Thread Reopen Requests

Now that Professionalism or Prejudice? has been closed, how about moving the chapters I posted regarding the discussion of my assertions about the myth of macroevolution to a more appropriate forum or perhaps you would consider beginning a new thread in a new topic where the discussion of whether or not macroevolution is true science, and where the discussion concerning the large number quotes from scientists that question whether the study of macroevolution stands up as a true science would be more appropriate. Perhaps then I could transfer those first five chapters to that thread. I have to replies to chapter 5 which I am unable to respond to in the Professionalism or Prejudice?.Many thanks in advance,DarkStar

---

Thanks Adminnemooseus,I shall attempt to offer a new topic that will meet the suggested guidelines. I will provide an edited cut-n-paste version of my comments from each chapter in order to provide a clearer picture of my position and then will choose a quote, one by one, in an attempt to fully cover each scientist, their quote, and their full position. Please continue to offer suggestions for changes and improvements.

---

This is not a request to reopen a thread and so perhaps this should have been posted elsewhere but I was unsure where that should be so this forum will have to do, unless and until a moderator determines otherwise.Now that the election is over and morality has trumped the leftist agenda, at least for now, I may find more time to drop in every now and then. Let me start by thanking percy for the time consuming response he posted to my "quotes" thread. Though the response was heavy with personal opinion, as is to be both expected and cheered, the time that was taken to research and respond to a number of quotes was greatly appreciated and shows that it is possible to respond with something other than the frenetic behaviour that others seem to prefer.Many thanks to percy for the time and energy used to respond in a professional and polite manner. Though the thread is now closed, it did spark a vital debate, though not always a profitable one, on the necessity of being able to clarify statements, positions, and opinions, with regards to quotes, concerning the issue of creation vs. evolution. Thanks again to percy, and to all who participated in the debate. I wish I had been able to contribute more but the political interests I hold had to receive the bulk of my attention and, for me at least, it payed off big time.

---

While on the surface this may seem as though it would be a good idea, the reality is that evo's must rely on a limited number of fossils to prop up their belief in macroevolution. They love to refer to these fossils as transitionals but, truth be told, these are hollow arguments when one considers the vast number of fossils that would have to be present, both before and after said transitional, in order to show any semblance of true macroevolutionary evidence.Creo's will use these same fossils, and the enormous lack of continual transitionals both before and after, to support their beliefs in creation while claiming that said fossils merely depict species which have long since gone extinct.While the discussion of the myth of macroevolution is an interesting topic, the reality is that it is a fruitless endeavor once one attempts to drag this myth into the realm of science. We all know that there is no more scientific evidence to support macroevolution than there is to support creation, perhaps even less.True, some have chosen to view the fossils that are available as being strong scientific evidence supporting the concept of macroevolution but they do so on the basis of their own personal bias and beliefs rather than on anything even remotely close to being true science fact.Hell, one could even use fossils as scientific evidence that ancient men were skilled engravers who found ways to preserve their engravings in the sedimentary layers of rock. However, choosing that position would be about as equally unscientific as the position of those who claim these fossils are transitional, and are thereby scientific evidence of macroevolution.Any discussion regarding the myth of macroevolution would have to be held in a forum designed strictly for the discussion of myths, recognizing that personal opinion is not, and never should be referred to as, science.If you would like to discuss the myth of macroevolution, please open a new topic about myths and I would be happy to inject myself in the discussion. Having said that, be forewarned, I have limited time to play on the computer and days, even weeks could pass before I am able to post or reply.Thanks

---

This would be acceptable if all interested parties are willing to accept the fact that my time is often limited and my devotion to other areas in my life must receive the greater precedence.

---

The theory of evolution is a viable theory, absent the myth of macroevolution.
Once the myth of macroevolution is included, the viability of the theory of evolution vanishes as it slowly evolves into just another example of an implausible story,
nestled amongst the numerous fairytale's of our youth.-----DarkStar

From Short SubjectsGreat Debate Challenge to DarkStar

---

The theory of evolution is a viable theory, absent the myth of macroevolution.
Once the myth of macroevolution is included, the viability of the theory of evolution vanishes as it slowly evolves into just another example of an implausible story,
nestled amongst the numerous fairytale's of our youth.-----DarkStar

Please pass this information on to MrHambre. I am sure he will be pleased. He can then contact me and inform me of where the thread he opens for our one on one debate is located. Thanks.

---

The theory of evolution is a viable theory, absent the myth of macroevolution.
Once the myth of macroevolution is included, the viability of the theory of evolution vanishes as it slowly evolves into just another example of an implausible story,
nestled amongst the numerous fairytale's of our youth.-----DarkStar

I agree that there should be two moderators. I am not familiar with JazzLover. I will peruse JazzLovers' posts.

---

The theory of evolution is a viable theory, absent the myth of macroevolution.
Once the myth of macroevolution is included, the viability of the theory of evolution vanishes as it slowly evolves into just another example of an implausible story,
nestled amongst the numerous fairytale's of our youth.-----DarkStar