Darwin on the Right: Why Christians and conservatives should accept evolution

Scientific American ^ | October 2006 issue | Michael Shermer

[Coyoteman]

Religion Moderator, does not this kind of deliberate TEXTUAL misrepresentation constitute mendacity? If not, exactly WHAT does it represent?

Apologetics?

[balrog666]

I notice that everyone not on the rational side has now left.

I suggest we abandon this thread to the rats and trolls.

[js1138]

Religion Moderator, does not this kind of deliberate TEXTUAL misrepresentation constitute mendacity? If not, exactly WHAT does it represent?

It's OK, because this is the religion forum, and he has faith that that's what the dictionary says.

[Dimensio]

There does exist a World Book entry on evolution that contains the text that Warrior of Justice has quoted. However, he has neglected to note the following sentence: "Most commonly, however, evolution refers to the formation and development of life on Earth. The idea that all living things evolved from simple organisms and changed through the ages to produce millions of species is known as the theory of organic evolution. Most people call it simply the theory of evolution." That statement clearly shows that the claim that the theory of evolution addresses the origin of the universe itself is false. Warrior of Justice is employing a logical fallacy in claiming otherwise.

[VadeRetro]

So, I have a better encyclopedia than he has--a World Book at that--and you have a better version of his dictionary. The funniest thing is that his "quotes" look mightily like his own bizarre writing "style," to use a word loosely.

This looks incredibly bad.

[js1138]

There does exist a World Book entry on evolution that contains the text that Warrior of Justice has quoted.

Except for the parts he made up. I'd say he has libeled Webster's and subjected FR to legal action. I wonder what Webster's will think of being misquoted on a public forum in a way that will bring ridicule?

[King Prout]

it looks incredibly like a parody, actually.

fuggeddabouddid - it's beer-thirty. MGD beckons.

[js1138]

Nor does lying about what the dictionary says=right.

[Dimensio]

Except for the parts he made up.

Upon examining his original "excerpt" and comparing it to the original source, it appears that you are correct. It seems that Warrior of Justice has fabricated claims regarding the text of that particular entry. I am now uncertain as to whether his false attribution would be considered abuse, or if instead that the act of pointing out his act of fabrication is itself abuse.

[Liberal Classic]

Franklin believed in salvation through works.

[js1138]

Apparently justice=lying.

[Celtjew Libertarian]

Actually, we've a friend of the family who had incurable cancer, went to Lourdes, and came back cured... Not even any of the scarring that had been there. But I've also known people without religious faith -- or at least not a faith of the Judeo-Christian tradition -- who suddenly healed, seemingly because they willed themselves to heal.

There are stories of small women who suddenly lifted heavy objects in order to save their children. Such things were once miracles, unexplainable except by faith. We now know they are the result of incredible rushes of adrenaline.

In that light it is conceivable that there is some hormone we have not yet isolated that can trigger sudden healing. I simply do not know. But I am familiar of similar healing that did and did not involve Christian prayer.

In any case, care to comment on my post #619 with regard to the Hebrew word, "Yom," not always meaning a single day of 24 hours?

[King Prout]

The use of big words and hollow ideas does NOT= "right".

perhaps, but irrelevant - that assertion does not debunk what you criticise.

on the other hand, deliberately misrepresenting the text of what you claim to be quoting does equal WRONG.

[VadeRetro]

I notice that everyone not on the rational side has now left.

Indeed. WOJ has done a fine job of silencing his creationist friends by being buffoonish to a caricature level. No matter how he stinks up the thread, WOJ is immune to criticism from the very side he is discrediting. Some people think there are no bad bullets fired at the Great Satan. (But obviously there are.)

[VadeRetro]

I am now uncertain as to whether his false attribution would be considered abuse, or if instead that the act of pointing out his act of fabrication is itself abuse.

In most parts of the world in the 21st century that would not be a question. Sad that we're at such a point here.