Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

MY SECOND ANN COULTER THREAD - EVOLUTION DISCUSSION (or Here We Go Again)

Posted on 06/27/2006 5:06:32 AM PDT by 7thson

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 641-660661-680681-700701-713 last
To: PatrickHenry
Again, a splendid post! And once more, the angels sing.

But is even one of them named Harold?

701 posted on 06/30/2006 2:50:53 PM PDT by VadeRetro (Faster than a speeding building; able to leap tall bullets at a single bound!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 659 | View Replies]

The "700 Club" placemark.


702 posted on 06/30/2006 2:51:12 PM PDT by dread78645 (Evolution. A doomed theory since 1859.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 700 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro

It's a common name up there.


703 posted on 06/30/2006 2:53:08 PM PDT by PatrickHenry (Unresponsive to trolls, lunatics, fanatics, retards, scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 701 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
Please learn to spell, so you can find a proper definition.

Your religion is science. You are willing to accept what others have told you. You wish me to listen to one with more understanding of your religion. There is no difference in yours and any other religion.

Be sure and genuflect when you pass in front of the computer... and give alms to your high priest bill gates!

Every aspect of radiocarbon dating presumes certain things and assumes others. I have a good enough understanding to know when not to buy the snake oil! Your science is as exact as the next "discovery"!

704 posted on 06/30/2006 4:01:20 PM PDT by pageonetoo (You'll spot their posts soon enough!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 700 | View Replies]

To: pageonetoo

If your understanding is great enough to outwit thousands of physicists, please share some of it with us.


705 posted on 06/30/2006 4:07:17 PM PDT by js1138 (Well I say there are some things we don't want to know! Important things!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 704 | View Replies]

To: pageonetoo
Your religion is science.

I believe that you are misusing -- or at the very least incorrectly equivocating -- the word "religion".

You are willing to accept what others have told you.

I am willing to accept the statements of experts within their respective fields of expertise. That does not make their repsective fields of expertise a "religion". Your declaration of science as a religion has no logical basis.

You wish me to listen to one with more understanding of your religion.

Incorrect. I merely suggested that you request information on a subject from an individual with experience in that subject. Calling that subject "religion" does not make it religion, no matter how often you apply the false label.

There is no difference in yours and any other religion.

This statement is founded upon the false premise that I have been referencing any religion.

Be sure and genuflect when you pass in front of the computer... and give alms to your high priest bill gates!

I have no idea what point you believe that you are making with this statement. It is especially perplexing given that I am using Linux.

Every aspect of radiocarbon dating presumes certain things and assumes others.

What "things" are presumed and assumed? Why did you not answer this question the last time that I asked?

I have a good enough understanding to know when not to buy the snake oil!

Then it should not be difficult for you to explain why it is "snake oil". I am confused as to why you thus far refuse to support your assertions with evidence.
706 posted on 06/30/2006 4:11:08 PM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 704 | View Replies]

To: Virginia-American
Sorry for taking so long to get back to you on this, my business has been keeping me very busy the last few days. My apologies again for confusing you with another poster, and thank you for the links.

In response to a central question of yours:
Is there some specific phenomenon that seems to require something outside the current theory? Perhaps not. But to me that isn't necessarily a reason to stop looking.

Let me define my position. I'm a Christian, but I don't think God would have left his fingerprints on anything, a nice "Made by God" copyright on the DNA would mess with free will. I also think that setting up the natural system we have is extraordinary enough for me without looking for additional "magic".

My questions about evolution rest on what I find to be extraordinary statistics regarding the actual strength of competitive advantage to bring about certain changes, especially in animals that have a very low reproduction rate. Bottom line, if an animal only procreates 20 times during its life, a 1% advantage gives no real useful benefit. It takes five generations for the trait to statistically gain advantage, but it is more likely that the trait would regress. And a 1% advantage seems a bit high when talking about extremely minute changes. There is also the question of why things would appear to evolve along a lineal track when the environment is also evolving and the climate ripping back and forth from ice age to ice age.

So I wonder if some of the evolution we see isn't really that advantageous. Namely that many mutations just happen and progress and species adapt. Competitive advantage being more like kids bumpers on a bowling ally.

707 posted on 07/01/2006 6:44:34 AM PDT by SampleMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 569 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon

"Not even a retarded gradeschooler could have been so confused as to mistake that for my taking issue with your trivial observation that one can't recreate a million years of evolution "in the lab"."

Actually you have to be so highly educated that you can't think anymore to have missed what I said. I specifically mentioned duplicating some of Coyoteman's skull finds and you said that it had been done. Duh.

" I even sent you to a link that explains the fallacies in your misconceptions to you."

No, your link was absurd and I easily refuted the points it made.

" No, obviously, you didn't [read the link]"

Uhm, you aren't aware of what was in your link. Go back and read your link again. I specifically responded to what it said about O.J. If I hadn't read it then I wouldn't have been able to respond to that, would I? Please try and keep up with the conversation. I'll try typing slower if you think that might help.

" It always has been of that nature, son"

Don't call me 'son'. You know nothing about me. That's merely more of your trying to be condescending. But that's all you have left since your arguments are so empty. Science hasn't always been about conjecture, it used to be based on repeatable observations.

You guys are in the Al Gore Environmentalist Global Warming psuedo-science wing of the scientific community. You come up with conclusions based on conjecture and goofy hypotheses and use rationalizations like "beyond a reasonable doubt" to describe things that are far from it.


708 posted on 07/03/2006 6:48:56 AM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 656 | View Replies]

Comment #709 Removed by Moderator

To: DaveLoneRanger
Then why did A) you deny what I said originally

What did I deny?

B) do we not witness what evolution predicts?

What, exactly, do you think that should be seen and why?
710 posted on 07/03/2006 9:46:03 AM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 709 | View Replies]

To: pageonetoo
I stated that carbon dating is based on assumption. Can you please explain the process of CD, whereby there is no assumption in the process? I doubt you can!

You stated that radiocarbon dating is based on assumptions, implying that it is untrustworthy. I challenged you on that statement and all I got in return is details of your religious beliefs.

I think we have established that your distrust of radiocarbon dating comes from your religious belief, and not from any scientific understanding of the subject.

711 posted on 07/04/2006 8:00:33 AM PDT by Coyoteman (I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 688 | View Replies]

Placemarker
712 posted on 07/04/2006 10:21:16 AM PDT by CarolinaGuitarman (Gas up your tanks!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 711 | View Replies]

To: mc5cents

BUMP


713 posted on 07/17/2006 6:59:27 AM PDT by 7thson (I've got a seat at the big conference table! I'm gonna paint my logo on it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 535 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 641-660661-680681-700701-713 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson