Posted on 10/19/2009 8:32:17 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Newsweek magazine recently published a commentary by atheist Richard Dawkins containing some of his arguments against “creationists.” Therein he admitted, “What would be evidence against evolution, and very strong evidence at that, would be the discovery of even a single fossil in the wrong geological stratum.”[1]
Out of place fossils are actually common, despite Dawkins’ claims regarding the “massive numbers” of fossils documenting evolutionary history. ICR News has reported on several over the last 12 months [2,3,4,5,6] and another one has surfaced recently...
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
I could also add that there are those of us who believe that genuine Christianity is more than just words.
You could indeed engage the argument instead of constantly dancing around and waving your arms in hopes of avoiding the issue.
By what right do you accuse ME of avoiding anything? And offer up such abuse?
I'm simply pointing out the truth to you. Many people will erroneously claim injury simply because they think that anything they don't like can't be the truth
"By what right do you accuse ME of avoiding anything? And offer up such abuse?"
It's not abuse for me to point out the truth to you. It's abuse for you to constantly subject me to such disingenuous sophistry.
You do realize the irony here....
By the way, the italicized words are literal quotes from Thomas's article.
Looking for "proof" to shore up your already-arrived-at conclusion simply isn't science. If the facts lead you there, great. But these people weren't led to a conclusion by the facts. These people started with a desired conclusion and from that moment on have been desperately looking for any potential evidence they can find, even if the evidence is easily refuted, to confirm their pet theory of origins.
Also by the way, it's rather telling that ICR's "science writer" proudly touts his qualification for the job as having a Master's Degree!
Now what remotely credible scientific organization would have as their main expert someone who has a Master's Degree? None, of course. But that's okay. ICR is not a credible scientific organization.
According to the National Science Foundation, the United States has more than 300,000 qualified scientists with PhDs in the biological and physical sciences - a vast number of whom would actually be Christians.
Yet the very BEST that ICR can come up with to represent their "research" to the public is some guy with a Master's Degree.
(Incidentally, we're never told what Brian's MS is in, or where he earned it. Hmmm, I wonder why?)
All of this further confirms everything I've ever seen concerning ICR. They are to physical science what VPC is to gun control research: Both organizations have come up with their conclusions in advance, and all of their "research" is really just propaganda designed to support the desired point of view they want to promote. It's not a quest for truth in either case. It's a quest to promote their ideology.
Anyway, by post #6, the ICR article had already been refuted at a couple of different points, none of which, as far as I recall, were ever answered.
Now it's true that Buck W's post at #7 was sarcastic. But in fact, the core statement was really quite true:
"Brian Thomas MS* remains a shameless rationalizer, easily contradicted by even the least prepared thinking person.
In fact, it took me only minutes to find a qualified and well-reasoned refutation of one of the key points of this article, a refutation which has been out for years already and which was nowhere addressed by Mr. Thomas.
Yes, it's true that Buck W's post was rather sarcastic. But tthat particular post was made in regard to the content and source of the information itself.
And that statement regarding content was answered by a vicious personal attack:
That means alot coming from an evo-atheist who pretends to be a Christian...
Yes, there was then some name-calling back and forth. But note who it was who started the ugly personal attacks: GGG.
That's what GodGunsGuts does. I've seen it before. It's a pattern. And in my opinion, it's a behavior pattern that is entirely unChristian.
[Cue more personal attacks by GGG on me. I'm an "evo-atheist impostor," a "phony," not a Christian, a "wolf in sheep's clothing," etc.]
And of course, after that the demands - demands! - followed that both Buck W and I recite GGG's Christian Shahada in order to "prove" our faith, along with more ugly slander, characterizing anyone who disagrees with GGG's personal point of view as "evo-atheist disruptors posing as Christians," "impostors," "false prophets," "liars," and "evildoers." (These are quotes.)
So no, I don't see any "irony" here. And I do believe that genuine Christianity is a lot more than just words. But the overall ugliness of how GGG interacts with others, like the fact that ICR can only "afford" a "science writer" with a Master's Degree, is unfortunately rather telling.
Note that I'm not necessarily impugning the motives of the people at ICR when I say this. They may well be, and I think almost certainly are, well-intentioned.
But they are sufficiently blinded by their zealous pre-commitment to their pre-determined point of view that they're not really capable of accepting any facts or evidence, no matter how compelling, that implies their pre-determined point of view may not be the correct one.
Bingo.
Add to that a number of rather nasty, and downright slanderous accusations made by GGG directly toward me, which have been removed by the mods.
I don't have a problem with GGG. This is a pro religious forum, and he's free to post whatever he wants, just as anyone here is free to criticize it. Given the nature of the debate, it can sometimes get very contentious, and neither side has a monopoly on either good or bad behavior. The bottom line is, generally speaking, if you're incapable of defending yourself, or you get offended easily, then you might want to rethink your desire to involve yourself with this issue.
That said, the irony I spoke of is reflected in what John said:
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God...And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us..
I don't expect you to understand the fundamental irony since you two are having a battle of egos, but one can always hope....
GGG posts brainless YEC claims which promptly get ripped to shreds by multiple people. Then GGG responds by basically calling you evil, since you don’t happen to agree with his/her particular brand of “Christianity.”
I think this was your first comment on the posted article. If you don't like the thread, go elsewhere. But you really have no reason to complain given the nature of your own comments.
If the articles have a serious refutation why didn't you post that instead of the comments above or like what you're posting now?
To those in the past have been either personally insulting or made off-color comments to me I simply won't engage in any sort of discussion after a point, that you call it “brushing off” their comments is of no matter.
On these threads there are a few that show up only to heckle and ridicule GGG, not to debate, not to refute, not even to attack the article, but to make personal insults as the many times their comments have been pulled shows.
Show up with at least a civil approach and I expect you'll be treated that way, otherwise take your lumps. But in no case complain to me with big letters. Afterall you said it was “fun”.
I try to engage in a scientific debate,but not once has GGG ever produced any scientific proof for his side. We get bible verses, name calling, and philosophical discussions.
GGG has said that he has no scientific background. Either he should read some basic textbooks or have someone else with the background speak for him when trying to debate the articles he posts.
We also get spamming in FR from him. When Ardi was announced, we got five identical articles in five days. when four of the links could have been included in the first thread.
Ditto. I have no problem with individual or groups agreeing among themselves on a belief system, I just have a hard time with them seeking to impose that belief system into science and impugning the beliefs and integrity of those who choose to believe differently.
Science dictates that all analysis and conclusion begin with the verification of the integrity of the data. That leads those not already accepting the YEC position to assess the bible, or more accurately, the version and translation of the bible used by those who advocate for Young Earth Creation. This is where the dialog always breaks down. The conclusions of the YEC are based upon subjective interpretation of the bible. Those who do not accept their interpretation will never reach the same conclusions. Those with the initial assertion have the obligation to substantiate their position with the same vigor and integrity as they attack the data (and messengers) that refute it. Endless packaging and repackaging of the same biblically based presumptions will not change any minds.
Funny, I get PMs from people who tell me they changed their mind on fairly regular basis. Indeed, the last person to let me know that they switched from an old earth to a young earth position is Jewish! I was a bit taken aback by this at first, but it makes perfect sense, as Jews and Christians share the very same first book of the Bible.
Read a Women Rides the Beast by Dave Hunt
Then you will know where I stand on the Catholic Church, not necessarily Catholics.
FR seems to have a sub-cult of anti-Catholic bigots.
Nope but we have a few anti Christian bigots, of which you are one. Martin Luther was right, you are wrong.
I am a Christian. You don’t make the call, pal.
“Please show me where ANYBODY on this thread has “ripped to shreds” the original article.”
The article is from ICR, the “You’re going to hell people” and is thus self-shredding.
“He always attempts to stear the argument back to this subtopic for some reason. He tries to get people to answer whether someone following Catholic doctrine is a Christian.”
While that’s a valid strategy in proving the fraudulence of the “creation science” movement and the flawed theology behind it, personally I prefer to ask “are evolutionists going to hell” - because an honest “creation science” purveyor has to say “yes” - especially if they are on an ICR thread, an organization that enshrines in it’s own bylaws just such a conclusion regarding hell and evolutionists.
So, are evolution-believers going to hell?
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.