Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   EVOLUTION'S FRAUD HAS CONTRIBUTED TO ITS PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE:
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4190 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 166 of 323 (525332)
09-23-2009 12:10 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by Archangel
09-23-2009 12:01 AM


Re: Holy Mary mother of god in a sidecar with chocolate jimmies and a lobster bib!
But wont you and all of your secular humanist defenders of evolution be sorely and sadly shocked on that final day when you inevitably learn how right we were and how absolutely wrong you were as you believed evolutions lies just as I am warning you about.
How do you know you are right? Your myths don't hold water, stories told by bronze age men who knew nothing about the earth, man, the sun, the universe, weather, etc. How shocked will you be when at the end......nothing
Edited by bluescat48, : typuo

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by Archangel, posted 09-23-2009 12:01 AM Archangel has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 167 of 323 (525334)
09-23-2009 12:43 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by Archangel
09-23-2009 12:01 AM


Re: Holy Mary mother of god in a sidecar with chocolate jimmies and a lobster bib!
But wont you and all of your secular humanist defenders of evolution be sorely and sadly shocked on that final day when you inevitably learn how right we were and how absolutely wrong you were as you believed evolutions lies just as I am warning you about.
Your pretense that only "secular humanists" defend evolution is, of course, untrue, and your daydream that one day we will learn that you were right is a fantasy contrary to all known evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by Archangel, posted 09-23-2009 12:01 AM Archangel has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 168 of 323 (525336)
09-23-2009 12:46 AM
Reply to: Message 164 by Archangel
09-22-2009 11:57 PM


Re: EVOLUTION'S FRAUD HAS CONTRIBUTED TO ITS PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE:
WOW, the sanctimony exhibited by you pseudo intellectuals as you repeatedly insist how right you are at a rate of your 116 combined posts to my 30. Here are all of my arguments in all of my posts which most have yet to be responded to with any substance at all, or rational evidence that anything you defend regarding evolution is based in a solid foundation of proven evidence. And if the foundation is faulty, then so is the house which is built upon it.
Unless you're ready to produce this overwhelming evidence that spontaneous life appeared magically around 3.5 billion years ago leading to common descent and all of the crap that follows that term. Also, no comment on the Miller video questions I asked? No interest in defending that experiment which is held up as the best evidence of spontaneous life appearing from non life? Even when I give you the experiment which your most fevered proponents hold up proudly as evidence, you refuse to comment in defense of it by answering my very valid and common sense questions.
All I get in response are 10 or 12 more angry and insulting posts which attempt to change the subject by insulting me, and more of your inane obfuscations. So here you go, I proudly repost the links to my posts in case anyone garners the nerve to actually respond to them ON POINT. EvC Forum: Origin of Translation...
And here's the link to the evidence in my OP's post in case anyone wants to respond to any of the examples of fraud it documents and actually get back on topic. Take your pick from the many examples of fraud it outlines. Evolution Fraud and Myths
We have already debunked the miserable fraudulent crap that you quoted in your OP.
The other false statements in your hysterical ravings are off topic. If you wish to scream deluded nonsense about anything else, that would belong on another thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Archangel, posted 09-22-2009 11:57 PM Archangel has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by Peepul, posted 09-23-2009 9:17 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 169 of 323 (525337)
09-23-2009 12:53 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by Archangel
09-23-2009 12:01 AM


Preaching
But wont you and all of your secular humanist defenders of evolution be sorely and sadly shocked on that final day when you inevitably learn how right we were and how absolutely wrong you were as you believed evolutions lies just as I am warning you about.
You're preaching!
You're peddling your narrow interpretation of religion, thinking it has something to do with science.
Why do you think for a minute you have anything useful to say about science?
Answer: you have nothing useful to say about science. You are peddling your religious beliefs concerning evolution in spite of all the evidence to the contrary, and you're ignoring any evidence that we post that contradicts your beliefs. You appear to be nothing but a zealot with a totally closed mind, and nothing you say can be trusted unless you can produce some empirical evidence. But you are amusing to watch--seldom have I seen the like.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by Archangel, posted 09-23-2009 12:01 AM Archangel has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 170 of 323 (525340)
09-23-2009 1:42 AM
Reply to: Message 153 by Archangel
09-22-2009 8:58 PM


Re: "True" science and other evolution fantasies:
quote:
Once again you generalize my rejection of evolution science as a rejection of all science so I must again preempt my response by correcting your misrepresentation of my views. With that said, here's a reality check which goes against everything you believe, but is true anyway. IF EVOLUTION WAS A TRUE SCIENCE THAT WAS TRULY SUPPORTED BY SCIENTIFIC FACT, THEN IT WOULDN'T CONFLICT WITH THE GENESIS ACCOUNT. AND IF IT DIDN'T CONFLICT WITH THE GENESIS ACCOUNT, WE WOULDN'T BE ON OPPOSING SIDES AT ALL.
Of course it is only your assumption that the evidence MUST fit with your interpretation of Genesis. Indeed that is your whole modus operandi - you assume that you are right and just throw baseless accusations at others who dare to disagree with you, regardless of the truth,

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by Archangel, posted 09-22-2009 8:58 PM Archangel has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by Peepul, posted 09-23-2009 9:30 AM PaulK has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2295 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 171 of 323 (525342)
09-23-2009 1:51 AM
Reply to: Message 153 by Archangel
09-22-2009 8:58 PM


Re: "True" science and other evolution fantasies:
I'm glad you finally say you're not interested in science Archy, for this:
Archangel writes:
IF EVOLUTION WAS A TRUE SCIENCE THAT WAS TRULY SUPPORTED BY SCIENTIFIC FACT, THEN IT WOULDN'T CONFLICT WITH THE GENESIS ACCOUNT.
Is of course the classic case of assuming the conclusion before studying the facts. Genesis must be true, that is your conclusion. Whatever contradicts that, must be false. That's not "true" science, that's pseudo-science.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by Archangel, posted 09-22-2009 8:58 PM Archangel has not replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2224
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 172 of 323 (525345)
09-23-2009 3:14 AM
Reply to: Message 153 by Archangel
09-22-2009 8:58 PM


Re: "True" science and other evolution fantasies:
Archangel writes:
IF EVOLUTION WAS A TRUE SCIENCE THAT WAS TRULY SUPPORTED BY SCIENTIFIC FACT, THEN IT WOULDN'T CONFLICT WITH THE GENESIS ACCOUNT.
The Genesis account? Which one exactly? Because there are two creation myths in Genesis, as you undoubtedly know. And they conflict first and foremost with each other. I suggest you sort that out first, and then we'll talk about "true" science.
Edited by Parasomnium, : There were two "are"'s as well...

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by Archangel, posted 09-22-2009 8:58 PM Archangel has not replied

  
greyseal
Member (Idle past 3862 days)
Posts: 464
Joined: 08-11-2009


Message 173 of 323 (525355)
09-23-2009 5:25 AM
Reply to: Message 153 by Archangel
09-22-2009 8:58 PM


Re: "True" science and other evolution fantasies:
archangel writes:
With that said, here's a reality check which goes against everything you believe, but is true anyway. IF EVOLUTION WAS A TRUE SCIENCE THAT WAS TRULY SUPPORTED BY SCIENTIFIC FACT, THEN IT WOULDN'T CONFLICT WITH THE GENESIS ACCOUNT. AND IF IT DIDN'T CONFLICT WITH THE GENESIS ACCOUNT, WE WOULDN'T BE ON OPPOSING SIDES AT ALL.
You know, I don't have to do anything else other than sit back and laugh until my sides hurt, because you're the source of your own undoing.
I quote YOU back at yourself as an answer to that dreck.
Archangel writes:
More judgmental criticisms and drivel from the peanut gallery as he offers no evidence at all to the debate. If incessant insistence that you are right was worth anything, you would have won this debate long ago. But alas, all we have is empty lip service...
Now go away until you have something useful to say.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by Archangel, posted 09-22-2009 8:58 PM Archangel has not replied

  
dokukaeru
Member (Idle past 4615 days)
Posts: 129
From: ohio
Joined: 06-27-2008


Message 174 of 323 (525384)
09-23-2009 8:24 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by Archangel
09-23-2009 12:01 AM


Re: Holy Mary mother of god in a sidecar with chocolate jimmies and a lobster bib!
Thank you for your response Archangel.
As you can see clearly from the link you posted that Abiogenesis(Origins of Life) and Evolution are two distinct ideas
Darwin.org writes:
Abiogenesis is about the origin of life. Evolution, technically, is about what happened after life arose on Earth. Life origins studies proceed under a number of hypotheses and remain very tentative during this early period of investigation.
Granted, the website does talk about both, but distinctly says that evolution takes place AFTER life has arose by whatever means like I mentioned before. This is a point that creationist often bring up. It is a strawman arguement and is intended to decieve and confuse. Using it as an arguement is ignorant at best and possibly even fraudulent.
Archangel in Message 145 writes:
The ignorance is yours Joe, in assuming that I don't understand how evolution defines itself just because I reject how it defines itself. I refuse to allow it to speak out of both sides of its mouth as it attempts to control the debate by limiting my ability to ask deeper questions about its philosophy than it would prefer to be asked.
Could you please provide your definition of evolution AND science and site references please. As has been mentioned before to you, this is a science thread. You need provide evidence. We also need to understand what your definition of these things are in order to ensure we are all on the same page. Again, it appears you do not have a clear understanding of what is and is not evolution.
If you like, we could discuss Miller-Urey experiments and the multiple theories for abiogenesis, but that is for another thread. You are supposed to be pointing out frauds that have been used to further evolution. From what I have seen, you have only provide the same arguements that creationist have been using for DECADES and that themselves are fraudulent to use. This has been pointed out to you numerous times, yet you have failed to respond. Please, if you really are an honest Christian, you will look in your heart and see how being honest with yourself and everyone here is the best practice.
Again, eagerly awaiting your response.
Thanks, Joe

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by Archangel, posted 09-23-2009 12:01 AM Archangel has not replied

  
dokukaeru
Member (Idle past 4615 days)
Posts: 129
From: ohio
Joined: 06-27-2008


Message 175 of 323 (525386)
09-23-2009 8:34 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by Archangel
09-23-2009 12:01 AM


You are in the minority view even within you own religion
Archangel in Message 72 writes:
Yes it is. Because they both can't be right. If evolution is correct and true, then the bible is a lie, and conversely, if the bible is true, then evolution is the lie. There can be no compromise regarding the opposing foundations upon which each belief system stands.
Archangel in Message 165 writes:
But wont you and all of your secular humanist defenders of evolution be sorely and sadly shocked on that final day when you inevitably learn how right we were and how absolutely wrong you were as you believed evolutions lies just as I am warning you about.
I am curious as to whether you believe the Pope and the overwhelming majority of Christians and Christian leaders have been decieved? For they have no problem accepting the sound science of evolution.
If you look at the quotes I posted of yours. You can see that you have a lot to gain from trying to disprove evolution. In your mind, belief in evolution basically damns you to your form of Hell. From the question I asked above....is the Pope damned to Hell?
You have also said that it is evolutionist who have the most to gain from continuing to promote evolution.
Do you realize how famous a biologist would become if he could show that our understanding of evolution is lacking or fundamentally flawed? The 150 years since Darwins Origins many have tried and failed. Does that not speak to you?
Again, Thanks for your time and responses,
Joe

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by Archangel, posted 09-23-2009 12:01 AM Archangel has not replied

  
dokukaeru
Member (Idle past 4615 days)
Posts: 129
From: ohio
Joined: 06-27-2008


Message 176 of 323 (525387)
09-23-2009 8:38 AM
Reply to: Message 153 by Archangel
09-22-2009 8:58 PM


Re: "True" science and other evolution fantasies:
Archangel in message 153 writes:
Once again you generalize my rejection of evolution science as a rejection of all science
Do you believe the science of genetics and that DNA is a "True Science"?
Edited by dokukaeru, : Fix broken quote

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by Archangel, posted 09-22-2009 8:58 PM Archangel has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 184 by Archangel, posted 09-23-2009 10:39 AM dokukaeru has replied

  
Peepul
Member (Idle past 5018 days)
Posts: 206
Joined: 03-13-2009


Message 177 of 323 (525391)
09-23-2009 9:05 AM
Reply to: Message 147 by Arphy
09-22-2009 7:55 PM


quote:
Yip, this is why debates on here never really seem to get off the ground. They don't even want to admit that they have a worldview which they think is supported by the evidence. This is because when we compare the two worldviews (evolution v YEC) and see which worldview is supported by evidence, the YEC worldview wins.
Ah well, I'm just hoping that one day i will come across someone who wants to discuss, which worldview is supported by the evidence
Come again Arphy? (That's a Britishism meaning you can't be serious)
Everyone on the evolution side here is interested in evidence above all else. People will give you evidence for hours if you let them. I could do so myself.
There is no credible evidence for a young earth. The only people who believe in a young earth believe it for religious reasons and then look for evidence to support it. And the evidence, unfortunately for you, just isn't there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by Arphy, posted 09-22-2009 7:55 PM Arphy has not replied

  
Peepul
Member (Idle past 5018 days)
Posts: 206
Joined: 03-13-2009


Message 178 of 323 (525393)
09-23-2009 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 168 by Dr Adequate
09-23-2009 12:46 AM


Re: EVOLUTION'S FRAUD HAS CONTRIBUTED TO ITS PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE:
quote:
And here's the link to the evidence in my OP's post in case anyone wants to respond to any of the examples of fraud it documents and actually get back on topic. Take your pick from the many examples of fraud it outlines. Evolution Fraud and Myths
Ok I picked one. I picked the Archaeoraptor. And what do I find in the VERY FIRST SENTENCE? I find this :-
quote:
The most recent and perhaps the most infamous evolution frauds was committed in China and published in 1999 in the journal National Geographic 196:98-107, November 1999
.
So National Geographic is now a journal is it, rather than a popular magazine? This deception by the author. It's utterly typical. I long to see integrity and honest evidence, but yet again there is deliberate distortion and misrepresentation. Archangel, just present facts, shorn of manipulation and sleaze.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-23-2009 12:46 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 179 of 323 (525394)
09-23-2009 9:17 AM


Statement of Intention to Moderate this Discussion
Tomorrow morning I will begin actively moderating this discussion. My goals are to focus attention back on the topic, and to eliminate violations of rule 10:
  1. Always treat other members with respect. Argue the position, not the person. Avoid abusive, harassing and invasive behavior. Avoid needling, hectoring and goading tactics.
Tomorrow morning I will post a brief note announcing that I have begun moderation, and violations of the Forum Guidelines appearing after that post will bring short (at least initially) suspensions.
The key part of rule 10 is, "Argue the position, not the person." Just so there's no ambiguity about my interpretation of rule 10, violations of this rule often correlate with use of the word "you."

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

  
Archangel
Member (Idle past 1357 days)
Posts: 134
Joined: 09-09-2009


Message 180 of 323 (525398)
09-23-2009 9:27 AM


Still no specific evidence in response to my queries I see. Just personal attacks as everything on topic which I offer is ignored out of hand. OK, let me offer another example of the massive assumptions which survive as facts for decades before evolution is unceremoniously forced to face reality and admit their error as they back pedal once again, and disregard yet another allegedly well established claim which they have relied on in order to gain further public validation with what turns out YET AGAIN to be a decades long established FRAUD, when all is said and done. Yes folks, it's called the C—lacanth: An Example of a False Intermediate Form of life which was said to have thrived some 410 million years ago during the Devonian period, was regarded by evolutionists as a powerful intermediate form between fish and reptile. It had been mysteriously erased from the fossil record 70 million years ago, during the Cretaceous period, and was believed to have become extinct at that time.19 Based on these fossils, evolutionist biologists suggested that this creature had a non-functioning, "primitive" as evolutionists put it, lung. Speculation regarding the C—lacanth became so widespread that the fish was cited in many scientific publications as the most significant evidence for evolution. Paintings and drawings of it leaving the water for the land quickly began appearing in books and magazines. Of course, all these assumptions, images and claims, were based on the idea that the creature was extinct.
The truth was very different, however.
Since 1938, more than 200 present-day C—lacanths have been caught, after that first one off South Africa. The second came from the Comoro Islands off north-west Madagascar in 1952, and a third in Indonesian Sulawesi in 1998. The evolutionist paleontologist J. L. B. Smith was unable to conceal his amazement at the capture of the first C—lacanth, saying, "If I'd met a dinosaur in the street I wouldn't have been more astonished."20
The tail of the living C—lacanth and that of a 140-million-year-old fossil specimen are identical to one another.
So, is the fossil specimen actually 140 million years old as claimed by evolutionists for so long? You still believe it is, don't you? You will never consider that, well, since we were wrong about it being an extinct transitional fish for so long, maybe our science is also wrong about its dating practices and methods. Here's another example of a living fossil which defies logic since it allegedly survived 50 million years and still has soft tissue attached to it..
This 50-Million-Year-Old Fossil Fish, Genus Priscacara, Dating Back To The Eocene Epoch, Was Also Discovered At Green River In Wyoming, Where Some Of The World’s Best-Known Fossil Discoveries Have Been Made. As With This Fish, Other Fossils Discovered In This Region Have Preserved A Large Portion Of Their Soft Tissues.
So what are we to take from this. Are 50 million year old fossils surviving with soft tissue attached or could there be some massive misinterpretations of evidence taking place by the evolution community? Not to mention of course the incredible denial of reality which considers that such a thing is possible based on real time observations of how quickly a body decomposes in the real word. I mean, must I post another time lapse video for you deniers of reality?
Now come on back and attack me once again rather than actually deal with the massive inconsistencies, contradictions and assumptions your so called science makes until of course reality hits them square in the face. Explain to me about the evidence which is beyond my ability to comprehend since I hate science.
http://www.living-fossils.com/3_1.php
Edited by Archangel, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 183 by dokukaeru, posted 09-23-2009 10:27 AM Archangel has not replied
 Message 195 by Lithodid-Man, posted 09-23-2009 2:39 PM Archangel has not replied
 Message 205 by RAZD, posted 09-23-2009 8:10 PM Archangel 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