Posted on 09/10/2011 8:30:28 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
At times I would like to see more Freepers with fundamentalist beliefs argue their cause elsewhere. Born again Christian sites would be a good place to start. While I respect their personal, although illogical opinions, they take up a lot of space here with their rants. But don't get me wrong, I respect them and their beliefs.
Why is it a contradiction? Lots of conservatives (perhaps even most) are only nominally Christian, lots are not believers at all, many are agnostic and still plenty of others simply believe the 7 days are not literal and evolution is the way God created everything.
Is there some sort of problem with conservatives believing in evolution that I am not aware of?
“Advanced tools”?
They’re not talking about chainsaws or duct tape, are they? But rather some rock picked from the ground. Maybe, like most academics, they invent a bit of “complexity” to boost their egos and inflate their self-worth. Opps, actual worth, now they can get more taxpayer funding for their research.
They were just a bunch of homos!
Every time a cave man saw a cave woman he became “Homo Erectus”.
That’s how we got to be here.
Any other stupid questions?
1.8 MILLION years ago.
Riiiiight. :)
The way the EPA is going, we’ll all be using stone axes again soon.
The ONE common factor shared by ALL those dedicated to the religion of Scientific Scholarship in research and academia is UNMITIGATED HUBRIS. LOL Oh yes, they have all the answers, they’ll tell ya. Right up til they find NEW ONES.
Which kind of evolution? Macro or micro? Micro is logical and rational; macro is not.
for those of us who understand science
You are a simple-minded dupe....
There isnt a single shred of Evidence in Science proving Evolution.
Leakey, when He found “Lucy” ran a Carbon 14 date...it wasnt old enough for Leaky.... He rand a second test...then a third...the third was the oldest date...”Thats it”! He said...Now he can get more Funding and keep sucking the tit of Grants....
The critical link for “Lucy” was the Knee Bone as its angle showed the little Monkey was an upright walker....
all of “Lucy’s” Bones were found in one location along a dry river bank...except the Knee Bone....Leaky found that 1.5 miles down stream.....He is a Fraud and all you “Intelectuals” are His “SUCKERS”
Leakey, when He found “Lucy” ran a Carbon 14 date...it wasnt old enough for Leaky.... He rand a second test...then a third...the third was the oldest date...”Thats it”! He said...Now he can get more Funding and keep sucking the tit of Grants....
The critical link for “Lucy” was the Knee Bone as its angle showed the little Monkey was an upright walker....
all of “Lucy’s” Bones were found in one location along a dry river bank...except the Knee Bone....Leaky found that 1.5 miles down stream.....He is a Fraud and all you “Intelectuals” are His “SUCKERS”
Why...Just one look at those chunks of stone and it’s clear as the nose on your face that they’re millions of years old. A person doesn’t see quality stone chipping like that in the new stuff.
Did you name your son Chip?
I wouldn’t be quite so harsh. Perhaps he means that he understands evolutional theory. He could believe in Intelligent Design, which is the only thing that makes sense in science and historically.
What makes evolution impossible is that to have the dramatic changes from a horse to a dog, or a cold-blooded reptile to a warm-blooded bird, it would take millions of mutations. Of course, many of the mutations are impossible from a scientific standpoint.
For instance, the type of sight that a reptile has is completely different from mammals. And there would have had to been many generations of blind species as the transformation was happening. Is that compatible with survival of the fittest?
But leaving that aside, with so many mutations required to make these radical leaps, there would have to be billions more transitional animal fossils than modern fossils. Yet you only see one or two transitional fossils claimed every decade or so. And most are dismissed as inconclusive at best.
As someone wisely said, evolution is a religion based on faith, and more leaps of faith than Intelligent Design.
Scientific theories are not mathematical theorems and, therefore, are not amenable to “proof”. Scientific theories are either confirmed or refuted, with varying degrees of probability. I know of absolutely no reliable evidence refuting the theory of evolution and lots of confirmation. The countervailing theories, like Intelligent Design are tautological and therefore not scientific theories at all, but confessions of faith. There is absolutely no evidence that will convince a person who is not looking for evidence but confirmation.
Just another example of “scientists” changing their theories every time they find another funny shaped rock somewhere. YAWN
The conflict is between evolution and any sort of a decent approach to science/logic, and not between evolution and conservatism or religion. Evolution is basically a dead theory walking and is being defended by academic dead wood and people with lifestyle and/or tenure issues. There is no scientific basis for it.
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.