incicively argued.
1 posted on
07/04/2007 5:43:31 PM PDT by
balch3
To: Coyoteman
2 posted on
07/04/2007 5:47:57 PM PDT by
ASA Vet
(Pray for the deliberately ignorant)
To: balch3
Williams' thesis: evolution is false, because some creationist named Wells says it is, and that settles that.
How can the scientific community ever hope to withstand such a terrible attack?
3 posted on
07/04/2007 5:48:28 PM PDT by
Alter Kaker
(Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
To: balch3
5 posted on
07/04/2007 5:55:54 PM PDT by
LiteKeeper
(Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
The evolutionary "icons" addressed by Wells include: 1) the Miller-Urey experiment; 2) the evolutionary "Tree of Life"; 3) the homology of vertebrate limbs; 4) Haeckel's drawings of vertebrate embryos; 5) Archaeopteryx as the missing link connecting birds to reptiles; 6) the peppered moth story; 7) beak evolution and speciation among Darwin's finches; 8) the laboratory-directed evolution of four-winged fruit flies; 9) equine evolution; and 10) human evolution. Nothing to see here. Move along!
These ten evolutionary "icons" have been the subject of enough misrepresentations, falsifications, quote mines, and outright lies by creationists to fill the Encyclopedia Britannica.
Short rebuttals for all of these "icons" (and a few hundred others) are found in the Index of Creationist Claims.
6 posted on
07/04/2007 5:59:45 PM PDT by
Coyoteman
(Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
To: balch3
Evolution to higher organisms by “random mutation” is absolutely impossible. We have learned so much more about the nuts and bolts of genetics in the last 15 or so years, that only a rapid atheist can continue to believe that life is a mere chance event! For you die-hard Darwinists, read Michael Behe’s latest book: “The Edge of Evolution.” He’s a biochemist, and the book gets pretty technical at times, but if you want to see an unglossed analysis of the facts behind genetic mutation, read it!
To: balch3
Evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics and cannot be proved using the scientific method. I have my own belief system that has been developed over years.
10 posted on
07/04/2007 6:05:18 PM PDT by
mountainlyons
(Hard core conservative)
To: balch3; Dog Gone; Dark Wing
And for irrefutable proof that evolution is wrong, send just $20 in small unmarked bills to:
Carlo Ponzi
P.O. Box 666
So Long Sucker, Oklahoma
An autographed statuette of HIM will be included with every purchase.
14 posted on
07/04/2007 6:13:52 PM PDT by
Thud
To: balch3
In other news...
The Flat Earth Society announced today that a majority of United Nations scientists now believe that the Earth really is flat.
To: balch3
The Bible contains thirty or forty stories about miracles and most of those are paranormal kinds of things for which rational explanations probably exist. Evolution requires an endless series of probabilistic miracles and grotesque violations of the basic laws of mathematics and probability theory. God vs Charles Darwin is one of life’s easier choices.
To: balch3
Complexity, by its very definition is ordered not chaotic, is multi-faceted, and reflects intelligence. This is a profession of faith. It is not supported by experience, but rather is contrary to experience. Far from being the product of intelligence, complexity necessarily must exist before intelligence. Omniscience is not a high degree of intelligence, but a different concept altogether.
To: balch3
Shouldn’t this be in Breaking News?
30 posted on
07/04/2007 8:14:53 PM PDT by
Oztrich Boy
(The polar icecaps are melting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .on Mars)
To: balch3
Why must so many highly religious people always be in such conflict with Science? If you believe that God created the Universe, then everything around you, including you is the actual “Hand of God”. If you desire to know the will of God, wouldn’t it be better to study the “Handy work of God”, with the minds his hand gave us. Than to study a book assembled in Byblos from stories, from all over the middle-east, by primitive and superstitious men who believed the world was flat, and disease was caused by demons entering in through your mouth. Translated, only God knows how many times, by similarly primitive men, who believed leeches, and bleeding a sick person, would remove the bad humors that cause disease. A greater understanding of the mind of God, is more likely to be achieved by the scientist studying the beauty of God’s creation filled with Quarks and Quasars, than the distorted writings of primitive men, no matter how divinely inspired, groping for some understanding of the world around them and their existence?
32 posted on
07/04/2007 8:25:30 PM PDT by
Eagle74
(From time to time the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots)
To: balch3
58 posted on
07/05/2007 8:53:55 AM PDT by
RightWhale
(It's Brecht's donkey, not mine)
To: balch3
Based on this rambling nonsense I conclude that the letter writer is somehow related to Ricky Williams.
To: balch3
The real question to evolutionists is why are you an athiest? It’s not about science, it’s about defying God.
60 posted on
07/05/2007 9:04:58 AM PDT by
DungeonMaster
(Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.)
To: balch3
Evolution as a scientific principle has been seriously challenged
No, it hasn't.
65 posted on
07/05/2007 9:23:08 AM PDT by
mysterio
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
