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

CONTRA COSTA TIMES ^ | 12 February 2006 | John Glennon

[andysandmikesmom]

On a side note....I was told a while back, that there was a poll on FR, on this very subject...when the time alloted to the poll was over, the results, apparently showed that most did not support evolution...however, it was noted by whoever ran the poll, that there seemed to be reams of votes, all put in by 2 particular posters, voting over and over and over again, in support of being anti-evolution...they then even proudly boasted of having done this...when their votes were all weeded out, the poll on this very FR, showed that the majority of folks support evolution...

Now, I did not see this poll(apparently before the time I entered onto these threads)...however, I was told of this, and others, such as Patrick Henry can give you a full and detailed account of exactly what occurred...

So it would seem, that here on FR, according to that poll, most did support evolution...directly contradicts what you maintain...

Its getting on late here, and I need to get up early tomorrow morning, but after I return I will ping Patrick Henry, to supply you with the details of this poll on FR...

Have a good evening...

[andysandmikesmom]

Please, please, please, we have gone over this false story of Darwins recanting his Theory of Evolution and convert to Christianity before he died, ad nauseum...

However, I have to leave now, as I have explained in my previous post...tomorrow, I shall ping some others, who can provide you with many well documented articles which discuss the very thing you talk about...

[andysandmikesmom]

And no evolutionist ever said that something was created out of nothing...that is truly something Creationists claim that evolutionists say, and in fact that claim is a lie...

[Californiajones]

How was I to know about Darwin's real or not real conversion? I was just asking a question. Who cares? I know God is real --

and I repeat:

Until Evolutionists can create something out of nothing, they can talk all they want.

[Dimensio]

Until Evolutionists can create something out of nothing, they can talk all they want.

So you're demanding an example of an event that evolution does not predict from the theory of evolution. Why?

[Dimensio]

Until Evolutionists can create something out of nothing, they can talk all they want.

The theory of evolution says nothing whatsoever about "something out of nothing". Why do you bring this up?

And didn't Darwin himself convert to Christianity before he died?

No.

[Californiajones]

Well, the only response I have to all of this is that I believe Einstein's Theory of Relativity. I believe it because it only applies to the visual world. It does NOT apply to the unseen spiritual world (and therefore the idea of moral relativity that was spawned from a misinterpretation of Einstein is ridiculous).

Until Evolutionists can create something out of nothing, they can talk all they want.

For example, I'd like any Evolutionist to create gravity -- or even cogently explain -- for me. Or conjure up one single cell out of thin air.

And my ideas are not restricted to Judea Christian thought -- Plato understood the problems of the visual world's relative nature and Aristotle rejected Evolution outright.

Nuff said. Boring waste of time until some Evolutionist can create somethin' out a nuttin'.

[Dimensio]

For example, I'd like any Evolutionist to create gravity -- or even cogently explain -- for me.

Why do you want this? The theory of evolution says nothing whatsoever about gravity, so why do you want an "Evolutionist" to create it?

[Havoc]

Thank you for posting that. Positively laughed my Butt off.

[Eagles6]

Fred is good. So is the .308.

[furball4paws]

Theater of the Absurd Placemarker

[Havoc]

No, it's not the point when being purposedly and usefully absurd. Nutbags exist. Good nonspecific that nobody would generally argue with on it's own. But put "evo" next to it and all of them suddenly see themselves as implicated. They don't necessarily have to be; but, they can feign insult and drag nuckles on the floor in pitched histerical screams as though directed at them instead of dealing with reality. The Fred article was insightful to that end.. lol

[Havoc]

Sorry, but the absurdity I illustrate is evolution. And like it or not, that is your own doing, and why America sees evolution as such a crock.. and it is. It is a faith system supported only by condescending twits who hammer everyone around them that has the audacity not to take plausibility over evidence and speculation over observation. It is a nutbag theory upheld largely by nonsense and hysterics.

[Dimensio]

And like it or not, that is your own doing, and why America sees evolution as such a crock..

I don't quite see how it's our fault that people like you dishonestly misrepresent evolution. Why is it our fault that you're a liar?

[Californiajones]

Evolutionists claim that evolution explains the creative nature of the universe, and that it's just some insecure nursery rhyme for people to believe a designed universe has a designer.

So, create something.

It's a game of syntax you are trying to catch me up in by calling me on "creating" things. Evolutionists decry "intelligent design" and ID means there is a Creator who created the world. Therefore, to design the universe means to create something out of nothing.

So design something out of nothing. It's gotta start somewhere.

Excuse me while I quote Aristotle, but everything in the time-space continuum has a "beginning, middle and end"

Don't Evolutionists believe even in that?

[Dimensio]

Evolutionists claim that evolution explains the creative nature of the universe,

No, they don't. The theory of evolution covers diversity of biological life forms. That's it. IT says nothing about a "creative nature" of the universe itself.

and that it's just some insecure nursery rhyme for people to believe a designed universe has a designer.

The theory of evolution makes no claims whatsoever regarding a designer of the universe. Your questions are founded upon a faulty understanding of the scope of the theory of evolution.

[Havoc]

*snickering*

I'm sure you aren't worried.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/11/22/opinion/polls/main657083.shtml

CBS is hardly a pro-Christian haven for anti-evolutionism.
But, don't worry... You just keep right on.. just not getting your message out.

[Havoc]

ROFL. Sorry, but nice try. Keep your chin up, though.

[Dimensio]

ROFL. Sorry, but nice try.

Nice try at what? The incident of two creationist FReepers trying to rig a poll on evolution is well-documented here. One of them even proudly admitted it.

[Havoc]

Ask Fred. I don't have to misrepresent smoke. And all evolution has done is shovel smoke. There isn't one of you here that could cogently answer Fred's pointed questions without screaching, dismissing or feeding a line of hooey.
Been there done that. If a problem makes you look bad, you cut and run from it at first chance, second chance or whatever chance is most appealing and useful. Macroevolution seems to be the latest.

The theory isn't a single one but a collection of theories that are all moving targets and as likely to half be gone tomorrow and replaced with something else if plausibility
falls apart. Evidence? What's that. We got a rock, want some spin about it with absolutely no proof - sure. But real evidence - nada.

Get real.