Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Arguing with Idiots… Part Deaux (A full-frontal assault on the Temple of Darwin)
Gordon Greene ^ | December 4, 2009 | Gordon Greene

Posted on 12/04/2009 9:55:41 PM PST by Gordon Greene

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320321-338 next last
To: Gordon Greene

What you are seeing in these recent posts is spill over from Darwin Central.

If anyone wants to know what it’s like over there, that’s it.


281 posted on 12/05/2009 8:20:13 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

To: GL of Sector 2814
Note that I always put a Heinlein quote in my tagline. (Which reminds me, time to put in a new one)

Good old Lazarus Long. I like the description in his wiki entry:

A rugged individualist with a distrust of authority, Lazarus drifts from colony world to colony world, settling down for a few years or a few decades and leaving when things get too regimented for his taste—often just before the angry mob arrives.

282 posted on 12/05/2009 8:25:55 PM PST by Stultis (Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia; Democrats always opposed waterboarding as torture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: Gordon Greene

A very wise decision. My advice is to spend less time (as YHAOS puts it) feeding the trolls, and more time posting Creation/Christian Right articles on FR. That way you get to proclaim the truth and drive the evos nuts at the same time. And while they are busy working themselves into a frenzy on your last post, you are already posting the next one :o)

PS Excellent post btw. Speaks for itself if you asked me.


283 posted on 12/05/2009 8:39:03 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts
"That way you get to proclaim the truth and drive the evos nuts at the same time."

I liked you better when you were "witnessing" down at the bus station. Do I hear an amen?

284 posted on 12/05/2009 8:50:05 PM PST by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law; Natufian; YHAOS
You don't really expect an answer do you? I aske what her for a definition of transitional species days ago and I'm still waiting. (But she continues to demand that I and others do her research for her....LOL

Speaking of answers and dissing someone for not giving them, there are several you have not answered either.

Post 201 by Yhaos.

Mine, like in posts 52, 53, 69, 91, 93, 95,104, 105,108, 114, 132, to name a few.

As far as transitionals, IIRC, you brought the subject up and then demanded that I provide the definition. When you bring it up, it's up to you to define it.

That said, I'm well aware of the definition games that evos play. They demand definitions from others that they can't even provide themselves. Ask 30 evos for a definition of species and you'll get 30 different answers running from *they can't interbreed* to *every creature on the planet is a different species.*

Same sort of nonsense with transitionals. Evos have claimed that every fossil found is technically a transitional.

I know better than to get sucked into the definition game. No matter what I propose, you'll find something wrong with it. Since evos demand the right for scientists to define scientific terms, it's up to them to decide what a species is. When they figure it out, get back to me.

285 posted on 12/05/2009 8:50:16 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Honestly, that means a lot coming from you. It’s obvious that I need to post and walk away... post and walk away.

A doctor should never get personally involved with his patients (of course I’m not a doctor and I have very little patience).

God bless.

GG


286 posted on 12/05/2009 8:52:03 PM PST by Gordon Greene (www.fracturedrepublic.com - I have a theory about how Darwin evolved... more soon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies]

To: metmom
"That said, I'm well aware of the definition games that evos play. "

I gave you the clue but you remain clueless. Start with Phylogenetic Taxonomy and Morphological Data Matrices. I don't care how "evos" define transitional species, I just want to know how you do so that we can share a common starting point.

287 posted on 12/05/2009 9:02:40 PM PST by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 285 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law; editor-surveyor; Gordon Greene

In this post, you were criticizing e-s for not being able to define what a transitional species was.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2400239/posts?page=307#307

So, I asked you, or challenged you, to provide a better one.

As of yet, you have not. You just threw it back to me and refused to answer like you have all the other questions you’ve been asked.

Much like other evos on these threads, now that I think about it....


288 posted on 12/05/2009 9:11:43 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies]

To: metmom; betty boop
Thank you so much for sharing your insights, dear sister in Christ!

As opposed to the current *scientific* scenario that everything kind of *‘just pooped’[sic] into existence* all by it little self, out of something called singularity, out of nothing , from nowhere, for as yet unknown and inexplicable reason?

For the record, a singularity is not nothing. A singularity is a space of zero dimensions, a mathematical point. A line is one dimension; a plane, two; a cube, three, etc.

An origin story beginning with a singularity is not ex nihilo. It relies on space, time and physical causation.

That is the weakness of all such theories (inflationary, multi-verse, multi-world, ekpyrotic, cyclic, imaginary time, etc.) Because of the CMB measurements, we know the universe is expanding, i.e. that there was a beginning of real space and real time.

As Jastrow said (paraphrased) that was the most theological statement ever to come out of modern science.

289 posted on 12/05/2009 10:01:08 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

“Start with Phylogenetic Taxonomy and Morphological Data Matrices. “

That’s just evo-athiest brainwashing! Real Christians use baraminology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baramin).


290 posted on 12/05/2009 10:01:38 PM PST by Buck W. (The President of the United States IS named Schickelgruber...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
This is the kind of mess you get into when universal, "objective" Truth is denied.

So very true. Thank you for sharing your insights, dearest sister in Christ!

291 posted on 12/05/2009 10:03:43 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: metmom

I’m not going to play that game. If you can’t define what you claim doesn’t exist ornthe necessari specificity to establish commonality don’t waste any more of my time. If you are serious about learning the difference let me know and I will provide you with somenfood material (I promise it will not make you burn in hell).


292 posted on 12/05/2009 10:31:20 PM PST by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 288 | View Replies]

To: Gordon Greene

[[You want to tell the mods that Natural Law and Buck W are one in the same or should I? You can play tattletale if you like. I don’t mind.]]

You’re kidding? Well- that explains a lot- now that you mention it- the tone of the two pesonalities was indeed much the same- hmmm- lol- that takes the cake


293 posted on 12/05/2009 10:51:30 PM PST by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: CottShop

Tell the mods whatever you like. I have faith that they are a whole lot smarter than you. In fact, I copied them on an earlier response and invtied them to investigate the alleged conspiracy. I’ m still here.


294 posted on 12/05/2009 11:10:08 PM PST by Natural Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 293 | View Replies]

To: GL of Sector 2814

[[These sorts of threads always seem to degenerate into a name-calling contest (Pawn of Satan!...)

Comeon, admit it, you drink goats bload on halloween and during winter solstace- You probably kick newborn kittens too (but only on days that you’re feelign generous)


295 posted on 12/05/2009 11:10:18 PM PST by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 250 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

did i say I was gonna tell the mods anythign buck? Er- Natural buck, er Natural.W, er- oh just forget it


296 posted on 12/05/2009 11:11:26 PM PST by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 294 | View Replies]

To: GL of Sector 2814

[[As for myself, I have a small confession to make. In some arguments I have actually...
(drum roll, please)
admitted to making a mistake.]]

I wish I knew what that felt like so I could sympathise, but I don’t, so I can’t


297 posted on 12/05/2009 11:16:19 PM PST by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: Stultis; Gordon Greene

“This oddity has convinced me that, on some psychological level, creationists don’t really believe in creation, or disbelieve in evolution, as much as they think they do. If it were otherwise they would behave very differently from the way they do. They would not be eagerly attempting to establish the precedent that it is only “fair” to include “both” creation and evolution. First this represents an intellectual relativism which they do not accept as a general principle; and second they would hold out for defeating evolution on scientific merit, so that it would justifiably be excluded.

It’s clear to me — even if they don’t admit it to themselves — that most creationists know deep down that evolution is in fact a strong theory, and creationism a weak one.”

Bingo! Great post.


298 posted on 12/06/2009 3:20:24 AM PST by Natufian (t)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl

Well, yeah, I knew that.

Which is one reason why science has nothing better to offer.

What they propose doesn’t even work under their conditions.


299 posted on 12/06/2009 5:07:06 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 289 | View Replies]

To: Natufian; Stultis; Gordon Greene

Bzzzttttt....

Wrong.


300 posted on 12/06/2009 5:09:00 AM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320321-338 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson