Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Points Of View
Granny Magda
Member
Posts: 2462
From: UK
Joined: 11-12-2007
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 12 of 45 (484334)
09-27-2008 9:48 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Syamsu
09-27-2008 9:04 PM


A couple of points.
Just for the record, a "couple" is two, not three.
- natural selection theory is false, or an after the fact rationalization
Wow. I've never heard it put so convincingly. I'll just nip out and burn my copy of Origin of Species.
- creationism is true, since all is based on decision not cause and effect
You had ample opportunity to provide evidence for your "decisions" garbage in the appropriate thread. You convinced precisely no-one, including other creationists. That makes it a bit rich for you to bring it up here as a bare assertion. Were all well aware what creationism is based on and it isn't your optimistic toothbrush nonsense. I'll give you a clue; it's a big book, often leather-bound, big cross on the cover...
- lots of discoveries were, and are made through creationism, for example Mendellian genetics which was conceived in terms of the species having boundaries of variation, and I think Newton's theory of gravity which works instantaneously over distance is also basically a creationist idea from a creationist
Quite right. Newton was a creationist (also an alchemist,but I don't hear you crowing about that). As a monk, I'd be very surprised if Mendel wasn't a creationist. In fact, the great Linnaeus, arguably the most influential biologist ever (apart from Charles Darwin of course ) was a creationist. Very impressive.
Got anything from this century at all? You know, ongoing creationist science... Stuff being done now... Not by dead people...
So given that creationism is true, and evolution is false, you should then argue the merit of science eventhough it is false. Otherwise it is just more arrogance.
This does not even begin to make sense.
Mutate and Survive

"The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Syamsu, posted 09-27-2008 9:04 PM Syamsu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by Syamsu, posted 09-28-2008 6:03 AM Granny Magda has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024