Posted on 01/08/2009 9:19:50 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
Nature Struts Darwin Gems
Jan 2, 2009 —- Like a showcase of pearl-handled revolvers, an armory of evidences Nature calls “Darwin’s Gems” have been exhibited to warn creationists that Darwin Day will be defended next month with a show of force. The authors, Henry Gee (former editor of Nature), Rory Howlett and Philip Campbell have made their 15 Evolutionary Gems freely available “and encourage its free dissemination.” Why? “Given that the concepts and realities of Darwinian evolution are still challenged, albeit rarely by biologists, a succinct briefing on why evolution by natural selection is an empirically validated principle is useful for people to have to hand.” This collected ammunition, they feel, demonstrates the “breadth, depth and power of evolutionary thinking.”
Their list includes 5 evidences from paleontology, 6 from ecology, and 4 from genetics and molecular biology (see Commentary for items on the list). The outline is followed by summary arguments for each “gem” of evidence for Darwinian evolution....
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
Asking someone to explain their question is what one does when they are trying to learn something.
Nope...it's as clear as mud, and the only way to see it clearly is by putting on the goggles of the cult of evolution.
Period.
Because humans share some DNA with chimps you conclude we came from a common ancestor and anyone that disagrees is insane. Your trouble is...far more see the truth...that the cult of evolution is forcing, by court edict, for all to see what's clearly just not there. It's all conjecture and nothing more.
And no realistic mechanism has ever been proposed to prevent micro-evolution from adding up, over time, to macro-evolution.
Except that there is no such evidence over time or otherwise that this is the case.
This mechanism is called "reality" but your cult won't allow you to see it.
All we have are creationist's claims that there is such a mechanism...somewhere.
Nope...what we have is the exposure of your cult via reality, and this is why it requires you to enforce science via courts, and not the lab, not peer review, not the scientists themselves and most certainly not the science classroom, because we all know that's too threatening.
You should stop forcing your liberal godless religious beliefs on science. You'd have more credibility, scientifically and otherwise.
It probably sounds great over at DU, but this is FR afterall.
That and fifty other lines of evidence.
The basic argument doesn't stem just from similarity, but from the nested heirarchy of similarities and differences formed by the genomes and fossils of every known thing that lives or lived.
You seem to be ignoring the fact that science does not include religious beliefs in its equations. Science follows the data wherever it leads, and if it leads in directions that contradict your religious beliefs--tough. Better get used to it.
It probably sounds great over at DU, but this is FR afterall.
FR was not anti-science in the past, but you a few others are doing your very best to make it so.
This gives you liberals away more than anytihng else, this notion that because we don't worship the godless cult of evolution means we're somehow anti-science. Seriously, you liberals should at least get together and rework your rhetoric.
See normal people understand(as betty boop so eloquently pointed out here) that science need not be at odds with God!
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/post?id=2160653,86
And also understand that atheists, anti-theists don't get to own science and dictate to parents how to teach our children...sorry but the godless liberal NEA position is not the conservative one no matter how many times you say it is.
This gives you liberals away more than anytihng else, this notion that because we don't worship the godless cult of evolution means we're somehow anti-science. Seriously, you liberals should at least get together and rework your rhetoric.
You still don't get it. Science requires adherence to the scientific method.
Science is neither liberal nor conservative, although I would have believed (before encountering you and a few of your cohorts) that science leaned toward the conservative side of things, as it follows logic and reason rather than myth and feelings.
But you and your cohorts are trying to hijack science and to abandon the scientific method all in an effort to force science to accede to your religious dogma in spite of what the evidence shows. That's not a conservative trait at all.
Claiming to be about science seems to be an effective means (at least on this forum) to adopt liberal secularist god-hating values and still maintain a pretense of being conservative.
Thanks for the ping!
Ya gotta love how they argue themselves into circles about evolution doesn’t address origins, but then again it does because of the way the argue about it so...
or that science need not be at odds with religion, but then it does...OBVIOUSLY the way they demand sterlizing God from science...
and that evolution is God’s great and intelligent design, but then...
of course...
as sure as the sun will come up tomorrow...
it’s NOT.
And they stubbornly stick to the untenable liberal lunacy that no one is allowed to tell children this!
As I’ve said so many times before...in the liberal world up is down and down is up!
NO WONDER they need to rely on symapathetic judges with cultish God complexes to enforce their other-worldly surreal illogic on all people’s children!
What do you think this is? Do these poor people suffer from some virus...a genetic/mental disorder...what could it be that afflicts them so?
Certainly man’s fall has as much to do with it as anything else.
Oh, I get it just fine, what you don't seem to get though is no one's appointed you, or your ilk, to decide or define just what this means and entails for all of us.
And all because your programming of sterlizing even the perception of anything to do with God precludes you from getting it.
Oh, I get it just fine, what you don't seem to get though is no one's appointed you, or your ilk, to decide or define just what this means and entails for all of us.
Because your religion is contradicted by the results of scientific investigations, you want to dictate how science is run, and either censor the dissemination of those results or change the way science is conducted. I just bet you would love to see that "science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions" the Discovery Institute was talking about before their Wedge Document got leaked and they ended up with egg on their faces.
As a layperson you have no say in the way science is conducted. You can't change it; the most can do is try to destroy it for your own selfish religious motives.
Because your religion is contradicted by the results of scientific investigations, you want to dictate how science is run, and either censor the dissemination of those results or change the way science is conducted. I just bet you would love to see that “science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions” the Discovery Institute was talking about before their Wedge Document got leaked and they ended up with egg on their faces.
As a layperson you have no say in the way science is conducted. You can’t change it; the most can do is try to destroy it for your own selfish religious motives.
Now that’s odd because one of your fellow cultists explained that the “science consumer” is the one who determines what is or isn’t science!
GO figure!
How many times must one explain to you that projecting simply will not help you deceive anyone? Particularly on FR!
Here’s crippling and recent evidence of just how utterly wrong you are...
AGAIN!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2159609/posts?q=1&;page=300
#300
Seriously, you should get your multitude of godless liberal cult disorders looked into!
In more ways than one too! Mentally, spirtually, psychologically...
Anti-theist rage boy is no way to go through life’s approach to science.
Is there any wonder that the under 40 college educated voted for Bama???? Remember it is the methodology that counts... a system think and the most intellectually fit are the first in line for the welfare checks!!!!
Precisely!
Liberalism is a destructive insidious disease, especially the god-hating brand which demands that God be somehow sterilized from science, law, history, governance, politics, medicine, journalism, education...indeed all public life.
What happens is there’s a vacuum left behind because godless liberals get moral instructions from themselves, which of course is rotten to the core with no compass, imperfect... just do whatever makes you feel good or flips your switch...or they get moirality from multiple cults or everything from buddhism (Richard Gere) or scientology (too many hollyweirdos to count) to Applewhite’s heaven’s gate...a mish-mash of unintelligible gobbledy-gook to go by. NO WONDER children are failing school, and crime is the way it is and children have no fathers.
The results of secular humanism run amok in Europe has now given them the curse of Islam.
And here we get to have algore’s hot air cult, and what you’ve just described.
godless liberalism should be confronted...see my tagline!
It’s looking like it’s too late...because the pie simply is not even so much as in the oven!
BTTT
Thanks for the ping!
Probably insufficient information of the requisite kind.
Some of the comments posted here make me wonder what I am supposed to think of some of my professional colleagues, being fully qualified and respected, peer-review and published academic scientists and members of the research faculties of renowned research institutions (one of them being the highly respected director of research in the college of agriculture and bio-engineering in a land grant university), who do not accept the evolutionary model’s “explanations” for the near indescribable diversity in form and function that we observe in that which we call living entities, not because these scientists are religious “nuts” but simply because of the distinctions they pose between that which seems reasonable and that which seem utterly improbable.
I cannot bring myself to label them “stupid,” as is the wont of dogmatic (is there any other kind) evolutionists.
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.