Replies

What's your point in belaboring the tenuous connection between Hitler and evolution other than to imply that people who accept the theory of evolution are as evil as Hitler? You and Dan play this fascinating game of condemnation by innuendo, followed by transparent protestations of innocence. It is unbecoming in a person who professes to be a Christian.

I've seen every bug eyed evolutionist (( nazi // overlords )) staring off at every canyon -- mountain -- bug .. .. ..

thinking // believing how it all grew out of a washed out mudball === looney !

What's your point in belaboring the tenuous connection between Hitler and evolution other than to imply that people who accept the theory of evolution are as evil as Hitler? You and Dan play this fascinating game of condemnation by innuendo, followed by transparent protestations of innocence.

Aah, atlaw! Click! The light is going on, isn't it?

What is this Free Republic anyway? It is a conservative political forum!

Why are we discussing evolution on a conservative forum? Because ideas have consequences!

If you think there is a connection between Hitler's atrocities and his belief system, you are correct. This is only denied by the blindest of fools. Did I or Dan say that all evolutionists are evil? You yourself made the connection. Logically it follows that if Hitler and Stalin and Mao and other enemies of the human race used social darwinism to justify their atrocities, that others may well do the same in the future. It does not, however, follow that all believers in evolution will do the same.

Now, as a point of information, more than one secularist has embraced evolution simply because the only alternative was creation and the existence of a Creator is unacceptable.

Today, scientists who still keep to these theories and insist on denying all things religious, are dogmatic and bigoted people, who have conditioned themselves not to believe in God. The famous English zoologist and evolutionist D.M.S. Watson confesses to this dogmatism as he explains why he and his colleagues accept the theory of evolution:
If so, it will present a parallel to the theory of evolution itself, a theory universally accepted, not because it can be proved by logically coherent evidence to be true, but because the only alternative, special creation, is clearly incredible. (D.M.S. Watson, "Adaptation", Nature, no. 124, p. 233)

Evolutionists rely not on science but on materialist philosophy and they distort science to make it agree with this philosophy. A geneticist and an outspoken evolutionist from Harvard University, Richard Lewontin, confesses to this truth: It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, so we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. (Richard Levontin, The Demon-Haunted World, The New York Review of Books, January, 9, 1997, p. 28)

Such a choice is not logical, but willful. Why would the existence of a Creator be unacceptable? If He exists, He exists. Denial does not make Him cease to exist. The only logical answer to why the will would be allowed to dominate the mind is that the self becomes more important than truth. And what is the center of hedonism? Think about it!

I found this sideways, to Dataman.

You and Dan play this fascinating game of condemnation by innuendo, followed by transparent protestations of innocence

What you describe is the last thing I'd expect of Dataman, after several years' acquaintance.

For myself, I don't really know what you are talking about. I delight in giving straightforward answers, when I have them to give. I honestly can't guess what you're alluding to. (If you've simply lost track of who says what, I can't blame you.)

Dan