Skip to comments.
The ‘Darwinist Inquisition’ Starts Another Round
http://www.pfm.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=BreakPoint1&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=169
Posted on 09/30/2005 2:09:51 PM PDT by truthfinder9
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200, 201-220, 221-240 ... 581-600 next last
To: Amos the Prophet
There are Darwinists who claim that the universe exists by random chancePossibly. There are Christians who are serial killers. So you're OK with the statement 'Christians are serial killers'?
To: RightInEastLansing
"So once again, what is the source of this external energy?"
Hint: big, yellow, bright, often seen in the sky
To: truthfinder9
I am sitting in Windsor Ontario at a WIFI equipped bar, killing three hours before I have to pick my daughter up at the train station. This ID thread was just what the doctor ordered.
Thank you everybody!
To: Dimensio
Yes, I agree. Just the other day, the sun created a new Lexus for me. Thank you for finally solving the mystery!
To: truthfinder9
News Flash: Most design supporters are practicing scientists. That's interesting. There are many "design" supporters on this thread. Would all of those who are indeed "practicing scientists" please identify yourselves, and your relevant credentials and areas of research?
205
posted on
09/30/2005 4:28:44 PM PDT
by
MRMEAN
(Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you were a member of congress;but I repeat myself. Mark Twain)
To: RightInEastLansing
Do you not understand the clear meaning of his words?I'm sure what's confusing everyone is that neither "Darwinism" nor evolutionary theory say anything about the universe existing by random chance. When faced with such nonsense, it's natural to try and elicit the intended meaning.
To: orionblamblam
My low opinion of their knowledge of science, you bet.No, your low opinion of their ability to run their own local affairs. You're not alone, it's a typical Democrat reaction.
the Creationist Hitler
Well, look who's playing the Nazi card. And very clumsily at that.
207
posted on
09/30/2005 4:31:37 PM PDT
by
inquest
(FTAA delenda est)
To: Ignatius J Reilly
And you of course have evidence to support the notion that solar energy can reverse entropy to the requisite level required for abiogenesis? Please explain this process to me. This is going to be great!
To: RightInEastLansing
I don't know any Darwinists who cite random chance--they cite natural selection. The simple meaning of "There are Darwinists who claim that the universe exists by random chance." strikes me as odd. Darwinists don't usually meddle in astrophysics. This makes me think the author of that sentence probably meant "darwinists claim evolution of species is the result of random chance." This, I would support as partly accurate about Darwinist views. Chance results in a variety of mutations. The best are selected and passed on to future generations.
Long story short, I do not understand the clear meaning of his words. That's why I asked the question.
209
posted on
09/30/2005 4:33:03 PM PDT
by
DC Bound
(American greatness is the result of great individuals seeking to be anything but equal.)
To: jennyp
It's a pretty easy distinction to make: If the teachers are citing the Bible as a science source, then you can begin to make a church/state issue out of it. If they're citing Dembski and Behe, you can't.
210
posted on
09/30/2005 4:34:17 PM PDT
by
inquest
(FTAA delenda est)
To: edsheppa
"I'm sure what's confusing everyone is that neither "Darwinism" nor evolutionary theory say anything about the universe existing by random chance. When faced with such nonsense, it's natural to try and elicit the intended meaning."
I guess you never met my seventh grade biology teacher.
To: truthfinder9
I am astounded that so many people who I thought were conservative are as bigoted as liberal secular humanists. Evolution is a farce,a legend, a fable made up by deceivers and children to explain away the knowledge of the one true God who is their creator and at whose feet we all shall bow.
You silly evolutionist kooks who believe you are descended from tadpoles and apes (hee, hee) are not worth arguing with as your prejudice and pride are excessive.
212
posted on
09/30/2005 4:37:16 PM PDT
by
wgeorge2001
(For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.)
To: Amos the Prophet
that's like saying there are religious people who burn witches.
213
posted on
09/30/2005 4:37:35 PM PDT
by
drhogan
Can we please stop using the grating redundancy 'random chance'? :-)
214
posted on
09/30/2005 4:37:47 PM PDT
by
Borges
To: drhogan
my understanding was that darwin was interested in the origin of species, not the origin of life. does anyone on this thread know if darwin ever claimed that life originated from non-living matter?His actual, published theory said that the first life was "breathed by the Creator." (Origin of Species, last page.) In one of his diaries (not intended to be published, and published only long after his death), he speculated that life may have begun in a puddle of chemicals on the early earth. But that was clearly speculation; he never published it because he had no evidence for it.
To: RightInEastLansing
"Until the Darwinian fundamentalists can demonstrate a 'natural' way to significantly reverse entropy, they should bow to the statisticians."
This statement of yours shows you have no idea what you are talking about. Inside a closed system the entropy is increasing but that says nothing how parts of that system behave. Please go and read some science books about that before repeating such nonsense.
Example:
Ever thought about what happens digesting food?
The entropy in the system man-meal is growing but man has after his way back form bathroom (toilet for all non-US) a lower entropy as before - he gained energy. What's left in the bath has a much higher entropy. There your argument goes down the drain.
216
posted on
09/30/2005 4:40:31 PM PDT
by
MHalblaub
(Tell me in four more years (No, I did not vote for Kerry))
To: DC Bound
"I'm sure what's confusing everyone is that neither "Darwinism" nor evolutionary theory say anything about the universe existing by random chance. When faced with such nonsense, it's natural to try and elicit the intended meaning."
So you have no problem with public educators teaching our children that there is very little evidence supporting a random origin to life, while there is significant statistical evidence supporting the non-random origin of life?
To: Lurking Libertarian
218
posted on
09/30/2005 4:42:06 PM PDT
by
drhogan
To: RightInEastLansing
a "random origin of life" would seem to contradict basic scientific principles.
what public school teachers happen to teach is often far removed from scientific thinking.
219
posted on
09/30/2005 4:44:56 PM PDT
by
drhogan
To: wgeorge2001
I am astounded that so many people who I thought were conservative are as bigoted as liberal secular humanists. Evolution is a farce,a legend, a fable made up by deceivers and children to explain away the knowledge of the one true God who is their creator and at whose feet we all shall bow. You silly evolutionist kooks who believe you are descended from tadpoles and apes (hee, hee) are not worth arguing with as your prejudice and pride are excessive
This is a parody, right?
220
posted on
09/30/2005 4:45:30 PM PDT
by
Coyoteman
(I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200, 201-220, 221-240 ... 581-600 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson