Designed to deceive: Creation can't hold up to rigors of science

CONTRA COSTA TIMES ^ | 12 February 2006 | John Glennon

[DelphiUser]

>>Do you see anything here about smoking?

Don't say the word smoking!!

Oops, I said smoking!

Dah! I said it again!

I'm gonna go take a shower, I smell like a long thin tube of paper filld with a weed, and set alight after this thread... < / Humor >

[atlaw]

My side is winning. Your side is losing.

Winning what?

[Havoc]

If you have to ask, you're not paying attention. You should get more involved lol

[bvw]

" There's no other logic for an anti-evolution stance!"

Great comment! Well that pretty much sums it up. Willful ignorance, indeed.

Ignorance by the Darwinists, that is, an obdurate unwillingness to see and understand the other side's aguments and to mock.

Of course the same willing blindness allows a Darwinist the liberty to continue beleiving in Darwinism. It's a niche, a niche for those of that type of blindered intellect, whether blindered by choice or by native limits to ability.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

" Yes. There is no alternative. Nothing -- no evidence imaginable -- can disporve, contradict or be inconsistent with evolution."

Um, that isn't what I said. I said there is no scientific alternative to the TOE. That means nobody else has come up with anything better; all of the alternatives rely on nonscientific premises and causes. I didn't say that there never COULD be scientific alternatives. I also specifically said that the saltationist version of evolution WOULD contradict the TOE as it stands. Therefore, your assertion I really meant that nothing could "disporve, contradict or be inconsistent with evolution" is bizarre. Are you having that much trouble reading simple declarative sentences? :)

[bvw]

And that's "testable", or at least they gets awfully testy about challenges to that dogamtic position.

[tallhappy]

Um, that isn't what I said

Yes it is. Pretty much in words as well.

I agree with you.

[atlaw]

If you have to ask, you're not paying attention. You should get more involved lol

It was a pretty simple question. You said "my side is winning." What are you winning? Your evasion strongly suggests that you don't know.

Maybe the question will be easier to answer if I add another element to it:

How do you know you're winning? In other words, by what measure have you determined that you're winning?

[Havoc]

Wasn't an evasion, it was called a joke..
You're not paying attention - you should get more involved.
Perhaps humor escapes you?

Double meanings and all.. lol
My side is winning the debate with America. You haven't convinced them to do anything but reject your ideology.
Pretty simple.

[bvw]

Here's Dick Morris on Hillary Clinton (as reported today on FR, "How Anger Wounds Hilll").

Hillary takes her political positions very seriously and personally. She has a hard time seeing virtue in those who disagree with her.

[atlaw]

My side is winning the debate with America.

Ok. And are you measuring this by opinion polls?

[CarolinaGuitarman]

" Yes it is. Pretty much in words as well."

No, it's not what I said at all. Now, since I think you can read somewhat proficiently, the only other explanation is that you are a liar. I clearly did not say that any and all evidence imaginable could be fit into the TOE. I said there is no other scientific explanation that explains the facts. Go lie to someone else.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

You and Hillary have a lot in common then.

[longshadow]

I don't think I've ever seen this many anti-evos drunk this early in the AM on a single CREVO thread in the history of FR.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"I don't think I've ever seen this many anti-evos drunk this early in the AM on a single CREVO thread in the history of FR."

Doesn't seem out of the ordinary to me.

[PatrickHenry]

I don't think I've ever seen this many anti-evos drunk this early in the AM on a single CREVO thread in the history of FR.

It's all a part of what we call post-Dover syndrome, which was easily foreseeable the day the brilliant opinion by Judge Jones came out. The symptoms are understandable -- denial, disorientation, anger, scapegoating, and finally ... an even more fervent commitment to creationism.

[tallhappy]

I see. When faced with something you think is harmful to your world view (it's not) you go to insult and attack.

What possibly can contradict evolution?

And, why is your definition of evolution different than that of the author of this article?

I said there is no other scientific explanation that explains the facts.

Yes. You don't seem to understand what you are saying. And, credit to you for using fact correctly.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"I see. When faced with something you think is harmful to your world view (it's not) you go to insult and attack."

No, when faced with someone who blatantly lies about what I said, I call them on it. I never even implied that there was no conceivable evidence that could go against the TOE. I said that there are no scientific alternatives. ID isn't a scientific alternative.

" What possibly can contradict evolution?"

An animal giving birth to a different class of animal.

" And, why is your definition of evolution different than that of the author of this article?"

It isn't.

" Yes. You don't seem to understand what you are saying. And, credit to you for using fact correctly."

You don't seem to be able to read. When someone says there is no other scientific explanation that fits the facts, that doesn't mean that there are no conceivable facts that could contradict the TOE. For someone who has pretensions to deep logical skills, you sure do like to wallow in logical missteps.

[VadeRetro]

Gee, that sounds sort of ad hominem, the sort of thing you're always decrying in other posters. That will be a good one to save and fling back in your hypocritical face the next time you show up on a thread talking about snide tones and denunciations.

[furball4paws]

"Nothing to do with epistomology Mr left Wing Professor who doesn't know the difference between ribosomal based mechanisms of anti-biotics vs lactam inhibition based, Mr never Ping me cry baby whining victim (who doesn't know what the term ping even means)."

Oh, my. You don't know the difference between tetracyclines and penicillin? What's this world coming to? :)

What a creep.