Posted on 07/24/2003 1:55:39 PM PDT by Mr.Atos
I was just lisening to Medved debating Creationism with Athiests on the air. I found it interesting that while Medved argued his side quite effectively from the standpoint of faith, his opponents resorted to condescension and beliitled him with statements like, "when it rains, is that God crying?" I was reminded of the best (at least most amusing)debate that I have ever heard on the subject of Creationism vs Evolution, albeit a fictional setting. It occurred on the show, Friends of all places between the characters Pheobe (The Hippy) and Ross (The Paleontologist). It went like this...
Pheebs: Okay...it's very faint, but I can still sense him in the building...GO INTO THE LIGHT MR. HECKLES!!
Ross: Whoa, whoa, whoa. What, uh, you don't believe in evolution? Pheebs: Nah. Not really. Ross: You don't believe in evolution? Pheebs: I don't know. It's just, ya know, monkeys, Darwin, ya know, it's a, it's a nice story. I just think it's a little too easy.
Ross: Uh, excuse me. Evolution is not for you to buy, Phoebe. Evolution is scientific fact. Like, like, the air we breathe, like gravity... Pheebs: Uh, okay, don't get me started on gravity.
Ross: You uh, you don't believe in gravity? Pheebs: Well, it's not so much that ya know, like I don't *believe* in it, ya know. It's just...I don't know. Lately I get the feeling that I'm not so much being pulled down, as I am being pushed.
Ross: How can you NOT BELIEVE in evolution? Pheebs: [shrugs] I unh-huh...Look at this funky shirt!!
Ross: Well, there ya go. Pheebs: Huh. So now, the REAL question is: who put those fossils there, and why...?
Ross: OPPOSABLE THUMBS!! Without evolution, how do YOU explain OPPOSABLE THUMBS?!? Pheebs: Maybe the overlords needed them to steer their spacecrafts!
Pheebs: Uh-oh! Scary Scientist Man!
Pheebs: Okay, Ross? Could you just open your mind like, *this* much?? Okay? Now wasn't there a time when the brightest minds in the world believed that the Earth was flat? And up until what, like, fifty years ago, you all thought the atom was the smallest thing, until you split it open, and this like, whole mess o' crap came out! Now, are you telling me that you are so unbelievably arrogant that you can't admit that there's a teeny, tiny possibility that you could be wrong about this?!?
Pheebs: I can't believe you caved. Ross: What? Pheebs: You just ABANDONED your whole belief system! I mean, before, I didn't agree with you, but at least I respected you. Ross: But uh.. Pheebs: Yeah...how...how are you gonna go in to work tomorrow? How...how are you gonna face the other science guys? How...how are you gonna face yourself? Oh! [Ross runs away dejected] Pheebs: That was fun. So who's hungry?
There have been, no one says that a species can adapt to a volcanic eruption or a meteor (nor can they mutate themeselves out of it!). However, they can indeed survive through the more normal environmental changes cited in the post you responded to - without mutation - because there is simply no time for them to 'evolve' fast enough to meet these changes. Besides, these environmental changes do not give thousands or millions of years of warning so that the species can get 'ready'.
Where does she tell you what to say? She is allowing you to say you will not insult. You refused. It is pretty clear now where you stand.
Of course. You are describing natural selection.
Very prescient of you! And it's a killer. If one cannot adapt to the change - right there and then - one dies. There is no time for mutation or gradual evolution, a species has to already have the genetic information within it to survive. What that means, is that natural selection does not create, nor is it an agency for creating any new genetic information.
you said: Are you really sure you see the same visions when you munch the wafers?
There were so many straight lines in this post I found it hard to restrain myself in light of certain tasteless jokes. However, it is something to comment upon that the fruit fly(arrghh) uses the rest of its brain to smell, taste, feel/hear, coordinate those and other things to survive and reproduce. SWAT!!! To a certain degree.(WHEW! made it without firing a shot)
Let's look at a review of the actual post you refer to and what really happened. Let's frame it in the words and questions you have asked ask A-G:
"But what I want to show you starts at post 556, when "NewLand" pings me with a link to a new thread he has started"
Well, let's check the accuracy of this first statement. Here is post #556 from that thread:
To: Dimensio
Dimensio, I think I am just going to love you even more because you need it. :)
556 posted on 07/09/2003 9:16 PM PDT by goodseedhomeschool (Evolution is the religion for men who want no accountability)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 550 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
----------------------------
Oops Patrick, you had the wrong #. You must have meant post #566...let's see that one:
To: goodseedhomeschool
You know the start of this thread? Patrick Henry has this list of names that he pinged (I guess that's what ya call it). None of the creationists were on the *ping.
OK, got it! That's what caused me to start the other thread...
Learn About The Bible Here
Check it out...
566 posted on 07/09/2003 9:20 PM PDT by NewLand [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 543 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
----------------------
As everyone can see, I did not PING Patrick, I was merely pointing out this new thread to someone else, and that I was PINGing only like-minded Christians to the thread, I did not use that post for any other purpose. This is clear and irrefutable...because it is there to see for everyone and anyone and it is the truth.
But that's just the beginning to the fun here, stay tuned. Back to Patrick's post here and his questions to A-G:
Yet for some reason -- put your thinking cap on, A-Girl -- I was specifically pinged to see this thread, where I would see my warning (about flame wars in the evolution thread) being directed against me in a bible thread! Why was I pinged to see that?
Good question Patrick! Since we have already proved that I did not PING you in post #566 or any post for that matter anywhere in the Biology textbook hearings prompt science disputes [Texas] thread, let's move to the You Can Begin To Learn About The Bible Here thread in question for our answers:
First, here is the post where I "lampoon" Patrick's post, exactly as he said:
---------------------------
To: chicagolady; ALS; JesseShurun; goodseedhomeschool; f.Christian; bondserv; Onelifetogive
Visitors to this thread should be aware that a small cadre of anti-religion (and especially anti-creation) people have perfected the practice of trolling for insults, so that when their provocative posts are answered, they can then complain of "abusive" behavior. They do this in the hope of having our threads pulled. Such people are a detriment to this website, and to the conservative cause. Everyone is therefore urged to NEVER respond to such posters. It can be difficult, because they are skilled at inciting flame wars; but it is only in this way that we can maintain a high standard of civil discourse, and preserve Jim Robinson's excellent forum as a place where true conservatives can gather.
9 posted on 07/09/2003 7:21 PM PDT by NewLand
-----------------------------
Hey, wait a minute! Note that I did not *PING* Patrick, I just PINGed a few other like-minded Christians that I wanted to draw to the thread.
So, the real question is... who actually PINGed Patrick?
Before we reveal that, let's review one more "statement" from Mr Henry in his post here to Alamo-Girl:
Why was I pinged to see that?
I'll tell you why. They intended for me to visit a bible thread and start making a fuss, so they could complain to Jim Robinson about how horrible I am, and what a "Christian basher" I am. Think about it, A-Girl. Why else copy my warning language, and then ping me to a thread I would otherwise never visit? Just to be friendly? Because they enjoy my company? Is there any alternative explanation for this except that I was being set up for an abuse-button hit? I may be paranoid, sure, but in that case there's another explanation for the situation. What is it?
Could it be...let's take a peek back at post #16 in You Can Begin To Learn About The Bible Here thread:
-------------------------------
To: PatrickHenry; All
I notice that he did not give credit where credit was due.
And we somehow come into these threads and disrupt?
Since when?
You guys can have a ball, we have no interest, have never had any interest and will continue NOT to have any interest in disrupting ANY religious thread.
16 posted on 07/09/2003 7:35 PM PDT by Aric2000 (If the history of science shows us anything, it is that we get nowhere by labeling our ignorance god)
-------------------------------
So Pat, it was your good friend, Mr Aric2000 who *PINGed* you to that thread.
Why was that, Pat? Could it be, to use your own words..."Look how they set me up, hoping I would bash"
And one last comment, since I've been forced to take the time to respond to your accusations, let's review one more "statement" from your post to A-G:
"My suspicion is that the whole thread was created to be nothing but a trap to get me banned. That's right; the whole thread was a fake facade. It wasn't about the bible, it was about getting evolution supporters banned. I can't prove that, and you may now suspect that I've gone off the deep end, but tell me this -- but what else explains what I've pointed out?"
I will let the readers, lurkers, maybe the radio and newspapers read this post... You Can Begin To Learn About The Bible Here and determine the TRUE nature and intent of that thread...it's easy! Just read for yourself all the posts (only 75) and you will clearly see the spirit, the exchanges, and the intent.
You may even notice a "diversionary" tactic from a well known evo who does visit the thread later on...
Alamo-Girl, I agree to abide by your contract. But I felt it was necessary and important to publish these facts, let alone to defend myself from such slanderous and unecessary accusations.
As I understand it, it is to address the possibility that someone, who is not bound by the agreement, may resurrect an allegation concerning an incident that occurred before the effective date. In that instance, your proposed change would allow the accused to defend himself without withdrawing from the agreement to do so.
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.