|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,419 Year: 3,676/9,624 Month: 547/974 Week: 160/276 Day: 34/23 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: TOE and the Reasons for Doubt | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2127 days) Posts: 6117 Joined:
|
"The record jumps, and all the evidence shows that the record is real: the gaps we see reflect real events in life's history not the artifact of a poor fossil record...The fossil record flatly fails to substantiate this expectation of finely graded change." (Eldredge, N. and Tattersall, I., The Myths of Human Evolution Columbia University Press, 1982, p. 59, 163) Here are the larger quotes, from just over 100 pages apart:
quote: Why can't creationists be honest about their quotes? Answer: the evidence contradicts their religious beliefs, so they have to lie about the evidence to make it appear to support their beliefs. Creation "science" as usual. Dishonest. And disgusting. Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2127 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
So it is for you and your evolutionist comrades to figure out just how all those objects got encased so far below the surface of the earth when in fact it takes humans to produce human teeth, gold chains, hammers, etc.
No. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. And when it comes to the type of nonsense you're peddlin' there is no credible evidence. If there was real evidence you wouldn't have just the creationist websites and literature pushing those claims. (Personally I think these are frauds planted by creationists for the purpose of advancing their religious beliefs, for which they can come up with no better evidence.)
Evolution is a sorry joke. I laugh at it.
For evolution there is evidence. For the type of nonsense you have been posting there is a sad lack of evidence. Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2127 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
The evolutionist position is wrong yet again and the history books will have to be re-written once more.
As more and more data is found, our picture of the distant past is becoming clearer. That is the strength of science; it can discard old falsehoods. Would that religious belief was as concerned about accuracy.
What will they do when they find the remains of a human inside the belly of a T-Rex? I am certain that day is coming.
Track down the creationist who perpetrated the fraud. (He'll be the one selling tickets and books and making a fortune from the gullible.) Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2127 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
which probably explains why the ToE has gone thru so much change since he penned it.
Why should change in a theory be a problem? It becomes increasingly accurate as it changes, and you should consider that a good thing. Unless you see the theory as dogma, unchanging from the beginning. Is that perhaps the problem? Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2127 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
but the toe that darwin coined is not the same theory we have today, yet we are expected to believe that he was spot on???
Who cares? Science is not a personality cult. Tens of thousands of scientists have contributed over the decades, each building on the work of those who went before. But Darwin got the major idea, and that has stood up well. I don't know why creationists keep after Darwin, as if personal attacks would change the theory or lessen the evidence. On another website a crazed anti-evolution zealot keeps claiming that Darwin inspired Marx and Hitler, led directly to eugenics, and other nonsense, as if any of that would somehow make the theory of evolution go away. I guess if you have no evidence against the theory you attack the originator, eh? Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2127 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
"Strengths and weaknesses" is simply the most recent tactic from the creationists in an effort to get their particular brand of religion taught in public schools.
The "weaknesses" that creationists are continually harping about are nothing more than PRATTS, dusted off and run out once again in the hope that they can gain some traction this time. It's like "teach both theories." When that didn't work they dumped that tactic and turned to "strengths and weaknesses." Both tactics rely on deception and misrepresentation. If you actually had the "truth" or TRUTH or TRVTH why is deception and misrepresentation necessary? Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2127 days) Posts: 6117 Joined:
|
So what are you saying, that the strengths and weaknesses of the theory shouldn't be taught because you feel it is a strategy?
"Strengths and weaknesses" is a ploy used by creationists to get their religion back into the schools. It has nothing to do with science and what science is actually doing. It is, in fact, anti-science.
So children should not be taught accurately because your side wants to win a strategy war? That is about the level of intellectual honesty your side has fallen to. Children should be taught accurately what science is doing, not what one narrow interpretation of one of the world's 4,000 extant religions wants them to be taught. "Strengths and weaknesses" is an anti-science propaganda campaign, and amounts to nothing but religious apologetics; it has no place in public school classrooms. Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024