The lies of Lynchburg: How U.S. evolutionists taught the Nazis.

Answers In Genesis ^ | September 1997 | Carl Wieland

[Fichori]

First published:
Creation 19(4):22–23
September 1997

by Carl Wieland

The chilling revelations of a recent television documentary¹ expose the disturbing consequences of evolutionary ways of thinking. Beginning in the 1920s, many thousands of people in the United States were sterilised against their will and without their consent, to prevent ‘undesirable breeding’. Over 8,000 of these procedures took place at a major centre to which such ‘undesirables’ were sent, in Lynchburg, Virginia.

[tacticalogic]

Can say as I have. What’s that involve, impalement?

[Fichori]

Forget the stake in the town square, lets just bury it.

[metmom]

FOTFL.

Now, now, you know better. Using their arguments against them is not allowed.

[Coyoteman]

Rather than reply to empty posts and taunts, here are some sample paragraphs from an article describing some recent scientific research [warning: science content]:

Recipes for life: How genes evolve Link

This classical view of gene evolution is far from the whole story, however. A decade ago, Michael Lynch at Indiana University in Bloomington and a colleague outlined an alternative scenario. Genes often have more than one function, and Lynch considered what might happen after such a gene is duplicated. If a mutation knocks out one of the two functions in one of the copies, an organism can cope fine because the other copy is still intact. Even if another mutation in this other copy knocks out the second function, the organism can carry on as normal. Instead of having one gene with two functions, the organism will now have two genes with one function each - a mechanism Lynch dubbed subfunctionalism (Genetics, vol 154, p 459). This process can provide the raw material for further evolution. "A gene preserved by subfunctionalisation can later pick up a new function," Lynch says.

Some theoretical biologists think gene copies can also be preserved by other, more subtle, mechanisms, but the real challenge to the classical model comes from actual studies of new genes in various organisms. Earlier this year, in the most comprehensive study of its kind yet, a team led by Wen Wang of Kunming Institute of Zoology in Yunnan, China, looked at several closely related species of fruit fly. By comparing their genomes, Wang was able to identify new genes that have evolved in the 13 million years or so since these species split from a common ancestor.

One of Wang's surprise discoveries was that around 10 per cent of the new genes had arisen through a process called retroposition. This occurs when messenger RNA copies of genes - the blueprints sent to a cell's protein-making factories (see diagram) - are turned back into DNA that is then inserted somewhere else in the genome. Many viruses and genetic parasites copy themselves through retroposition, and the enzymes they produce sometimes accidentally retropose the RNA of their host cells.

What this article does is show that the creationists' claim that no new genes arise ("no new information") is false. New genes arise in a number of different ways.

Now, isn't real science better than the Borkings creationists have been posting lately?

[tacticalogic]

Getting squeamish?

[Fichori]

I like turning the “WRONG WAY” and “ONE WAY STREET” signs around every once and a while for entertainment...

[Fichori]

Quit asking questions and start digging.

[tacticalogic]

Quit asking questions and start digging.

You're far enough down the hole for both of us already.

[cpforlife.org]

"Expelled is from the Michael Moore school of film making."

WRONG. And you are full of it for saying so. Cite one example where Ben was not accurate, and don't try any made up BS.

I've heard that you are a moderator over at Darwin Central? Is that true?

I've heard that Anyone who disagrees with them over at DC is treated very cruelly until they are banned or leaves and that you are the chief mod. Is that true?

BTW militant Darwinists have no credibility in my book. They shout down all differing thought as if they are a cult.

Science is supposed to be completely open to the search for truth, THE TRUTH. Not controlled by politics of any kind—lib or conservative. But the libs have hijacked science in so many areas. The global warming hoax and evolution seem to be the two big flaming examples.

The worst of it is the scientific fact that life begins at conception and that a baby is alive for the entire nine months before his or her birth. Liberalism has, in the most evil of ways, distorted and destroyed that truth. In one room of a hospital a 20 week preborn child can be operated on and right next door another child of the same age can be riped apart limb by bloody limb because mommy does not want the baby.

This is what liberalism leads to:

[valkyry1]

Do the frevolutionists see themselves as being frontmen for science, you being one of those frontmen

[wendy1946]

One thing they believe is that science (including garbage science like evoloserism) should be above things like ethics and morality.

[valkyry1]

By default, they want to become the Shamans of their new world.

[Mr. Silverback]

Nicely put.

[Mr. Silverback]

No. What causes knee slappnig merriment where I live is the “cretative” extent to which anti-evolutionists will go in an effort to inflate their flawed views of the Bible and science.

Tell me, how is the idea that the first few chapters of the Bible mean what they say a flawed view?

[Mr. Silverback]

Hey ZULU...

Louis Pasteur was a Catholic.

Bill Maher doesn't believe in germ theory or pharmaceuticals:

But it turns out that the late-night comic is no icon of rationality himself. In fact, he is a fervent advocate of pseudoscience. The night before his performance on Conan O'Brien, Mr. Maher told David Letterman -- a quintuple bypass survivor -- to stop taking the pills that his doctor had prescribed for him. He proudly stated that he didn't accept Western medicine. On his HBO show in 2005, Mr. Maher said: "I don't believe in vaccination. . . . Another theory that I think is flawed, that we go by the Louis Pasteur [germ] theory." He has told CNN's Larry King that he won't take aspirin because he believes it is lethal and that he doesn't even believe the Salk vaccine eradicated polio.

Interesting and illustrative. When you throw out the priest he isn't replaced by a scientist, he is replaced with the witch doctor.

[Mr. Silverback]

as well as the non-experiment doing branch of science.

What experiment would prove evolution? How could the evolution theory be falsified?

[Mr. Silverback]

At least my comments are not personal attacks, as has become the norm of late for creationists.

Oh, don't make jokes like that, I may actually laugh a body part off.

Considering Coyoteman's posts on this thread accusing Creationists and IDers of plotting to overthrow the government and destroy freedom, I don't think he should be saying anything to anyone about baseless personal attacks. Start at post 9 and follow our conversation from there.

[Mr. Silverback]

BTW, it's been about 23 months since I asked Coyoteman if he supports or opposes the idea that a main goal of scientists should be to eliminate religion. He has not answered the question, even though it was posted to him several times and he was glad to answer (with non-answers) other questions about his tinfoil hat theories of Creationists coming up with a new Mein Kampf.

His silence is interesting and illustrative.

[Fichori]

“Considering Coyoteman's posts on this thread ...” [excerpt]

Yep, thats some classic Yote ya got there.

[CottShop]

[[The article is written by Creationists for Creationists and for only one reason, because guilt by association is all the standing they have,]]

lol- I just popped into htis thread and read this comment- please tell me you didn’t jjust say that? Still laughing- Acording to soem in htis thread- ID is dismantled by tryign to associate it with Creationism- ID is dismantled by trying to associate it with the OPINIONS of some scientists in the field OUTSIDE of the actual science- and ID is dissaembled by tryign to associate it with a few websites who have soem particular statements of faith-

You folks are really precious- Honest- If nothign else- you all is consistently hypocritical