Posted on 07/30/2008 7:56:37 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Feedback archive → Feedback 2008
Christopher Hitchens—blind to salamander reality
A well-known atheist’s ‘eureka moment’ shows the desperation of evolutionists
In a recent article in the leftist online magazine Slate, prominent atheistic journalist Christopher Hitchens (b. 1949) thinks he has found the knock-down argument against creationists and intelligent design supporters. Fellow misotheist Richard Dawkins (b. 1941) and another anti-theist Sir David Attenborough (b. 1926) agree. Not surprisingly, there have been questions to us about this, so Dr Jonathan Sarfati responds. As will be seen, their whole argument displays ‘breathtaking inanity’ and ignorance of what creationists really teach, and desperation if this is one of their best proofs of evolution...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationontheweb.com ...
We must be looking at two different images, looking at two different theories.
Check out the “orchard model” — it’s the one that shows the creation of various “kinds” of creatures, which over time experienced genetic variation. No single common ancestor from which all of life developed. No gain in genetic information.
I agree with you, MrB — Scripture is true, not false.
And as soon as I write that, some FReeper is going to come along providing evidence of its being false, thus revealing their low estimation of it.
If Jesus was present at creation, indeed if all things were created *through* Him, then He was able to “correct” misunderstandings of the creation of humanity as they were commonly understood at the time. But rather than correcting anything, He affirmed it.
If it’s good enough for Jesus, it’s good enough for me. The Father will not fault me for believing as Jesus did/does.
That is exactly like saying "show me where Nancy Pelosi has endorsed John McCain to be President." All of the publications you mention are specifically propagandistic, and dedicated to controlling the flow of debate in exactly the way that our political parties do.
Nah, it goes back to ancient Egypt. Pharoah was actually equated with god.
When it stops being purely academic, and gets down to using science to make public policy decisions, what do we use to make those decisions?
Sooooooo how's the weather where you are? ;9)
In case you have not figured it out with your PHD and all, there are no mechanisms to prevent what does not exist. microevolution is just a poor synonym for adaptation.
And BTW, (borrowing coyoteman style), So sorry to tell you, but dont bet the rent money on appealing to science for authority. When PHD’s can be had based on imaginary ape like creatures that became man, science is already on very shaky ground.
And many of our modern theocrats want to take us back to those bad old days.
Fine, *bad old days*. *roll eyes*
Not a very creative way to avoid providing the sources.
So now what? We have different rules of engagement for evos and non-evos? When a non-evo makes a statment, he's hounded about backing it up but evos don't have to provide anything? Are evos exempt from following the rules of engagement they impose on everyone else?
Do as I say, not as I do?
Past tense. Modern day Israel would not be found in the OT.
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Good grief, we couldn't have stuff like that, now could we?
Is “modern day theocrats” any less spicific or any more subjective/perjorative than “Darwinists”?
Pretty much, but that was a result in response to "the bad old days" of living under the British crown and the theocratic dogma of the Church of England, which a lot of people came to this country to escape.
So you submit that there simply is no such thing as a "modern day theocracy"?
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.I think Coyoteman was thinking of the earlier Darker Ages when theologians were doing the thinking. Not the time of the English Enlightenment.
Many of the Founding Fathers of the United States were also influenced by Enlightenment-era ideas, especially the views of John Locke on the duties and role of government for the people.The DoI pretty much follows The Second Treatise on Civil Government of John Locke. The ultimate conclusion of which is
when by the miscarriages of those in authority, it is forfeited; upon the forfeiture, or at the determination of the time set, it reverts to the society, and the people have a right to act as supreme, and continue the legislative in themselves; or erect a new form, or under the old form place it in new hands, as they think good.John Locke's Empiricism arose from the Age of ReasonFINIS.
17th century philosophy in the Western world is generally regarded as being the start of modern philosophy, and a departure from the medieval approach, especially Scholasticism.And that started with Francis Bacon, who had something to do with freeing science from the cold dead hands of the Scholastics.
Western Philosophy had three good centuries before succumbing to Romanticism and post-modernism. Perhaps that's all any civilization can expect
You left off fundamentalism.
Save us, dear Lord, from those who would save us.Art Hoppe, On the Death of Robert Kennedy
San Francisco Chronicle, 1968
Macroevolution means evolution at or above the species level.
1. New species have arisen in historical times. For example:
* A new species of mosquito, isolated in London’s Underground, has speciated from Culex pipiens (Byrne and Nichols 1999; Nuttall 1998).
* Helacyton gartleri is the HeLa cell culture, which evolved from a human cervical carcinoma in 1951. The culture grows indefinitely and has become widespread (Van Valen and Maiorana 1991).
A similar event appears to have happened with dogs relatively recently. Sticker’s sarcoma, or canine transmissible venereal tumor, is caused by an organism genetically independent from its hosts but derived from a wolf or dog tumor (Zimmer 2006; Murgia et al. 2006).
* Several new species of plants have arisen via polyploidy (when the chromosome count multiplies by two or more) (de Wet 1971). One example is Primula kewensis (Newton and Pellew 1929).
2. Incipient speciation, where two subspecies interbreed rarely or with only little success, is common. Here are just a few examples:
* Rhagoletis pomonella, the apple maggot fly, is undergoing sympatric speciation. Its native host in North America is Hawthorn (Crataegus spp.), but in the mid-1800s, a new population formed on introduced domestic apples (Malus pumila). The two races are kept partially isolated by natural selection (Filchak et al. 2000).
* The mosquito Anopheles gambiae shows incipient speciation between its populations in northwestern and southeastern Africa (Fanello et al. 2003; Lehmann et al. 2003).
* Silverside fish show incipient speciation between marine and estuarine populations (Beheregaray and Sunnucks 2001).
3. Ring species show the process of speciation in action. In ring species, the species is distributed more or less in a line, such as around the base of a mountain range. Each population is able to breed with its neighboring population, but the populations at the two ends are not able to interbreed. (In a true ring species, those two end populations are adjacent to each other, completing the ring.) Examples of ring species are
* the salamander Ensatina, with seven different subspecies on the west coast of the United States. They form a ring around California’s central valley. At the south end, adjacent subspecies klauberi and eschscholtzi do not interbreed (Brown n.d.; Wake 1997).
* greenish warblers (Phylloscopus trochiloides), around the Himalayas. Their behavioral and genetic characteristics change gradually, starting from central Siberia, extending around the Himalayas, and back again, so two forms of the songbird coexist but do not interbreed in that part of their range (Irwin et al. 2001; Whitehouse 2001; Irwin et al. 2005).
* the deer mouse (Peromyces maniculatus), with over fifty subspecies in North America.
* many species of birds, including Parus major and P. minor, Halcyon chloris, Zosterops, Lalage, Pernis, the Larus argentatus group, and Phylloscopus trochiloides (Mayr 1942, 182-183).
* the American bee Hoplitis (Alcidamea) producta (Mayr 1963, 510).
* the subterranean mole rat, Spalax ehrenbergi (Nevo 1999).
4. Evidence of speciation occurs in the form of organisms that exist only in environments that did not exist a few hundreds or thousands of years ago. For example:
* In several Canadian lakes, which originated in the last 10,000 years following the last ice age, stickleback fish have diversified into separate species for shallow and deep water (Schilthuizen 2001, 146-151).
* Cichlids in Lake Malawi and Lake Victoria have diversified into hundreds of species. Parts of Lake Malawi which originated in the nineteenth century have species indigenous to those parts (Schilthuizen 2001, 166-176).
* A Mimulus species adapted for soils high in copper exists only on the tailings of a copper mine that did not exist before 1859 (Macnair 1989).
There is further evidence that speciation can be caused by infection with a symbiont. A Wolbachia bacterium infects and causes postmating reproductive isolation between the wasps Nasonia vitripennis and N. giraulti (Bordenstein and Werren 1997).
5. Some young-earth creationists claim that speciation is essential to explain Noah’s ark. The ark was not roomy enough to carry and care for all species, so speciation is invoked to explain how the much fewer “kinds” aboard the ark became the diversity we see today. Also, some species have special needs that could not have been met during the flood (e.g., fish requiring fresh water). Creationists assume that they evolved from other, more tolerant organisms since the Flood. (Woodmorappe 1996)
Source: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB910.html
29+ Evidences for Macroevolution:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
Modern day theocracies:
Iran
India
Bengaladesh
Pakistan
And they began to make real progress when they finally escaped the stiffling thumb of religious control. I think it was called The Enlightenment.
cm: And many of our modern theocrats want to take us back to those bad old days.
So, those *bad old days* comment was in response to JC's comment about the medieval times.
So which, modern day theocrats want to take us back to those bad old days (medieval) and when and where did he (they) state that?
No, I never said that. You're putting words in my mouth again.
You asked for an example and I gave the best one I could think of. I'm not familiar with modern day Israel's form of government so used their past one.
If folks like that win control of the government, the dark ages will truly return.
I believe we have at least one poster here who favors replacing the constitution with biblical law. He admitted it in a thread within the past 10 days to two weeks.
And look at the Wedge Strategy--look what they advocate:
Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions.
We don't need nuts like that running around loose. You may not realize it, or care, but the only way those folks could get their wish of a "Christian only science" would be through some reincarnation of the Inquisition.
Not for me, thanks.
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.