Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,905 Year: 4,162/9,624 Month: 1,033/974 Week: 360/286 Day: 3/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why Darwinism is wrong
TheNewGuy03
Inactive Member


Message 89 of 305 (205454)
05-05-2005 11:14 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by crashfrog
05-05-2005 11:41 AM


Heh.
I guess you don't understand the concept of creation. It isn't some guys trying to impose Christianity on people, or philosophical crap, for that matter. All it means is that the world was created, not developed by evolution and chance.
The evidence supports neither evolution nor creation. You realize what the objective here is: to take empirical facts and attempt to wedge them into our own worldviews.
With that, I will depart.
This message has been edited by TheNewGuy03, 05-05-2005 11:15 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by crashfrog, posted 05-05-2005 11:41 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by crashfrog, posted 05-06-2005 12:21 PM TheNewGuy03 has replied

TheNewGuy03
Inactive Member


Message 90 of 305 (205460)
05-05-2005 11:22 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Jianyi Zhang
05-04-2005 9:35 PM


Yes.
I agree with you, Dr. Zhang. This debate will be endless, and it is pointless. It just shows human nature in action.
The Darwinists/evolutionists do not fully understand the creationists' point of view, and the reverse also holds true.
Why don't we just settle for the facts? There are more unanswered questions in the world.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Jianyi Zhang, posted 05-04-2005 9:35 PM Jianyi Zhang has not replied

TheNewGuy03
Inactive Member


Message 100 of 305 (205780)
05-07-2005 1:10 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by crashfrog
05-06-2005 12:21 PM


OK...
Tenure means nothing. Understanding is everything.
In essence, you say that creationists are mindless, ignorant cranks. Not so ironically, creationists think evolutionists are mindless, ignorant cranks.
Like I said earlier, the evidence is in, but it is trimmed and fitted into theory, simply because no one knows anything.
People may be able to go to space, but that means nothing when you're dead or forgotten.
Oh yeah, please don't reply to this.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by crashfrog, posted 05-06-2005 12:21 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by EZscience, posted 05-07-2005 1:32 PM TheNewGuy03 has replied
 Message 106 by crashfrog, posted 05-07-2005 5:25 PM TheNewGuy03 has replied

TheNewGuy03
Inactive Member


Message 153 of 305 (206523)
05-09-2005 3:01 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by crashfrog
05-07-2005 5:25 PM


...
Yeah, creationists are wrong, and evolutionists are right. Evolutionists are always right.
By "not knowing anything," I mean that nothing is 100% sure. But wait, I'm wrong again.
You obviously didn't read the last line of my last reply. DO NOT REPLY. That's it.
*I don't need the extra e-mail!
This message has been edited by TheNewGuy03, 05-09-2005 03:12 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by crashfrog, posted 05-07-2005 5:25 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 194 by crashfrog, posted 05-11-2005 4:41 PM TheNewGuy03 has not replied

TheNewGuy03
Inactive Member


Message 154 of 305 (206525)
05-09-2005 3:10 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by EZscience
05-07-2005 1:32 PM


Re: OK...
I just don't want all the reply notices cluttering my e-mail box.
Anyway, read my last post.
Of course it fits very nicely with evolutionary theory. It's because the observations are built around evolution. Duh.
And I didn't try to implement anything into anything. You could say I'm a creationist because there's only one way to classify me outside of being an evolutionist.
I realize that I'm fighting an impossible battle. I can't make people listen. The few creationists in here are heavily outnumbered by the evolutionists. Some things just take a longer time to change.
Oh yeah, isn't evolution also a "predetermined model" by empirical standards? What else could you call it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by EZscience, posted 05-07-2005 1:32 PM EZscience has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by Arkansas Banana Boy, posted 05-09-2005 3:49 PM TheNewGuy03 has not replied

TheNewGuy03
Inactive Member


Message 167 of 305 (206761)
05-10-2005 11:46 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by Wounded King
05-10-2005 9:10 AM


Heh.
What does one do to have a sufficient understanding of evolution? Become an evolutionist...?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by Wounded King, posted 05-10-2005 9:10 AM Wounded King has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by Wounded King, posted 05-10-2005 12:22 PM TheNewGuy03 has replied
 Message 175 by Jianyi Zhang, posted 05-10-2005 9:44 PM TheNewGuy03 has replied

TheNewGuy03
Inactive Member


Message 171 of 305 (206778)
05-10-2005 12:41 PM
Reply to: Message 170 by Wounded King
05-10-2005 12:22 PM


Re: Heh.
What is the origin of mitochondria?
Αγάπη,
Το Παιδί

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by Wounded King, posted 05-10-2005 12:22 PM Wounded King has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by Wounded King, posted 05-11-2005 4:24 AM TheNewGuy03 has not replied
 Message 184 by EZscience, posted 05-11-2005 12:21 PM TheNewGuy03 has not replied

TheNewGuy03
Inactive Member


Message 188 of 305 (207120)
05-11-2005 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by Jianyi Zhang
05-10-2005 9:44 PM


Re: Heh.
Yep, Dr. Zhang, it certainly does seem that way. But, unfortunately for them, I won't add myself to their ranks.
Αγάπη,
Το Παιδί

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by Jianyi Zhang, posted 05-10-2005 9:44 PM Jianyi Zhang has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 195 by crashfrog, posted 05-11-2005 4:45 PM TheNewGuy03 has replied

TheNewGuy03
Inactive Member


Message 202 of 305 (207288)
05-12-2005 2:30 AM
Reply to: Message 195 by crashfrog
05-11-2005 4:45 PM


Hmm...
I guess you're not too fond of sarcasm.
And I do have knowledge of evolution, considering I was one myself.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by crashfrog, posted 05-11-2005 4:45 PM crashfrog has not replied

TheNewGuy03
Inactive Member


Message 203 of 305 (207290)
05-12-2005 2:35 AM
Reply to: Message 201 by Wounded King
05-12-2005 2:15 AM


Re: The return of Lamarkian evolution is imminent !
This is true.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by Wounded King, posted 05-12-2005 2:15 AM Wounded King 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