Posted on 05/07/2012 3:17:32 PM PDT by tpanther
SCIENCE NOW KNOWS THAT MANY OF THE PILLARS OF DARWINIAN THEORY ARE EITHER FALSE OR MISLEADING. YET BIOLOGY TEXTS CONTINUE TO PRESENT THEM AS FACTUAL EVIDENCE OF EVOLUTION. WHAT DOES THIS IMPLY ABOUT THEIR SCIENTIFIC STANDARDS?
(Excerpt) Read more at discovery.org ...
He’s a Moony and he’s loony.
Turn off the caps lock if you want anyone to take you seriously
Read and understand the following if you want me to take you seriously; personally, I don’t care if you do.
http://vwxynot.blogspot.com/2007/06/endogenous-retroviruses-and-evidence.html
In fact, when the false “evidence” is
taken away, the case for Darwinian evolution, in the textbooks
at least, is so thin it’s almost invisible.
Didn’t put on caps lock...once you read, you’ll understand. That was how it was in the article.
Great. A shouty Moonie, that’s all we need.
I read a good bit of the article...it presupposes that evolution is true, and then goes on to say why, by supplying “evidence”.
It takes a jab at creationists and throws in that’s not science.
The point of MY article is, neither is evolution.
Then there’s my tagline.
Reading continues to remain fundamental.
Not fun and mental.
But anything to ignore the gargantuan thin-ness. ;)
Some of us haven’t evolved ears yet.
LOL...and too many think ears will eventually evolve to the point we can read with them.
The article your link took me to was not in caps.
Evolution is one of Gods' more ingenious creations allowing his creatures to adapt and evolve to suit the universe he created for them.
Thanks, God, well-played!
Supplying evidence to demonstrate the truth of something is how science is one. Asserting the contrary with nothing but capital letters is not how science is done.
Who is this "Science" person? Can we question him/her?
Well, yes and no. That lede was done in “Small Caps” font embellishment.
You know, this is very true, but if you bring up this argument with pro-Evos, they say that no scientists believe in that evidence, and they don’t base their theories on it. They just blame the shoddy textbook manufacturers for perpetuating these errors.
I wonder why nobody from the pro-Evo crowd ever gets concerned with correcting the textbooks that are miseducating children about their theory? Are they worried that their “real” evidence will be less compelling than the “fake” evidence? If not, then what is a more plausible explanation for their lacadaisical attitude?
How science is one?
Or perhaps you meant won? LOL
Well by all means, let us know when you might have something to add!
Liberals are like that.
They just kinda shrug their shoulders and say something like...well I didn’t plant it there or whatever.
Yeah...the “real” stuff probably is just as damaging and also notice how liberals are always making rules for others to follow that they never ever have any intention of keeping themselves. They’re constantly doing that with anything that dares to challenge their beloved evolution.
The more I’m around this, the more I’m convinced evos are liberals.
Here are a number of the most important discoveries and inventions:
Antibiotics, circulation of the blood, germ theory, atomic theory, heredity, theory of relativity, the inter net, aerodynamics and so on.
The theory of evolution? Provides jobs for anthropologists.
“done” was the word I meant, perhaps if I had used all caps the typo wouldn’t have happened
When you can rationally and convincingly refute the ERV evidence I provide to you we can discuss it further.
Conjecture isn’t evidence.
And what you described is called adaptation.
Otherwise what’s to prevent all the apes from becoming human?
That's what the "Men in Black" are really doing.
And why do you think they keep making "Planet of the Apes" movies -- subliminal instructions to humans to keep down the other primates.
Nah...had you not fixated yourself on all caps while busily making rules for everyone but yourself...
there’s nothing to refute other than what you’re calling it. But it’s most certainly not evidence of anything.
Sooner or later you people will have to make our minds up for us and stick to “it’ll take ga-jillions of years to prove evolution”...
or not.
shhhhh....pretty soon the cat’s gonna get out of the bag.
a gorilla will start talking or a chimp will get caught flying a plane.
Oh wait...in a ga-jillion years they will anyway!
I suggest you just “keep banging the rocks together.”
Bump for later
I have plenty of rules for myself, one is not to abandon logic in such discussions. ERV is ample proof of evolution; all one has to do is be willing to apply logic to the evidence.
Or one can choose not to read about it and remain ignorant. I expected your choice.
“Who is this “Science” person? Can we question him/her”?
Sorry, no.
Unfortunately, he fell off the edge of the flat erth.
There may be problems with evolution as a theory. There are plenty who view evolution as a religion. Alas, the anti-evolution crowd (on the whole) is so grossly ill-informed in both theory and reality it’s embarrassing. The hysteria is so loud, the sensible is lost amid the noise.
It makes no sense to me that schools would be teaching out of any outdated textbooks in today’s digital age.
See logic isn’t banging your worldview over other people’s heads and squealing when all the holes are exposed.
Sorry, but that’s just not science, or evidence of such.
See logic isn’t banging your worldview over other people’s heads and squealing when all the holes are exposed.
Sorry, but that’s just not science, or evidence of such.
Ya think?
Now here’s where we do have actual “evidence”, as it were.
And speaking of reality, the reality is that it’s the evolutionists that enforce science through the courts, dictating what science is and isn’t via their worldview; hijacking science, the courts and whatever is necessary to promote their secular godless sensibilities.
Which is why we hear liberals saying things on TV like euroweenies are further along the evolutionary scale and are therefore more accepting of things like gay marriage and all of society paying for birth control products via taxes and so forth and so on. If you disagree, well then you might as well be a knuckle-dragging ape with a proclivity for warring with women.
In short, evolution is a tool of liberalism.
what will that do, prove how old they are?
If the part I linked wasn't in caps please tell us what you saw.
I’m not banging peoples heads with a world view. I linked to an article about ERVs and how they provide irrefutable proof that humans and chimpanzees have a common evolutionary ancestor. It further demonstrates that all mammals, if one goes back far enough, have a common ancestor. I invited you to read, comprehend and, if you can, refute the article. I believe that is where you are having your difficulty.
You certainly haven’t exposed any holes in modern evolutionary science and I don’t think an honest review of my responses here could be fairly termed “squealing” by anyone.
Stick with your magic apple/talking snake story. I’ll bet you’ll find it easier to comprehend.
Ah.... “Reification”.
Just like “evolution did this”.
“Has any Creationist been caught faking evidence?”, he asked rhetorically.
Ahhhh, but there’s where your so-called logic fails.
No what really happened was I posted and article illustrating the holes in evolution to the point when one removes the PROVEN falsehoods, it’s “thin” to say the least, YOU in turn squealed about caps lock, which wasn’t the case btw...
and posted some article that illustrated nothing to answer MY article and then got sore because I disagreed with you.
Liberals.
Unlike the kids who were on your little school bus, I know how to stay on topic. Since I began responding to your post, I have asked you to read, comprehend and refute the article on ERVs. This may be an insurmountable obstacle for you but it is all I have asked of you and all I have chosen to discuss since the ERV evidence irrefutably demonstrates the existence of common evolutionary ancestry among species. It also, by the way, amounts to an inextricable connection between evolution and modern genetic science; one cannot have one without the other. To deny evolution requires one to deny genetic science.
Do that, and I will be happy to discuss it further with you.
Ooops, wrong again. Staying on topic would actually be addressing the erroneous and uncorrected embryos etc.
Even post #43 was closer and it was rhetorical! :)
I’m staying on my topic which I clearly indicated in my first response to you was all I was willing to discuss. I indicated that if you would address the ERV evidence I would discuss it further with you. I also said I didn’t care if you wanted to accept the challenge or not.
Careful reading is an important life skill. Look into it.
Not your topic!
So, do you routinely respond to the shortcomings and outright fraud of evolution by posting irrelevant articles?
Don’t fret, no one else has either.
If you could read it and actually understand it you would see that it is far from irrelevant. It, in fact, shows that evolution is a demonstrable fact.
Stick with the magic apple/talking snake story. It’s far less work for you to understand and, since you don’t care about the truth, for you, it’ll work just as well.
You seriously don’t understand. I posted an article about telling the truth, you ignored it and blew it off and didn’t address it and posted more evo-rubbish as if that actually fixes things.
And now, on the way out, you’re immensely uncomfortable with your maker and project-alot...about telling the truth no less.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
