against the ToE with not a whit of understanding of the basic model.

Ultimately, shouldn't the question be, "How does ID disprove Evolution"? It doesn't, of course. And despite objections from the Christian extremists, evolution still happens. If the hand of one or more gawds (and there is no reason why your gawds are necessarily included in that roll call) is behind existence, there is no evidence of it. In any case, Science cannot investigate the supernatural. There may be things science can never explain, and it accepts that limitation. But the Kansas school board notwithstanding, Science investigates natural phenomena, natural causes, natural effects. The supernatural is not in view.

The Dover case and other humiliating defeats of the Christian extremist aganda amply proved that ID is nothing but a theological attempt to put Christian fundamentalism into the public schools. The goals of the Discovery Institute and fundamentalist charlatans like them are to impose Christian fundamentalism upon schools and government. They wish to transform this nation into a theocracy, intolerant of non-Christians or Christians who do not agree with them, and imposing their concept of "morality" upon the population.


I hope to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won’t have any public schools. The churches will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy day that will be.

- Jerry Falwell



There will never be world peace until Gods house and Gods people are given their rightful place of leadership at the top of the world.

- Pat Robertson

Why because it's making you look bad for trying to defend his comments ?

Those quotes are from darwins books heck what I was saying is right there in the title of the book and confirmed later in the his book. Then he showed other examples of racism by evolutionists in the early 1,900's but I showed a more recent claim that blacks were less intelligent according to an english geneticist.

Face it the theory promoted racism and they made false predictions and faulty assumptions.

You are a fine one to talk heck you copy and paste from the words of Ruggedtouch from other forums and we are not positive that is you.

I think we first need to acknowledge that your “quotes” are so often falsified, it’s difficult to take your whining seriously, We also need to acknowledge that one of your cut and pasted “quotes” is lifted from the ICR. I’ve pointed out before your dishonest tactics wherein you “quote-mine” from the ICR and I’ve pointed out their dishonest tactics. They are among the most notorious of the “quote-mine” charlatans. They’re almost as crooked and deceitful as “anointed-one” which you “quote-mine” from.

But to address your deficiencies regarding science, extremist nut-bar fundies have a far worse problem than with the ToE. By your own twisted and stunted “reasoning”, which I offer exactly for your fun and excitement, your own fundamentalist views are in jeopardy. For among the many problems with Christianity are the basic questions of existence it is unable to answer.
And there is an entire universe of other questions that do immediately emerge! The list is be cosmic in scope, including the very veracity of your gawds vs. other, more likely gawds, the unanswerable conflicts between predestination and free will, etc. There have been wars upon wars built on conflicts of theology concerning questions that none of the Bibles have complete answers for.

For that matter, the problem of unanswered questions presents far greater difficulty to extremist religionists than to science. After all, Christianity is “revealed from the gawds” Since the source of that revelation is supposedly one of the gawds himself, leaving us with important and essential questions unanswered is a unquestionably valid argument against the veracity of your fundie faith. Quite obviously, and according to your extremist beliefs, christianity should possess all of the answers, right?

Yet it doesn’t. And one of the most important questions challenging your extremist ideology is how you can remain so decidedly certain in your ignorance but call it ‘religious belief”. Yet you ignore all of this in your daily and stupendously stupid crusade against science, enlightenment and evolution.

 

[Hollie]

Did you notice that you still cannot offer a single reference to anything in the ToE that addresses race?

You again offer nothing more than self-refuting argumentation when you cut and paste what you don't understand.

Do you not understand the father of your theory and his cronies were racists ? Of course today a biologist will not teach those lies because they know better. They know skin color was not passed on through evolution but their assumptions and predictions were wrong then and some of them are wrong today.

Darwin made a great observation but gave a very poor explanation ,and made the explanation worse by his assumptions and predictions.

The fossil record has not done what he said it should do if his theory be correct either. Slow gradual changes and we know that didn't happen and that is why gould and eldredge created a theory to explain the evidence that was not supporting Darwin.

Darwin's finches are classic examples of "slow gradual changes" caused by environmental conditions altering. You have obviously never even seen a copy of his book let alone opened one and actually read anything of what he wrote on the subject.

I'm sure ywc will counter with something cut and pasted from Harun Yahya. The problem with extremists is that they have limited science knowledge which comes from scouring fundamentalist websites.

They take no issue with promoting their lies, falsified "quotes" and extremist literature because it appeals to their ignorance.

 

[Hollie]

Both comments are from nuts and I have very little respect for both pastors. That day will never come until God comes and has the resurrection and judges mankind.

See God shows you some of these characters were speaking and doing for themselves and not truly representing God in the way they should have.

Mat 7:18 It is not possible for a good tree to give bad fruit, and a bad tree will not give good fruit.
Mat 7:19 Every tree which does not give good fruit is cut down and put in the fire.
Mat 7:20 So by their fruits you will get knowledge of them.
Mat 7:21 Not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord, will go into the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the pleasure of my Father in heaven.
Mat 7:22 A great number will say to me on that day, Lord, Lord, were we not prophets in your name, and did we not by your name send out evil spirits, and by your name do works of power?
Mat 7:23 And then will I say to them, I never had knowledge of you: go from me, you workers of evil.

Mat 7:24 (a) And the extremist nut-bars have fallen out of the tree of very little knowledge and bumped their heads on every branch.

May the gawds bless Jerry, Pat, Jimmy Swaggert (if he can just keep his pants on), Tammy Faye, Billy Bob, Harun Yahya, and basically, every creep, charlatan and snake oil salesman you're beholden to.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Both comments are from nuts and I have very little respect for both pastors. That day will never come until God comes and has the resurrection and judges mankind.

See God shows you some of these characters were speaking and doing for themselves and not truly representing God in the way they should have.

Mat 7:18 It is not possible for a good tree to give bad fruit, and a bad tree will not give good fruit.
Mat 7:19 Every tree which does not give good fruit is cut down and put in the fire.
Mat 7:20 So by their fruits you will get knowledge of them.
Mat 7:21 Not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord, will go into the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the pleasure of my Father in heaven.
Mat 7:22 A great number will say to me on that day, Lord, Lord, were we not prophets in your name, and did we not by your name send out evil spirits, and by your name do works of power?
Mat 7:23 And then will I say to them, I never had knowledge of you: go from me, you workers of evil.

Mat 7:24 (a) And the extremist nut-bars have fallen out of the tree of very little knowledge and bumped their heads on every branch.

May the gawds bless Jerry, Pat, Jimmy Swaggert (if he can just keep his pants on), Tammy Faye, Billy Bob, Harun Yahya, and basically, every creep, charlatan and snake oil salesman you're beholden to.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Did you notice that you still cannot offer a single reference to anything in the ToE that addresses race?

You again offer nothing more than self-refuting argumentation when you cut and paste what you don't understand.

Do you not understand the father of your theory and his cronies were racists ? Of course today a biologist will not teach those lies because they know better. They know skin color was not passed on through evolution but their assumptions and predictions were wrong then and some of them are wrong today.

Darwin made a great observation but gave a very poor explanation ,and made the explanation worse by his assumptions and predictions.

The fossil record has not done what he said it should do if his theory be correct either. Slow gradual changes and we know that didn't happen and that is why gould and eldredge created a theory to explain the evidence that was not supporting Darwin.

Darwin's finches are classic examples of "slow gradual changes" caused by environmental conditions altering. You have obviously never even seen a copy of his book let alone opened one and actually read anything of what he wrote on the subject.

It happened in a short period of time due to drought. Supported by recent studies.

" Usually we think of evolution as being a slow grind, he says.

But, Pfennig added, the study suggests that evolution due to competition between closely related species "paradoxically may often occur so rapidly that we may actually miss the process taking place."

"Instant" Evolution Seen in Darwin's Finches, Study Says

The pace of evolution