Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,920 Year: 4,177/9,624 Month: 1,048/974 Week: 7/368 Day: 7/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Young earth creationism is valid and the macroevolutionary hypothesis is not valid
MrHambre
Member (Idle past 1424 days)
Posts: 1495
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 7 of 316 (89812)
03-02-2004 2:54 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by kendemyer
03-02-2004 1:01 PM


Deaf Dumb and Blind
As noted Applied Epistemology-hypothetico-deductive Bayes Theorist Esteban Hambre noted when faced with the exact same boatload of misinformation from Kendemyer:
quote:
This is really amusing. It seems that evolutionists can only be trusted when they seem to support creationism with out-of-context quotes. Are we supposed to believe that Patterson, Eldredge or Ridley are claiming that species don't evolve?
I'm sure Dobzhanski's oft-quoted line that "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution" would not be so conducive to underhanded creationist quote mining. His lifelong commitment to his Orthodox Christian faith should dissolve any argument that evolution is only supported by atheists. So all that's left is some quote concerning the controversies still raging in biology that the creationists hope everyone will misinterpret as ridiculously as they.
It's deplorable that creationists still use this tactic. It makes a mockery of reputable scientists and insults the legacy of rational inquiry for which creationists obviously have no respect.
My words still stand, Ken. You do nothing except spew links, instead of engaging in debate yourself. Are we supposed to believe that "Behe has not been refuted whatsoever" just because you say so? We've all read Darwin's Black Box and have attacked his methodology and claims in several places on this site.
Quotes aren't facts, Ken. If we present the words of someone who affirms the validity of evolution, you claim that person can't be trusted. If you present his words, however, you claim it proves your point.
regards,
Esteban "Quote Mining Disaster" Hambre

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by kendemyer, posted 03-02-2004 1:01 PM kendemyer has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Brad McFall, posted 03-02-2004 3:16 PM MrHambre has not replied

MrHambre
Member (Idle past 1424 days)
Posts: 1495
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 19 of 316 (89849)
03-02-2004 4:49 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by kendemyer
03-02-2004 3:43 PM


Ken,
Theology and the Bible have absolutely nothing to do with the debate over evolutionary theory. If someone pulled quotes from the Bible in an attempt to refute Germ Theory, Atomic Theory, or the Theory of Universal Gravitation, we would similarly argue that the Bible is irrelevant to these issues.
regards,
Esteban Hambre

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by kendemyer, posted 03-02-2004 3:43 PM kendemyer has not replied

MrHambre
Member (Idle past 1424 days)
Posts: 1495
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 49 of 316 (90082)
03-03-2004 3:46 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by kendemyer
03-03-2004 3:22 PM


Expecting Miracles
Regardless of whether or not evolution (or a ferilized egg growing into a baby or a seed growing into a tree, etc.) violates the 2LOT is sort of beside the point, considering that creationism depends on miracles from on high. When have these ever been replicated in the lab? Where is the "credible evidence" for the creation hypothesis?
The Bible, of course, is so stringently scientific. It declares that people have been created from dust, folks rise from the dead, the Sun stands still in the air, and plenty of other phenomena that seem to defy what we know about science. Conveniently, the Bible tells us that believing without seeing is the noble way to approach its claims.
Materialistic science is based on the assumption that if natural law were subject to the whims of a supernatural entity, we would see evidence of this. Why has science only uncovered material mechanisms for all phenomena? Why does it seem that natural laws are the balance between regularity and randomness in our universe, not any willful being controlling things?
regards,
Esteban "Doubter" Hambre

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by kendemyer, posted 03-03-2004 3:22 PM kendemyer has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by kendemyer, posted 03-03-2004 3:54 PM MrHambre has replied

MrHambre
Member (Idle past 1424 days)
Posts: 1495
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 60 of 316 (90096)
03-03-2004 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by kendemyer
03-03-2004 3:54 PM


Speaking of Evidence
Ken says to me:
quote:
I think there is plenty of empirical evidence that you fall short of moral perfection and are in need of repentance.
Hey, big guy, thanks for the compliment. I want to debate in a rational way on the subject of the scientific bases for evolution and creationism, and come to an understanding about what constitutes science and what doesn't. I don't think you're willing or able to help me. Best of luck.
regards,
Esteban "Cut Your Losses" Hambre

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by kendemyer, posted 03-03-2004 3:54 PM kendemyer has not replied

MrHambre
Member (Idle past 1424 days)
Posts: 1495
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 100 of 316 (90387)
03-04-2004 8:37 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by wj
03-04-2004 8:23 PM


Re: to: Asgara
WI or WJ or whatever,
Look, Ken answered very clearly and concisely when he said he supports Lord Kelvin, who was only wrong about that molten core thing. Why don't you shut your materialist latrine hole and listen once in a while.
regards,
Esteban "Talibanned" Hambre
[This message has been edited quite a few times, actually, by MrHambre, 3-4-04]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by wj, posted 03-04-2004 8:23 PM wj has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by wj, posted 03-04-2004 8:40 PM MrHambre has not replied

MrHambre
Member (Idle past 1424 days)
Posts: 1495
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 107 of 316 (90464)
03-05-2004 6:16 AM
Reply to: Message 98 by wj
03-04-2004 8:23 PM


Kendemoratorium
I already quit on the Kenster, and I hope he goes the way of Skeptick and all the other creos who see themselves as defending God against the evil atheists and their so-called science.
regards,
Esteban "Silence is Golden" Hambre

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by wj, posted 03-04-2004 8:23 PM wj 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