Posted on 02/12/2006 10:32:27 AM PST by PatrickHenry
The Blather Blast.
That might be what we've got here. I'm wondering if some of the more ludicrous, drunken streams of consciousness from creationists on this thread are for real though. DU fratboys trying to make conservatives look stupid?
I think this is the funniest argument against evolution we've seen yet...
So, what's your excuse? Willful ignorance, superstitious brainwash, or charlatan exploitation?
Creationists -- at least those who venture into the domain of science -- steadfastly claim that evolution relies on never-occurring, single-generation, large-scale transitions from one species to another -- an imaginary phenomenon they call "macro-evolution" -- a fiction of their own devising which they correctly reject for lack of evidence. From this wobbly foundation, they go on to claim that because ducks never give birth to dogs, or monkeys to humans, that all of evolution is false.It is not known why creationists consistently fail to comprehend that the gradual process of evolution requires only "micro-evolution" -- a well-observed, easily understood, undirected natural phenomenon which they claim to accept. Perhaps it's because gradual change via mutation and natural selection is too easy to understand, too natural, too obvious! Or perhaps it's because because they realize that a long series of small changes implies that the Earth is far older than they would prefer. They don't want to understand such an explanation. They prefer that the origin of species be an inexplicable mystery -- one which must have a supernatural cause. But in rejecting the fantasy of "macro-evolution" -- events that never happen and which are actually contrary to the process of evolution, creationists are saying nothing about the theory of evolution, only their own, self-imposed misunderstanding.
Senator Santorum backed away from the ID side in the Dover case. If he thought the anti-evolution side had any political muscle, do you think he would have done so?
Santorum now critical of Dover case
"...Santorum said he was troubled by court testimony that showed some board members were motivated by religion in adopting the policy."
[snip]
"He said he intends to withdraw his affiliation with the Michigan-based public-interest law firm that promotes Christian values."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1545613/posts
_____________________________________
Gov. Taft of Ohio must not think the anti-evolutionists have much clout either:
___________________________________-
I don't have the link handy right now, but the Dover school board members who pushed ID were soundly thrashed by candidates who promised to reverse the policy.
I've presumed all along that your presence on the crevo threads had to be some kind of joke. Thank you for clarifying that!
Are you and your buddy Hillary having a hard time seeing virtue in those who disagree with you?
Dover CARES sweeps election
Dover CARES swept the race for school board Tuesday defeating board members who supported the curriculum change being challenged in federal court.
After months of fierce campaigning that included some mudslinging from both sides, new members of the board are Bernadette Reinking, Rob McIlvaine, Bryan Rehm, Terry Emig, Patricia Dapp, Judy McIlvaine, Larry Gurreri and Phil Herman.
The challengers defeated James Cashman, Alan Bonsell, Sherrie Leber, Ed Rowand, Eric Riddle, Ron Short, Sheila Harkins and Dave Napierskie.
Are you saying you'd believe it was magic?
Would giving birth to a different species contradict it?
Following that devastating article at the top of the thread, I'd guess they were finally driven to last gasp madness.
Yes, I understand. The liberals are allowed to be insulting. If we insult back we are nasty mean etc...
Do let us know when you've started being honest about ridiculous hypotheses of evolution. First you'll need to learn about the theory of evolution though. Then you'll know enough to be able to laugh with us at the ridiculous evolution hypotheses that creationists hypothesise.
I can imagine that must be particularly hard on them! LOL!!!
Children are the same species as their parents (barring bizarre hybrids like ligers and tigons). If you think that the theory of evolution says otherwise then you haven't even reached first base of understanding the basics of the theory.
Any fertile offspring is always the same species as the parents.
"They simply do not address what I think are some interesting proposals put forth by evolutionary biologists and creationists alike."
It's pretty obvious from reading the article that the writer did not attempt to gather any data except from evolutionist believers.
You left out gin, vodka, and Scotch.
"Everyone including IDers and even 6-day YECers, believes that evolution explains some, most, or all biological diversity. The difference is that "Big E" evolutionists are convinced that evolution alone can explain all biological diversity, and are consequently the dogmatists. They are the ones who regard dissent as heresy, and are fearful that people may have doubts."
Nice summary.
If the evolutionist believers would stick to calling a "fact" the biological diversity that can be presently tested then there would be no arguments about any of this. It's when they go on to insist that the TOE explains ALL biological diversity that there is a dispute.
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.