I think I see the problem with these "quote-mining" operations. Some of it, obviously, is pure dishonesty, by people who know better. But I suspect that most of it is done by people who are clueless that old texts become superseded by new information, and old opinions become superseded by revised opinions -- often by the same people who wrote the old opinions.
This "all quotes are equal" approach to scholarship could have its roots in bible study. After all, it's quite common to dig into the scriptures and pull out something that supports one's position. We all do this. All scripture quotes are good quotes, and religious folk routinely "quote mine" the bible. That makes sense -- with the bible -- because it's a closed work, and everything relevant to what it discusses is to be found within its covers.
But the study of science is entirely different. Science-minded people understand that new information is constantly piling up, which often renders even recent books obsolete. I suspect that many creationists simply don't grasp the situation.
Nope. Materialists in no way believe in miracles and he clearly states that life is a miracle in that quote.
Evolutionists when presented with evidence showing that scientists do not believe in their garbage always make excuses that the people did not mean it, have said otherwise at some time or other, the quote is old or numerous other nonsense excuses. The question they never answer though is why did these people make these statements if they did not mean them? Are they some kind of idiots just blaberring away nonsense? They even claim that the quote on eugenics by Darwin is 'not what he meant' when clearly the whole concept of evolutionary theory rests on getting rid of the laggards as the quote on the top of the article shows. Indeed to evolutionists, getting rid of the 'less viable' is the way of progress to bigger and better things.
Therefore this constant attack on quotes is just a lame defense by evolutionists of their ideology. They cannot contemplate that any honest, reasonable person can disagree with their theory. They cannot countenance that anyone can say that the emperor of evolution has no clothes so they must paint all who say it as idiots or nutcases. The problem they have is that it is not just idiots or nutcases that disagree with evolution, reasonable, smart people disagree with it.
The large amount of evidence presented in the article above shows quite well that there is much scientific reason to reject evolution. That evolutionists do not dare discuss the evidence presented in the article above shows that the evidence presented against evolution is fact and not refutable.