Are You Too Dumb to Understand Evolution?

CreationEvolutionHeadlines ^ | September 10, 2008

[ColdWater]

Do you not know that the sunlight is refracted upon entering the atmosphere thus changing the direction of the rays?

[ColdWater]

If I had, I am sure you would have posted it by now but you haven’t.

[tpanther]

Well if only some of these evos spent 1/100th the time they worry about God, many of which are convinced He doesn’t exist in the first place; on the global warming hot air cult algoreacles running out the back door with their precious science and looting them blind!

Christians weren’t burning people at the stake.

Put it this way, I can’t find anything that would support such a thing in the New Testament.

[tpanther]

How is “hitting them between the eyes” with “scientists that dissent” going to do anything to an argument that “science belongs only to the scientists’?

---

Have you read the link?

[metmom]

So it goes to show again that the whole issue isn’t about teaching science correctly,(as if that can happen considering the quality of public school textbooks) because after telling us time and again that creation should be taught in philosophy classes, when someone tried that, they got sued as well.

And the evos threw their support behind in when there was a thread on it, just as is happening on this thread.

It’s not really about science, it’s about ideology. Evolution just happens to be the convenient distraction to throw up to people as a smoke screen.

The liberal mindset of the evos here, approving of federal control of schools and curriculum, coerced payment of the hijacked public education system, denial of religious freedom, supporting taxing churches.... the list goes on, is amazing. About the only issue I’ve ever seen the evos take the conservative side on is on the second amendment.

[tpanther]

If I had, I am sure you would have posted it by now but you haven’t.

---

Don’t flatter yourself, you’re not worth digging through 1100+ posts.

[Fichori]

“You still have to have to define the "when".” [excerpt]

When?
At any given time, thats when.

“Buy the books and study them. A little education won't hurt you : )” [excerpt]

I can't afford to go buy books. (Unemployed)

“So I basically guessed correctly where you got your 21 arc seconds from : )” [excerpt]

I'd be worried if you didn't know...

“No. They would both point towards the actual position of the Sun. Or close enough for Government work anyway : )” [excerpt]

LeGrande, do you remember this:

Updated anti-amnesia innoculation!

The LeGrandeic System of Astrophysics

post 447

[LeGrande] In other words when you look at the Sun, you are seeing it about 7 minutes behind where it actually is, but if you had a sensitive gravity sensor where would it point? At the sun you see or 7 minutes ahead of the sun you see?

post 469

[mrjesse] this [is] how it would be if the sun were orbiting the earth... if gravity "traveled" instantly (which I think was a basis for your question) then indeed, the sun's gravity would be 2.13 degrees ahead of its visual location... But the sun doesn't orbit the earth! Other way around!

post 488

[LeGrande] You seem unable or unwilling to try and grasp simple concepts that disagree with your world view. My example was simple, is the sun where it appears to be when you look at it? Or is it ahead of where it appears to be? You seem to think that it is where it appears to be, you are wrong.

post 489

[ECO] the sun is where mrjesse says it is.

post 496

[LeGrande] MrJesse is claiming that... the sun is in exactly the same place that we see it, when we see it. You seem to agree, according to your equation and statement "the sun is where mrjesse says it is." Both of you are wrong, we see the Sun where it was 8 minutes ago when the photons were emitted.

post 504

[mrjesse] Can you find anyone at nasa who plans space missions and who agrees with you? The more I hear of your idea the more crazy it sounds.

[LeGrande] LOL They all agree with me... May I suggest "Physics for Dummy's"...

post 542

[LeGrande] Go out at dawn and point a transit right at the edge of the Sun at the instant the first light appears at the horizon (it should be the same point). Now wait 8.3 minutes and measure the distance from the edge of the Sun to the horizon. That is the difference between the Suns apparent position and its true position.

post 593

[LeGrande] There is no difference between the Earth spinning in place or the sun orbiting the earth, the suns apparent position vs actual position is the same.

post 603

[LeGrande] At the exact instant that you see a solar eclipse the suns actual position is already 8.3 minutes beyond that point.

post 525

[ECO] Is the moon's apparent position off by more than 2.1 degrees from its actual position? Or less?

post 529

[LeGrande] The lag is a little over a second.

The Collapse of the LeGrandeic System of Astrophysics

Look at the pictures, LeGrande. There is no 2.1 degree lag. Apparent position of the Sun, actual position of the Sun, apparent position of the moon, and actual position of the moon, all in the same place. And a straight line through the real Sun, the real moon, and the observer on Earth. Dramatic, no? Like a stake pounded through an undead vampire, it rids the world of your 2.1 degree solar lag theory.

Solar Eclipse



Solar Eclipses for Beginners

Originally posted on Mon 14 Jul 2008 by Ethan Clive Osgoode on the thread The Sunset of Darwinism
Large underlinded text is not in the original.
The photo of the 'Solar Eclipse' was broken, and subsequently updated.

Whoo Hooo!
That was FUN!

“That's the same question. The answer is still no. You are basically taking the rotation of the Earth out of the equation, just like an observatory. Granted there are some other factors but they are unimportant for our discussion.” [excerpt]

Smart boy!
(Your catching on!)

“ No what you are missing is that light takes time to reach its destination, the field effects of gravity are instantaneous. The is where the whole discussion started, with field effects : ) You need to get up to speed.” [excerpt]

Back in 991 I posted to you that the speed of light is 299,792,458 meters / second.

I am fully aware that light is not instantaneous.

You have asserted previously that “There is no difference between the Earth spinning in place or the sun orbiting the earth, the suns apparent position vs actual position is the same.” which is simply wrong.

I think your the one who's not up to speed.

“We are talking about the apparent vs actual position of a person on the equator of the earth with a Sun that appears to rise in the East and set in the West : ) If you change the point of reference the observation changes.” [excerpt]

You are, now.

“First you have to determine the speed of light and the distance of the Sun to the Earth, but if you accept that it takes light 8.3 minutes to get from the Sun to the Earth and that the light is traveling in a straight line the geometry is indisputable. Are you disputing that the light takes apx 8.3 minutes to get from the Sun to the Earth?” [excerpt]

Where you go wrong is in assuming that there is no difference between the Earth spinning in place or the sun orbiting the earth.

“Based on your questions, may I assume that you have conceded the point that for an observer on the Earth (Equator or areas where the rises in the East and falls in the West) That there can be a considerable difference of up to 2.1 degrees between the Suns actual position and apparent position?” [excerpt]

based on your assertion that “There is no difference between the Earth spinning in place or the sun orbiting the earth, the suns apparent position vs actual position is the same.”, I would conclude that you have no idea what your talking about.

I'm starting to feel like a bully beating up a cripple in a wheel chair.

[ColdWater]

Well if only some of these evos spent 1/100th the time they worry about God,

Please. You are under some false illusion about what scientists worry about.

[ColdWater]

I'm starting to feel like a bully beating up a cripple in a wheel chair.

Is that where you get your kicks? You won't even respond to my corrections of your errors or acknowledge the physics and history lessons I have provide to you.

[Fichori]

“Time for some history and astronomy lessons ...(NOTE: The sun is a star)

Starlight and Rain ” [excerpt]

Yes, Light-time correction and the Aberration of light.
Very familiar with those two.

Annual aberration which is caused by the earth orbiting the sun accounts for 20.49552 arcseconds, or 0.0056932 degrees.
Diurnal aberration which is the earth rotating on its axis (like a car driving in rain) accounts for 0.32 arcseconds, or 8.88888889 × 10^-5 degrees.

Wikipoodle has a nice article on theAberration of light

[tpanther]

Well if only some of these evos spent 1/100th the time they worry about God,

Please. You are under some false illusion about what scientists worry about.

---

No no no, the unindoctrinated scientists I’m not worried about.

And quite often we find it’s not scientists at all!

godless liberal scientists are about as objective as

godless liberal professors

godless liberal journalists

godless liberal historians

godless liberal lawmakers...

I would go on but I’ve already wasted far much too much time.

[Fichori]

“Do you not know that the sunlight is refracted upon entering the atmosphere thus changing the direction of the rays?”

Yes, I am aware.

however, this was not part of the equation.

As you may have noticed, standing on the moon and looking at the earth was compared to standing on the earth and looking at the sun.

Obviously, atmospheric effects are irrelevant.

[Fichori]

“Is that where you get your kicks? You won't even respond to my corrections of your errors or acknowledge the physics and history lessons I have provide to you.”

Goodgrief!

I actually feel kinda sorry for the guy!

And don't get your knickers in a knot.
I respond to posts as I get them.

I was busy replying to LeGrande and didn't even know you had posted to me.

What errors are you talking about?

[tpanther]

Beginning to feel as though this has so little to do with the science too?

Gosh, metmom too....is this what it must be like in working with deprogramming people from cults?

Oh wait...this is EXACTLY what we ARE doing isn’t it! :)

[Fichori]

Dealing with Evolution or Atheism is one thing.

Dealing with Evolution AND Atheism at the same time is like drinking from a fire hose.

[GodGunsGuts]

It is time for the majority of Americans who believe in Creation/ID to rise up and flex their political muscle. This is going to require unseating/replacing elected officials, taking over school boards, getting ballot measures passed, impeaching federal judges who overturn the will of the people. It's going to require getting in the faces of the other side, and giving them a taste of the political power inherent in our numbers. Our goal should be to purge our public schools of religious Darwinism, demand the privatization of all origins science, and demand the right to direct our children's’ education tax dollars to the school of our choice. Nothing less will do. And until we begin to stand up for our rights, we deserve what we get IMHO.

I completely agree with Dinesh D’Souza when he says:

“Instead of engaging this secular world, most Christians have taken the easy way out. They have retreated into a Christian subculture where they engage Christian concerns. Then they step back into secular society, where their Christianity is kept out of sight until the next church service. Without realizing it Christians have become postmodernists of a sort: they live by the gospel of the two truths. There is religious truth, reserved for Sundays and days of worship, and there is secular truth, which applies the rest of the time.”

“Many Christians have ... sought a workable, comfortable modus vivendi in which they agree to leave the secular world alone if the secular world agrees to leave them alone. Biologist Stephen Jay Gould proposed the terms for the treaty in his book Rocks of Ages when he said that secular society relies on reason and decides matters of fact, while religious people rely on faith and decide questions about values. Many Christians seized upon this distinction with relief. This way they could stay in their subculture and be nice to everyone. “

“But a group of prominent atheists—many of them evolutionary biologists—has launched a powerful public attack on religion in general and Christianity in particular; they have no interest in being nice. A new set of antireligious books—The God Delusion, The End of Faith, God Is Not Great, and so on—now shapes public debate.”

I think it's time we stopped leaving the Temple of Darwin alone! I think it's time we left our comfort zone and engage the Darwiniacs directly. I think it's time to flex our political muscle and make them wish they had opted for stickers in biology books!

[metmom]

It’s mostly a problem with the judiciary. Every time a school board votes to allow creation, the atheist God haters pitch a fit and file a lawsuit.

Trying to do it the right way, isn’t working.

Fortunately, most people see the truth in spite of the monopoly that the ToE has in public schools. Decades of brainwashing still haven’t convinced people that science has it right.

[Matchett-PI]

Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Why Darwinists Reject Evolution
http://onecosmos.blogspot.com/

:)

[GourmetDan]

"You do not understand the clear meaning of words. “Epigenetic mechanisms constrain expression by adapting regions of the genome to maintain either gene silencing or gene activity.” Nothing about mutation, or mutation being “constrained”. EXPRESSION is being constrained. You do know what expression is don't you? It is the DNA gene being transcribed into RNA and then being translated into a protein. THAT is gene expression, and it is controlled by epigenetic mechanisms."

You do not understand the clear meaning of words. “Epigenetic mechanisms constrain expression by adapting regions of the genome to maintain either gene silencing or gene activity.” means *all* gene activity *including* mutation.

"NOTHING about epigenetic mechanisms of DNA methylation and histone modification constrain mutation. Once again you simply have no idea what your talking about."

Of course it does. No gene expression, no 'selection'. Genes are either silenced or promoted, mutation included. There are heritable changes that are passed on. Do you think that stressed bacteria turn on hypermutation across their whole genome? No way. They only 'shuffle' genetic information in certain areas where they may get a sub-optimal, but viable, alternative.

[ColdWater]

It is time for the majority of Americans who believe in Creation/ID

ID: Man evolved over millions of years from simple organisms.