Posted on 12/03/2009 8:35:52 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
Evolutionists retreating from the arena of science
--snip--
Today, the Darwinian scientific consensus persists within almost every large university and governmental institution. But around the middle of the 20th century an interesting new trend emerged and has since become increasingly established. Evolutionary theorists have been forced, step by step, to steadily retreat from the evidence in the field. Some of the evidences mentioned earlier in this article were demonstrated to be frauds and hoaxes. Other discoveries have been a blow to the straightforward expectations and predictions of evolutionists. Increasingly, they have been forced to tack ad hoc mechanisms onto Darwin’s theory to accomodate the evidence. Their retreat to unfalsifiable positions is now evident in every arena where they once triumphed. Let us examine how Darwinian theorists have moved from concrete predictions and scientifically observable supporting evidences to metaphysical positions in several key fields of research...
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
Based on the attitude that I see displayed by him or her, I'm sure that I won't convince xcamel. I just wish to point out the logical fallacy to others.
Would explaining it the first time do the job, or will I find myself having to explain it to you again and again; year after year?
After receiving the explanation numerous times over the years, will you still maintain that you never got an answer?
Then Genesis was not literally documenting the creation either.
You see, the oldest trick in the book is when you’re proved wrong, or painted into a corner, is to exclaim “You don’t understand the context!!” [you ignorant swine...] and ride off on your feelings of moral superiority..
Frankly... you can keep your pearls.
Read Genesis and read about the 7 headed beast and notice the difference. Read Revelation 17 then read Genesis 1-11. Not comparable. Anyone who says we pick and choose what’s literal and what’s symbolic, basing their claim on comparisons of Genesis and Revelation, is ignorant or dishonest.
Not comparable? How can you tell? They had different authors. Perhaps the symbolism in Genesis is masked to you by the author’s style.
“The questions about the symbolic references of Christ’s Revelation perhaps being purely literal should seem quite silly to those of you who’ve actually read it to the end of its first chapter.”
John would have been like, “7 candle sticks? Who cares?” “A beast with seven heads that are 7 kings? Who cares?”
I do believe John did see a beast with 7 heads though, as if it were really there. In that case, it is literal.
I’m baffled (but that ain’t too hard to do...)
LOL. The Holy Spirit was the author of both books. Just read them and tell me what you think. Instead of watching dancing with the stars or whatever is on that idiotic machine, read Revelation 17 and Genesis 1-5.
Do you think Jesus raised was resurrected Camel?
What I think is not in question here, and frankly none of your business.
What sums things up is that metmom has several times asked the same question, has received the same answer several times; and yet keeps asking the same question while saying ‘I have never received an answer on this’.
It is quite funny as posted a link to me answering the EXACT SAME QUESTION that she asked from over a year ago.
I guess some people are incapable of actually learning anything.
Yes, I believe He was resurrected. However, I do not ask how, and I do not create a whole pseudo-science, which twists and spins the current state of knowledge to explain the biochemistry of Christ's blood after resurrection, the mechanism of restoring the brain functions and so on. I hope the analogy to the problem of 'creation science' is clear.
Nicely stated.
This interpretation presents a first-person account of events that predate the narrator.
He doesn't understand what the “pearls” are or with what he is associating himself. At least that's the most generous face that I can put on it.
Make that leap of false logic if you like. Just don't claim to the pile of jumpers at the bottom of that cliff that I was the one who pushed you.
My point is simply that Christ Himself tells the readers of His Revelation that symbols are being employed in John's prophetic vision of the future. Can you point to a similar reference from God in Genesis as He briefly summarizes the past to Moses?
"...when you’re proved wrong..."
What assertion, exactly, have I made? Other than that Christ's Revelation, by Self admission, contains symbolism.
"Frankly... you can keep your pearls."
Kicking the dust off the ol' sandals now.
If you want a real knee-slapper just investigate the author of the article that this thread that claims science is retreating. It is Dave Woetzel, an unabashed whacko who spends is spare time trying to prove that man and dinosaurs coexisted. A "scientific" endeavor that begins with a conclusion and ends either in ridicule or, if he is successful, with him spending eternity entombed in dino-dung. That is the standard of credibility these guys use to support their literalism position....LOL
Actually, my comments were based on watching your demeanor become insecure and defensive many, many times in the past. In my considered opinion, your anger can be counted on to flare (and become abusive) when a creationist starts asking questions that challenge your evo-assumptions, or otherwise exposes the state of your knowledge re: the origins debate to be outdated and wrong.
.....resist the dark side, use the force, Luke. Obi-GGG-Kenobi probably can't see the irony and hypocrisy either.
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.