It's Dogged as Does It [Darwin in the Galápagos]

Scientific American ^ | February 2006 issue | Michael Shermer

[whattajoke]

Ok, fine. As a creationist, which I'm assuming you are, where do you get your stories from? The top creationist website, Answers in Genesis?

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"It is also an historical fact that Darwin shot Lincoln."

Well, that's true. He couldn't stand that Lincoln was born on the same exact day.

[TheBrotherhood]

"Still waiting for you to explain why Darwin's close family denied Lady Hope's story."

It never denied it because there was nothing to deny. It has been written as an historical fact that Darwin recanted his theory of evolution to his family and close friends.

Anyway, even if he would not have denied it, it would have been known then, as it's known today, that evolution is a myth and a lie.

[Dimensio]

AiG includes the "Darwin recanted" story as one of the arguments that creationists should not use. Even they recognize Lady Hope's story as a fraud. Why creationists here see fit to repeat known frauds is a mystery to me.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

His son said it was a crock, and so did his daughter. His family DID deny it, vehemently. Lady Hope was a liar.

[PatrickHenry]

It is also strongly suspected that Darwin was Jack the Ripper, but his family always denied it.
</Highschool-dropout, workin'-in-the-sawmill mode>

[ndt]

"Still waiting for you to explain why Darwin's close family denied Lady Hope's story. Not that you will. You also won't explain how evolution is a "fraudulent theory"."

Actually TheBrotherhood started with "Darwin, according to his daughter/son, repented and asked forgiveness foe his frauds perpetrated on humanity. ". Now that that has been debunked, he's arguing that "Lady Hope" was a witness.

[whattajoke]

Damn you. I was playing with him.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Why creationists here see fit to repeat known frauds is a mystery to me."

Mystery solved: They're stupid.

[whattajoke]

Because, the leading creationist resource, Answers in Genesis, has the "Darwin recanted on his deathbed" bs as the TIPPY TOP "ARGUMENT" NOT TO USE.

Why? Because not even those liars can justify this lie!

Enjoy it here. And, in the future, so as to not upset your crew, stop using your other dumb arguments too. Here's a nice list.

[TheBrotherhood]

"It is also an historical fact that Darwin shot Lincoln. Later on he kidnapped the Lindbergh baby."

That's a lie in case you didn't know it.

[Dimensio]

It has been written as an historical fact that Darwin recanted his theory of evolution to his family and close friends.

So support this claim with evidence, especially in light of the fact that his own daughter wrote "I was present at his deathbed. Lady Hope was not present during his last illness, or any illness. I believe he never even saw her, but in any case she had no influence over him in any department of thought or belief. He never recanted any of his scientific views, either then or earlier "..

Anyway, even if he would not have denied it, it would have been known then, as it's known today, that evolution is a myth and a lie.

Support this claim with evidence.

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"It is also strongly suspected that Darwin was Jack the Ripper, but his family always denied it."

He DID train as a doctor early on, and one of the theories is that Jack was a doctor...

[longshadow]

You have to wonder about some of the posters here; do they just play clowns on FR, or is that what do in real life?

[whattajoke]

AiG has expanded their "arguments not to use" section. I predict in due time, their entire site will consist of all their arguments they've given up on.

Anyway, I was pleased (in a strictly relative sense, since their answers are still weak) to read this, as arguments they should no longer use:

‘Evolution is just a theory.’ What people usually mean when they say this is ‘Evolution is not proven fact, so it should not be promoted dogmatically.’ Therefore people should say that. The problem with using the word ‘theory’ in this case is that scientists use it to mean a well-substantiated explanation of data. This includes well-known ones such as Einstein’s Theory of Relativity and Newton’s Theory of Gravity, and lesser-known ones such as the Debye–Hückel Theory of electrolyte solutions and the Deryagin–Landau/Verwey–Overbeek (DLVO) theory of the stability of lyophobic sols, etc. It would be better to say that particles-to-people evolution is an unsubstantiated hypothesis or conjecture.

‘There are no transitional forms.’ Since there are candidates, even though they are highly dubious, it’s better to avoid possible comebacks by saying instead: ‘While Darwin predicted that the fossil record would show numerous transitional fossils, even 140 years later, all we have are a handful of disputable examples.’ See also Q&A: Fossils.

[PatrickHenry]

Darwin also exerted an evil influence over the Russian imperial family:

[longshadow]

Darwin also exerted an evil influence over the Russian imperial family:

And I hear he also personally tutored Ted Bundy on how to pick up chicks....

[mlc9852]

I live in the mountains and we get flooding.

[Cold Heart]

Bookmark

[ndt]

"I live in the mountains and we get flooding."

Do you still see the mountains? Then it's localized and you do not need an ark, you can just wade through the muck on over to a mountain. Gravity does an amazing thing with water, when you fill up a valley, it quickly empties out. They even produce large structures at the low end of valleys to prevent this very phenomenon and allow water to be stored for later use. Neat stuff no?

Water will find the lowest point, and in the case of a world wide flood, that point would be the ocean. If you remove water from the ocean to flood all the land, you lower sea level even farther. The only way you could flood the land mass of the earth would be through the miraculous creation of massive amounts of water to generally raise sea levels world wide.

How can flood waters be hundreds of feet deep on the beach but the ocean not be any higher. Really, try to picture that. It would resemble another story from the bible with parting seas and walls of water.