Posted on 09/02/2014 11:10:04 AM PDT by JimSEA
Please remember, it's a matter of the highest, utmost kindness if I call you "stupid", because the alternative is "g*dd*am*d liar", and that's something I can't contemplate, FRiend.
Of course I've read the arguments against evolution -- they get posted in threads here, on average, two or three times a month.
And I've never seen one which doesn't strike me as extremely, ah... uh... ahem... "stupid".
BrandtMichaels: "What I detest are folks who use ridicule instead of sound reasoning."
Then you detest most all creationists who post on these threads, because that's all they have to offer.
BrandtMichaels: " I detest folks who think evolution is settled science."
But evolution is "settled science" -- that's a fact beyond debate.
Of course, you may not like it, you may not agree with it, you may loathe and despise the many scientists who study and report their findings related to evolution, you may even have many friends who feel just as strongly as you do, but evolution theory is still science, and it is still "settled" -- those are observed, confirmed facts, end of discussion.
Will evolution theory ever be overturned?
Theoretically, sure, any scientific theory can be overturned by new data which falsifies old understandings.
But the practical reality is that very few strongly, repeatedly-confirmed theories get overturned, and that certainly includes evolution's basics: 1) descent with modifications and 2) natural selection.
Of course, alongside evolution theory are many other scientific speculations, hypotheses and theories, some of which are clearly just "current best guesses" and any of those can be, and routinely have been, overthrown by new discoveries.
Indeed, that's exactly what makes science itself so real, and so exciting.
BrandtMichaels: "Eventually evolution will be completely exposed for the fraud that it is [and always was since it completely contradicts the Holy Bible] along with naturalism [no God] and uniformitarianism [we know even with occasional catastrophes things do not progress uniformly]."
No, evolution might theoretically be mistaken, but it cannot possibly be a "fraud", since it conforms to science's basic assumptions (i.e., naturalism, uniformitarianism) and all the available facts.
That some findings of science seem to contradict some people's interpretations of scripture, is also an unfortunate fact, but what natural science has going for it is it's ability to keep us alive and comfortable in this life.
That's why so many people (though certainly not all) embrace science.
BrandtMichaels: "God has declared one major worldwide natural disaster from our past - the flood.
You folks blindly and blithely claim no evidence but then the vast majority have not even examined the evidence from a creation perspective."
As JimSEA points out in post #44 above, if you look at geological formations through the eyes of science, you can find gold, diamonds, oil, fossils and innumerable other valuable raw materials.
But thinking of miles of geological strata, as if they all resulted from a single recent world-wide flood makes no sense, from any scientific perspective.
So I'll say it all again: you and your folks are not required by any law to believe a single word published in the name of science.
But you are also not allowed by US law to call your own religious beliefs "science", or to declare "unscientific" those elements of science which you find loathsome and abhorrent.
So you say, but nevertheless, it is a fact: the US Supreme Court was asked to rule, and did, saying that religion is not science and scientists alone will determine what does, or does not, qualify under the term "science".
That's why you are not allowed to go into public schools and teach your religion in science classes.
Of course, I totally agree that you should teach your religion in religion classes of public schools; at the same time, have no problem excluding insane religions (i.e., some cult worship, or that alleged "religion of peace") from public schools.
But normal denominations, taught as such in public schools could only be good in many cases, I think.
Fraud is a criminal act.
When you start taking the position that it's a crime to contradict the Bible you went off the rails somewhere back down the line.
Not exactly - God says that someday we will all give an account for our words and actions.
Possibly you just think I’m wrong and creation is wrong in this world, with no regard for the next. You have not begun to change your perspective to a heavenly realm.
Fraud has been criminalized, but that is not its definition.
I didn't say that was it's definition. I said that it was a criminal act.
I think that when you start declaring that disagreement with your personal religious beliefs to be engaging in a criminal act then the idea of "freedom of religion" just got kicked to the curb.
I see you are quite content to take things out of context, twist my words, fall to ridicule and reach absurd conclusions.
Evolution and liberal logic have taught you well grasshopper.
Maybe someday there can be a reasonable debate between creation and evolution...
But it seems fairly unlikely in my lifetime.
Evos it seems would be happier uncovering ‘heretical’ thinking and burning believers at the stake.
Here here, bring on the EVO Inquisition! <== sarc
I took your words at face value, since I believe that's how scientific theories and evidence need to be approached - not with emotional hyperbole and drama queen histrionics.
Oh yeah I forgot one other step:
Malign your opponents by ascribing your tactics to them.
You’re the one that chose the term “fraud”.
And you're the one who attempted to redefine it by using the verb "is" in Post #63. That verb is an assertion, and you did not qualify that assertion. That is defining.
And you are wanting to try me as a criminal when it is clear that many different tax-payer funds and grants have been used and abused in support of pro evolutionary findings.
Build your evo empires all you want but we should never use taxpayer dollars in support of it.
Science would have much more integrity w/o the public continually funding anything which is impossibly elusive [or just plain common sense] i.e the food you eat is bad for you, no wait it’s good, nope bad, grrr, arg, we must need a more expensive and comprehensive study, yeah that’s the ticket].
1st law of bureaucracy - to sustain and grow itself usually through trickery and thievery.
I wouldn’t call you a fraud because I believe you are a sincere believer. However, I can’t be so restrained with the creationist “scientists” at ICR and other young earth organizations’ egregious lying, attributing quotes to people who never said those things, attribution of scientific positions that never existed, manipulation of people not well grounded in science, and attempting to teach their nonsense to school children as scientific fact. Step back and take a critical look at these people.
No, I'm disagreeing with your assessment that fraud was committed based solely on the evidence that it contradicts the literal interpretation of Bible.
You want me to agree that fraud isn't a crime?
I don’t recognize those as the words I used...
Here's a direct quote:
Eventually evolution will be completely exposed for the fraud that it is [and always was since it completely contradicts the Holy Bible]
It's fraud because it contradicts the Holy Bible. Fraud is a criminal act. Do the math.
I did say that "crime" is not part of its definition.
A fraud can be perpetuated by people unwittingly, but the original intent would be intentional deceit (definition of fraud).
And we can, and justifiably do prosecute people for that, right?
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.