[You:] No I did not. According to you and your fellow evolutionists if one does not post the whole book it is a 'doctored quote' an 'out of context quote' or some such insulting garbage.
You not only omitted the next sentence from your quote-- which contradicted the point you were trying to make-- but you also added to Darwin's quote two words that weren't there. If that's not quote doctoring, I don't know what is.
Anyone who wants to see the sequence, please read Gore's original "quotation" from Darwin in post #782, my posting the actual quote in #804, and Gore's repetition of his fraudulent misquote in posts #842 and 863. (I say "fraudulent" because the added words reappeared even after his initial --doubtless inadvertent-- error had been pointed out to him in #804).
The next sentence did not refute my statement that evolution is wholly materialistic - as I have shown several times already. I also copied YOUR quote without any changes. You are completely out of line and just plain lying. As usual you cannot refute my statements so you just attack me. You continue to make false charges after they have been refuted. Your dishonesty and despicable tactics are obvious from the following:
To: Lurking Libertarian
You posted a doctored quote from Darwin.
No I did not. According to you and your fellow evolutionists if one does not post the whole book it is a 'doctored quote' an 'out of context quote' or some such insulting garbage. The part you wanted included shows quite well the dishonesty of Darwin. He is trying to pass himself off as maybe God created life while not saying it and being able to deny it later. Here's the whole thing again. The truth of my post#840 is irrefutable so that's why you are attacking the messenger (and note - the passage you wanted included is here):
As to evolution rejecting supernatural intervention specifically all we need to do is quote Darwin:-me-
... you reply adding the part in bold
"Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved."
First of all note that he ascribes totally material causes to evolution. Secondly one must ask is 'breathed' by whom. It seems to imply God, but note that he does not mention God which I think a Christian would have. He leaves the door open to a materialistic explanation later on which he is unwilling to talk about at this time because he wants to deceive his public regarding his religious beliefs as the following amply shows:
"P.S. Would you advise me to tell Murray [his publisher] that my book is not more un-orthodox than the subject makes inevitable. That I do not discuss the origin of man. That I do not bring in any discussion about Genesis, &c, &c., and only give facts, and such conclusions from them as seem to me fair.
Or had I better say nothing to Murray, and assume that he cannot object to this much unorthodoxy, which in fact is not more than any Geological Treatise which runs sharp counter to Genesis."
From: Daniel J. Boorstein, The Discoverers, page 475.
That he was deceptive about his religious views in the Origins is beyond doubt and that is why he waited until his views had gained ground that he went full front against Christianity in the 'Descent of Man' by finally saying what he meant all along - that man had descended from apes, that man was not specifically created by God. We also must add to his deception the quote below from Alamo-Girl's post:
"It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present. But if (and oh! what a big if!) we could conceive in some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, etc., present, that a proteine compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter would be instantly devoured or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed."
So from all the above, the case is pretty solid that both evolution is wholly materialistic and that Darwin was willfully deceiving his public about his religious views in the Origins.
840 posted on 11/12/2002 6:13 PM PST by gore3000
982 posted on 11/13/2002 5:34 PM PST by gore3000
[Post Reply | Private Reply | To 885 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]