Interesting choice of words. "Lying." Not that you disagree with his presentation, or that he presented any logic in the framework or self-consistency, nor valid. No - by "lying. As such, you also wouldn't dare to acknowledge that theories do not have to be perfectly accurate to be scientifically useful - as in classical mechanics.
No - for you it is "liar!"
That speaks volumes - do you realize that?
Moreover, I saw your response to Southack when he simply pointed out the double standard of your previous post and (simply and correctly stated) that evolution was evolution isn't scientific. Your flippant rebuke was:
Whatever chief.
Ah, OK. Whatever. That is a "valley girl" response. It was as impressive as your lying comment. Buzz words like that are for Bill and Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid, and that moniker fits them. You attempt to throw all of those who oppose you as liars, whatever.
I noticed in your profile you quote C.S. Lewis. Are you familiar with all of his work? Or did you pick out that one quote about tyranny because you liked how it sounded? C.S. Lewis was a man of great wisdom. He was also an incredible Christian.
I don't want to make any assumptions about you or the current status of your relationship with God, so please share that. The reason I would like you to do so is because I am observing in you a hostility that is more deep seated about the debate regarding intelligent design. Your responses ape those of the academics who launched on this guy.
Since you like to issue challenges (as you did here to Southack) I would like to issue one to you as well:
When you can provide evidence that genetic control does not control the information that provides for almost all life forms, and provide evidence that mutations are impossible, you'll have evidence that falsifies the mechanism of evolution.
spunkets - either man was created by God with a purpose and a destiny, or he is a multifaceted complex organism accidentally with no reason or purpose; and he was formed from non-living nothingness.
If the latter is true, then when we die comes "the nothing." But if the former is true, we are accountable to Him. Tell me, is that what really scares you? I
Apperently you don't understand physics. Classical mechanics is perfectly accurate, by the correspondence principle. Scientific theories must be perfectly accurate, else they are not theories.
"Moreover, I saw your response to Southack when he simply pointed out the double standard of your previous post and (simply and correctly stated) that evolution was evolution isn't scientific."
He was flat out wrong as usual. Evolution is a scientific theory.
"Your flippant rebuke was: ...a "valley girl" response.
whatever chief.
" I noticed in your profile you quote C.S. Lewis. Are you familiar with all of his work?"
Yes.
"It was as impressive as your lying comment. Buzz words like that are for Bill and Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid, and that moniker fits them."
Prof. Marshall lied.
"I am observing in you a hostility that is more deep seated about the debate regarding intelligent design. Your responses ape those of the academics who launched on this guy.
I am not an acedemic, so my responses couldn't possibly be the same. My responses are my own.
Re: "When you can provide evidence that genetic control does not control the information that provides for almost all life forms, and provide evidence that mutations are impossible, you'll have evidence that falsifies the mechanism of evolution.
"you like to issue challenges (as you did here to Southack)"
In case you missed it, I gave the elements of falsifiability. Notice it's a statement that includes what would falsify the theory of evolution. Try to grasp it, it's not at all challenging.
"spunkets - either man was created by God with a purpose and a destiny, or he is a multifaceted complex organism accidentally with no reason or purpose; and he was formed from non-living nothingness."
This has nothing to do with evolution, nor does the term accidentally apply. Science deals with reality and what is. There's no scientific evidence whatsoever that the world resulted from the act of some individual. In fact God said specifically that was the case. Matthew 12:39 He answered, "A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah." That was in response to a challenged posed by the equivalent of the day's IDers. Matthew 12:38, "Then some of the Pharisees and teachers of the law said to him, "Teacher, we want to see a miraculous sign from you."" No sign was, or is to be given, except the Holy Spirit.
"Tell me, is that what really scares you?"
Nothing scares me.