(Vanity) Evolution the Lie

Creationist

[Pox]

My original statement was meant to reflect those with the mindset of muslims and their demeanor towards non muslims, as in, if they tried to force me to follow their religion (as in, shove it down my throat), I have every right to deny them existence.

I hope that has cleared it up for you.

[Creationist]

You are an angry person, who feels better by attacking others with words and I would venture to bet with violence when in person, when the discussion doesn't go your way.

I have not once attacked you with words. I have made observations of your actions and come to a person conclusion.

I will pray for you my friend and hope that God that is Jesus will be expedient in opening you eyes to the truth and soften your heart to acceptance.

May the Lord Jesus bless you beyond your needs.

[Pox]

This premise of this thread and your demeanor towards those who do not subscribe to your interpretations is derogatory and insulting, in my opinion.

[Creationist]

Well you are entitled to your opinion.

My demeanor has never been derogatory to a person just a belief of a lie, or so called evidence that is not proof of evolution.

I do not think so highly of myself as to believe everyone or even anyone would subscribe to my opinion.

But that is why it is called a personal opinion.

I look at the visible evidence of the world and see that it is best explained by the Genesis account of Creation and a Global flood.

Evolutionist see the world as best explained by actions that can not happen today, actions that do not follow the physical laws, actions that do not follow nature's laws, hypothesis's that can not be reproduced or tested, and call it a fact. That is not true science, it is a faith based belief and therefore a religion.

As a religion as you have stated should not be shoved down anyones throat, so take it out.

I have books from the turn of the century that do not use evolution or billions of years in their explanations of the physical environment, and it is easily understood and would never make a person ignorant because of the lack of this lie.

[Pox]

Once again, you attempt to validate your belief by nitpicking evolution as if they are the only two possibilities, and you seem to believe that I and others who do not agree with your interpretations have no other choice but to accept your beliefs if you can in some way discredit evolution.

I find that condescending, arrogant beyond belief, and insulting to no end, not to mention disingenuous.

Since you have absolutely no proof that will validate your own beliefs, nor are you prepared to offer any, I find your demeanor and methodology galling and predictable.

The 'game' doesn't work by your rules, and until you can accept that axiom, your 'side' will continue to flounder towards 'extinction'.

[Creationist]

Mutations do not work chemical or radiation, there are enough examples of that around no new species.

Natural selection does not create new species, it selects at random the stronger. So it weeds out any mutations.

What other mechanism do you offer? One like Coyoteman has offered, Aliens do it, not the illegal ones the ones from outer space. If that is the case again it is religion, no alien no proof just faith based.

No my friend you have brought nothing to this banquet discussion other than your words of condescension towards me because of the melody of information that disproves the theory.

[Creationist]

Another note,

It is not my objective to preach God to you or convert you, the latter can only be done through God.

I am against evolution which is not science. None of it is testable, and do not give examples of variation and adaptation this is not evolution.

[Coyoteman]

One like Coyoteman has offered, Aliens do it, not the illegal ones the ones from outer space.

I do not, and have never, postulated aliens, illegal or otherwise, as a necessary or documented part of evolution.

Sorry, you are wrong once more.

[Creationist]

To: Creationist
I see you deny the facts.
All of the Biology books I have run across have origins in them, why they even have plate tectonics.

Biology covers a much larger field than just evolution. This may come as a shock to creationists, but there are a lot of independent theories, and even (oh, the horrors) an hypothesis or two, within the field of biology.

I still find that part funny how you say biology covers a much larger field to justify plate tectonics in the book which is obviously geology related.

And any way if we evolved from what did we evolve from and so on? And where did the material come from that life originated?

Beats me. Not a part of the theory of evolution.

It appears that you are in the dark about evolution. It is married to origins, and the big bang, it is in the books and therefore a part of the fairy tale

On the contrary, you appear to be "in the dark about evolution." Do you remember seeing things like "change in allele frequencies over time" and the like on these threads?

Do you remember seeing something like this? Its been posted a number of times:

From a post by Dimensio here. :

I submit five hypothesis regarding the origin of the first life forms.

a) Natural processes occurring entirely upon earth resulted in chains of self-replicating molecular strands that eventually became the first life forms.
b) Aliens from another planet and/or dimension traveled to this planet and -- deliberately or accidentally -- seeded the planet with the first life forms.
c) In the future, humans will develop a means to travel back in time. They will use this technology to plant the first life forms in Earth's past, making the existence of life a causality loop.

d) A divine agent of unspecified nature zap-poofed the first life forms into existence.

e) Any method other than the four described above led to the existence of the first life forms.

Which of these five scenarios is necessary for evolution to have occurred? Why, any of them! Evolution works just fine with any of these scenarios! Remember, "change in allele frequencies over time."
You should study evolution, and figure out what it really says, before you attempt to critique it. Your ridiculous strawmen, which you easily knock down, do not harm the theory of evolution--as they bear no resemblance to the actual theory. Rather, these strawmen expose your unwavering and unreasoned opposition (presumably for religious reasons) to the findings of most modern sciences.

You can continue to deny the real world, even though it is there for all to see, but you should remember the consequences. Perhaps you should heed the cautions presented by St. Augustine, in The Literal Meaning of Genesis, 1:42-43.

880 posted on 12/04/2006 10:22:20 PM PST by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.) [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 878 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

You said the agreed with the above, and now you deny it with your post

I do not, and have never, postulated aliens, illegal or otherwise, as a necessary or documented part of evolution.

You really should own up to what you have said.

[Creationist]

In conclusion, I do not think this polemic will have a conclusion in our debate, to tarry with you will just draggle my persona.

A scion of a primate is what you choose as your ancestor. This belief I can not deny you in spite of the opposing physical evidence.

You stand strong in your redoubt, with your desultory theory, it is a matter of principle I understand.

Erudite men have given you a talisman of artist depicted drawings of there ideals, which many worship in school books, museums, and TV.

In spite of the comments I have remained sangfroid.

You may think me a scalawag due to my opposition of evolution. Yet I wish this to be a amicable debate despite our differences.

Excuse me if I have been a little orotund.

God bless

[Coyoteman]

Nice try. That was not an argument I made in favor of space aliens as the cause of life on earth.

That was an argument made by Dimensio that evolution worked fine with any of five scenarios he presented. I presented his argument, with attribution.

Please work on your reading comprehension, eh?

[Creationist]

You supplied the information and you posted with confidence of the possible scenarios as a probability of evolution.

My comprehension is fine, you should work on owning up to your belief when stated by you in a post.
Even if what was stated was first posted by another you used it with validation of your belief.

Sorry Coyoteman but you are the one who believes that you are a scion of a monkey or a green man.
You should not draggle this polemic by denial of your statement through back peddling now.

This is another evolutionary talisman and when questioned you deny it as you know that evolution has no backbone.

Stand proud and strong behind your redoubt of denial of your own belief when questioned.

[Wakeup Sleeper]

Its nice to have an educated man here as you Creationist, and another fellow of mankind who is not afraid to admitt they are a sinner as I, And a forgiven one at that In Christ!

[Creationist]

Amen to the merciful forgiveness of Jesus, and his Grace.

[humblegunner]

No it was 6000 years ago

Goodness gracious that's a retarded thing to think!

[Wakeup Sleeper]

Where is your evidence to think it retarted?

[Creationist]

Well what nugget of wonder do you adhere to. Mud coming alive. Life from non life we can not produce it in a billion dollar lab but you think it happened?

Nothing exploding into everything, does not adhere to the 1st law of Thermodynamics.

A lizard becoming a chicken, no matter what mechanism you give for that change you still have to change complete working systems to do so, no way would it survive the changes and no evidence in the fossil record of such changes.

The second law of thermodynamics in a nut shell has everything starting in order and working to disorder. What you appear to be believing is disorder or a huge nothing exploding into everything created the organization you have in your everyday life.

I believe in a God whose name is Jesus who walked among men was witnessed by followers and non alike. The archeology has never disproved the Bible and only validates it. Jesus said he created the universe and everything in it, he is God so he would know, and humans saw him and documented it.

The genealogy only goes back 6000 years and the Bible has never been disproved.

So tarded as you may think my faith in God rests in the fact that nature, supernatural fact, and historical documentation all profess that Jesus is God and he exists.

Your belief is based on assumption, speculation, and presupposition by those with no proof of any kind.

[humblegunner]

Where is your evidence to think it retarted?

A great many things on the Earth can be proven to be older than 6000 years.

Therefore the Earth is older than 6000 years.

Believing otherwise is nutty.

[NewLand]

What does any of this have to do with being a conservative?

I totally agree that this discussion (evolution vs creation) has little or nothing to do with being politically conservative.

However...

It was the fringe group of hard core evos here on FR who introduced this discussion to the site, and supported their position with the various accusations such as 'creation is a cancer on conservatives' all the way to 'the Republicans lost the 2006 mid-terms because of this issue', as well as the general tone of 'scientists are smart and anyone who believes in creation is not'.

That fringe group has been mostly (and rightfully) banned from FR, and they have been exiled to their own obscure website where the most common theme of their threads are making fun of Free Republic, Christians, Republicans, etc.

One of the many problems that the FR management had/has with that group here on FR is that they post some their dogma from openly liberal websites such as Religoius Tolerance.org or global warming advocacy groups such as The AAAS (publisher of Science magazine), or in past years, from the NYT or LAT, WAPO, etc. The other problems included comparing Christians to radical Islam, and various foul mouthed disrespect to numerous FReepers who disagreed with them.

There are a few posters still left from this group, and as founders and regular members of 'The Other Site' (TOS) their main purpose is to tear down Free Republic in any way possible. Those that remain are being civil only to prevent being banned. They do not contribute to the Free Republic mission in any way, and thus, IMO, are wasting the bandwidth of this site.

Although much could be debated about this post, at least the poster openly stated this as a vanity, and the category is Bloggers & Personal. In summary, it was the hard core fringe evos who insisted their issues were News & Activism, and thus, they were/are the ones who have politicized this issue on FR.

[si tacuissem]

There is more historical writings of Christ than any other historical figure in all of history at the time of Christ or before. Thats pretty damming to your assumptions. More than Ceasar, Nero, etc... etc..

I've read this claim here on FR before, by other Freepers but with the same spelling of Ceasar :-) ... Frankly, this kind of hyperbole doesn't do any good.

Flavious Josephus who wrote of Christ who taughtmany and did surprising feats was believed to be the messiah was condemned to be crucified by Pilate and was considered to be resurected.

Josephus wrote more about Caesar than about Jesus Christ.

Tacitus writes of Neros persecution of Christians 55 A.D.

He wrote about Christians, not about Jesus Christ.