Dead MothsGlued To The Trees![And More Evolution Frauds Exposed!]

GEM Genesis Evidence Ministry ^ | 2004 | Teno Groppi

[Dimensio]

Science must fake evidence sometimes.

No evidence was faked here. The only fraud is on the part of the creationists who claim that there was a fraud.

[Stultis]

Correction to my previous... I've recently learned that not just horses but dogs also apparently have differing chromosome numbers among species.

[dangus]

On many threads, I have asserted that there was no "gotcha" gained by creationists by various stories. THIS, on the other hand, is significant.

[Dimensio]

On many threads, I have asserted that there was no "gotcha" gained by creationists by various stories. THIS, on the other hand, is significant.

What, creationists crying "FRAUD!" over a common practice in any insect study because they don't have a legitimate argument to their name? That is significant?

Seems fairly mundane to me.

[RunningWolf]

Evo cannot stand on its own, so its prognosticators (demented nutcase on this thread) must turn quickly to an attack on 'creationists'

Wolf

[Stultis]

must turn quickly to an attack on 'creationists'

So those claiming fraud, lies, etc, where there are none, should be left alone?

Would this include Congressional Democrats too?

[beaver fever]

'm sorry Beaver. I didn't work when I previewed so I thought I did something wrong and it wouldn't show up. :-)

I was only kidding. I should have ended LOL

[YHAOS]

"Yes, of course. We understand. Science must fake evidence sometimes."

You mean this was not so much a case of peppered moths as it was a case of salted moths?

[bornacatholic]

"Dear viewe, we glued these damn moths to the trees to prove a point about naturally occuring events" as a caption to these photos would deprive mean Creationists of their ammunition.

[bornacatholic]

Creationists crying fraud is a naturally occuring event.

[bornacatholic]

Nature documentaries ought be labelled fiction then, right?

Y'all appear quite panicked about transparency, brother.

[Stultis]

Nature documentaries ought be labelled fiction then, right?

*I* don't think so. But you should, by the standards you're applying, and if you think our response to this ludicrous overreaction and faux outrage re Peppered Moths is "panicked". It would be hypocritical on your part to insist that pictures merely illustrating color and crypsis can't be in any way staged, but ones that ARE intended to illustrate much more, e.g. authentic natural behavior in nature documentaries, could be. Don't you think?

BTW, maybe you can answer the question Full Court has chosen to ignore. Why would creationists make a big stink about moths changing color, and not even changing species, at the same time most creationists allow that whole Families containing dozens of species, many with differing chromosome numbers (e.g. horse, dogs) can evolve from a single "created kind"?

[Dimensio]

"Dear viewe, we glued these damn moths to the trees to prove a point about naturally occuring events"

That would be an inaccurate caption. A proper caption would be "Attention viewers: in order to properly highlight the physical features of this organism, we have glued it in place so that it cannot move around and spoil the aim of the camera".

[bornacatholic]

. It would be hypocritical on your part to insist that pictures merely illustrating color and crypsis can't be in any way staged,

*Stage all you want. Fake all you want. I just ask for the information to be labelled as what it is.