Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Evolutionists retreating from the arena of science
CMI ^ | December 1, 2009 | Dave Woetzel

Posted on 12/03/2009 8:35:52 AM PST by GodGunsGuts

Evolutionists retreating from the arena of science

--snip--

Today, the Darwinian scientific consensus persists within almost every large university and governmental institution. But around the middle of the 20th century an interesting new trend emerged and has since become increasingly established. Evolutionary theorists have been forced, step by step, to steadily retreat from the evidence in the field. Some of the evidences mentioned earlier in this article were demonstrated to be frauds and hoaxes. Other discoveries have been a blow to the straightforward expectations and predictions of evolutionists. Increasingly, they have been forced to tack ad hoc mechanisms onto Darwin’s theory to accomodate the evidence. Their retreat to unfalsifiable positions is now evident in every arena where they once triumphed. Let us examine how Darwinian theorists have moved from concrete predictions and scientifically observable supporting evidences to metaphysical positions in several key fields of research...

(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...


TOPICS: Australia/New Zealand; Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; US: Georgia; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: abiogenesis; absolutebs; atomsdonotexist; baptist; belongsinreligion; biology; bovinescat; catholic; christian; christianity; christianright; churchofdarwin; climatechange; cosmology; creation; crevolist; darwinliedpeopledied; denial; dna; dumbasdirt; electricityisfire; electricuniverse; embarrasschristians; evangelical; evilution; evoisnotscience; evolution; evotardation; forrestisstoopid; genesis; genome; geology; god; godsgravesglyphs; gravityisahoax; gravityisjustatheory; headache; intelligentdesign; lutheran; manmonkeymyth; moralabsolutes; noah; noahsark; notasciencetopic; propellerbeanie; protestant; ragingyechardon; religionnotscience; religiouslunacy; religiousright; science; secularmythology; spammer
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 361-372 next last
To: Ira_Louvin

I guess if they type louder, it will make them more right...


81 posted on 12/03/2009 11:31:42 AM PST by xcamel (The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it. - H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Behemoth the Cat

I believe the bible makes it plain enough how the world was made. What I can’t believe is how upset and hateful the evolutionists become when creationism is presented. Evolution is a religion with its own set of beliefs. Unfortunately, they only have the spirit of the devil to persuade their behavior.


82 posted on 12/03/2009 11:31:42 AM PST by Cowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl

In the wild days of the internets they used to call the statement you just made “going cartoony” - I guess it still applies.


83 posted on 12/03/2009 11:36:49 AM PST by xcamel (The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it. - H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: xcamel
Is it your contention that the vast majority of biblical scholars do not use an historical-grammatical hermeneutic when interpreting the Bible???
84 posted on 12/03/2009 11:37:33 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Behemoth the Cat

What you are talking about, darwin referred to as diversification. We see this in cats, dogs, all kinds of species will adapt to conform with their natural environment.

The same phenomenon is responsible for drug resistance. However, this is different then say a virii transforming into a bacillus, which is what evolution insists we ought to see.

Darwin assumes that diversification eventually leads to the transformation of species, but cannot prove his assertion.


85 posted on 12/03/2009 11:37:46 AM PST by BenKenobi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Is it my contention that the vast majority of biblical scholars disagree with [you and] literal creationism.

Try to read the statement correctly and stop wasting everyone else’s time.


86 posted on 12/03/2009 11:41:07 AM PST by xcamel (The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it. - H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Cowgirl
Cowgirl, I do not remember discussing with you, so I will re-state some major points. If you believe in the Biblical description of the creation, it's fine, and I am not going to make any hateful comments with respect to your beliefs. I do become hateful, however, when beliefs are 'supported' be pseudo-scientific charlatanry (aka. 'creation science'). You want to present creationism to me? Then present it as a belief. "I believe that God created the Earth and the Man". Conversely, if you try to use science, then it will be critically evaluated from the standpoint of scientific methodology and observed facts.
87 posted on 12/03/2009 11:42:36 AM PST by Behemoth the Cat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: BenKenobi

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html
Scroll down to 5.0 Observed Instances of Speciation.


88 posted on 12/03/2009 11:47:59 AM PST by Behemoth the Cat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: metmom
Most crop plants are polyploid (have multiples of their original numbers of chromosomes).
From Wickipedia:
* Triploid crops: banana, apple, ginger, watermelon, citrus
* Tetraploid crops: durum or macaroni wheat, maize, cotton, potato, cabbage, leek, tobacco, peanut, kinnow, Pelargonium
* Hexaploid crops: chrysanthemum, bread wheat, triticale, oat, kiwifruit
* Octaploid crops: strawberry, dahlia, pansies, sugar cane

Some crops are found in a variety of ploidy. Apples, tulips and lilies are commonly found as both diploid and as triploid. Daylilies (Hemerocallis) cultivars are available as either diploid or tetraploid. Kinnows can be tetraploid, diploid, or triploid.

89 posted on 12/03/2009 11:49:56 AM PST by Wacka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: demshateGod

Except, many have died because of D’s theories.
<><><><><><

Name one. Who died directly because of Darwin’s theory.

Perhaps there is someone who was bonked on the head by a copy of Origin of Species, fell down a flight of steps, and died as a result of their injuries, but beyond that ... sorry.

Pol Pot never once stood over someone in the killing fields and said “I kill you in the name of Charles Darwin”.


90 posted on 12/03/2009 11:50:26 AM PST by dmz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: xcamel

And if they ignore the questions they cannot answer it has the same effect


91 posted on 12/03/2009 11:52:04 AM PST by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, Theres a higher power ,They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: canuck_conservative
“If you’re gonna keep posting your creationist propaganda, please provide back-up proof from an unbiased outlet.”

Over the past several years the news and science writers have had a number of “supports” for evolution found, Ida, Ardi, Millennium Man, Lucy. What can these fossils tell us about ourselves? Indeed what can any fossil tell us about ourselves?

From an unbiased (not biased TOWARD creationism by any measure):

“Paleontology, read as history is additionally unscientific because, without testable hypothesis, its statements rely for their justification on authority, as if its practitioners had privileged access to absolute truth....”

If you want to know who said that I'll tell you in my reply so you can judge the words on their merits and not the source.

92 posted on 12/03/2009 11:54:56 AM PST by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ira_Louvin

egg-zactly.

Even better is when they only respond to a small portion of a post, adding stupidity to abject ignorance.


93 posted on 12/03/2009 12:02:53 PM PST by xcamel (The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it. - H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
But no creationist of any persuasion has ever claimed that every single word of the Scriptures must be read in a totally, without exception, literal way. So why would they take this vision of John's as such?

Only evolutionists demand that creationists behave in such a way and tell others they do. Lying about them is the only way they can find to try to discredit them.

I've never met such a literature and grammar challenged group of people in my life.

94 posted on 12/03/2009 12:06:57 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: xcamel

==Is it my contention that the vast majority of biblical scholars disagree with [you and] literal creationism.

First, if you knew anything at all about biblical interpretation, you would know that the historical-grammatical method is different than biblical literalism. The vast majority of biblical scholars (to include biblical creationists) employ the historical-grammatical method to arrive at original intent, whereas I have never even heard of a biblical scholar that employs a strictly literal interpretation of scripture. That’s not to say that they don’t exist, but if any do exist, they are so rare I have never even heard of them. Indeed, even most old earth creationists use the historical-grammatical approach in virtually all other books EXCEPT Genesis...which they tend to throw out in deference to the ever-shifting opinions of mere mortals (so long as they are dressed up in white lab coats.


95 posted on 12/03/2009 12:09:07 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: allmendream

Specific examples, then, please.


96 posted on 12/03/2009 12:09:35 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

So... as for you.... Genisis: Literal or not?

Think very hard before you answer.

And no, you don’t get an existential get-out-of-the-question-free Hermeneutical caveat like “maybe”.


97 posted on 12/03/2009 12:14:13 PM PST by xcamel (The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it. - H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: Behemoth the Cat

Dear Behemoth, I won’t pretend to be scientific but please do lighten up. After all, we will all turn to dust one day and then we will know which of us was right.


98 posted on 12/03/2009 12:17:02 PM PST by Cowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: metmom

See my post #89.


99 posted on 12/03/2009 12:17:07 PM PST by Wacka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: xcamel; GodGunsGuts

I am personally impressed by the clear and concise explanation GGG has provided as to why we find no trilobites above the Permian strata, and why we find no dinosaurs above the cretaceous strata, or no mammals in the Cambrian strata


100 posted on 12/03/2009 12:18:44 PM PST by Ira_Louvin (Go tell them people lost in sin, Theres a higher power ,They need not fear the works of men.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 361-372 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson