Replies

“laughable campaign to expand the cult of Darwinistic Materialism”

I’m not interested in “Darwinistic Materialism” I’m interested in science and the body of scientific knowledge. You may be able to prove, scientifically, that Darwin is wrong - and I’d be happy to accept that. Instead, you incessantly post unscientific, non-peer reviewed Bible Study papers and call it science.

“Darwiniac” That’s actually a good one.

“Darwinian misery just love, love, luuuuvvvvsss company.”

You don’t get it....Just prove scientific fact wrong with study, research, and hard work - and then we’ll have new scientific facts. There are probably very few actual “Darwiniacs” out there - they are a boogeyman that you have created because you think that science threatens faith.

If you truly had faith in God, you would know that there is a difference between science and faith - and they are not in opposition.

I’m Christian, and I believe in science, which supports evolution as fact - as best as we can understand it at this time. If you’ve got something else to add to scientific knowledge, then add it. Publish something. Get it out there.

So keep fighting that Darwiniac boogeyman - but know that it’s just a figment of your Creatard imaginiation.

Didn't you see what they gave Darwood for his birthday? Why, they cut down his tree, that's what they did. Creation scientists have been predicting this ever since Darwood began publishing his unscientific fairytales about the unobservable, unrepeatable past. And lo and behold, that day has finally arrived. So now Darwood is without his tree, and then I come to find out that natural selection was discovered by a Creationist some 25 years before Darwood published Origins. Not only that, Darwood stole the idea without giving attribution, but was later forced to give attribution in subsequent editions of the same. Of course, Darwood didn't stick with observable facts when it came to natural selection. You see, the Creationist who discovered natural selection demonstrated that it is a conservative (as opposed to an information adding) force in nature. Darwood, of course, was not about to let the scientific facts get in his way, and promptly infused natural selection with magical, information adding powers never before seen in nature. To sum up, Darwood was a non-scientist, he did not practice the scientific method, a med-school dropout, a reverend who went apostate, a plagiarist, and all-around loser, who then had the audacity/ to reinterpret the entire history of biology based on nothing more than a few minor variations within species. And you guys fell for it. LOL!!!

==I’m Christian

LOL...you sure don’t act like one. I see no difference between your approach and misotheists like Richard Dawkins (except that he’s a tad less rude than you are). Other than that you sound just like him and the rest of his merry band of God-hating (r)evolutionary misfits.