Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Living dinosaurs
abc.net.au ^ | 9/30/2002

Posted on 10/01/2002 8:32:43 AM PDT by SteveH

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 381-400401-420421-440 ... 601-602 next last
To: PatrickHenry
"Total--only EVOLUTION"---NO competition"...your exact words!

Yes, BEAST train crashing HARDER

"losers jump upon the BEAST train"
"Come losers all onboard the BEAST train!"

Oh BEAST* train crashing LOUDER
Crash on the BEAST train
Come on crashing BEAST train
Yes, BEAST train crashing HARDER

* peace train...cat stevens

EVO train TOO!

401 posted on 10/03/2002 7:10:44 PM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 400 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Liberal disrupter alert...YOU!
402 posted on 10/03/2002 7:11:52 PM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 400 | View Replies]

To: Heartlander
Dotted lines and assumptions, this is what I was pointing out to you. You’re allowed to infer and your data is the only data that is correct. Do you see ‘this’? You claim proof all the time…

You say this, Mr. Not-A-Creationist, but what's your agenda? And what's your story? My inference makes sense. You can't even say what your inference is, only what it isn't. This is Luddite behavior: cheering for the gaps, praying for ignorance.

We have been through this many times. I do not subscribe to YEC or evolution but this is based on what I consider dogma on both sides.

I am not asking you what you do not believe. I am asking you what you do believe. If you don't have a story, you don't have a horse in the race. And there no people who are militant believers in "Nobody knows anything." Ask yourself if your denials and tap-dancing are credible.

Science is merely a hobby for me…

Is this a joke? Your hobby is science?

Your posts betray militant opposition to the teaching of what we have learned so far in science. Again, why? Why do you profess one thing while doing another?

403 posted on 10/03/2002 7:15:32 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 396 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Every once in a while you post something I can agree with. Is that a test to see if I'm reading?

Placeholder bump ;^)

404 posted on 10/03/2002 7:16:03 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 376 | View Replies]

To: Heartlander
What is a Creationist to Vade?

When is a Luddite for the Lord not a creationist?

405 posted on 10/03/2002 7:16:37 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 399 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Then you bolded several words in my text to show I wasn't making pronouncements in Biblical authoritarian terms. I was explaining a line of reasoning from evidence, after all.

“Biblical authoritarian terms”? Hmmm. You keep interjecting this Creationist/Christianity thing.

Why am I doing what I'm doing? I was appalled some three years ago to see so many of my philosophical and political brethren attacking science. Conservatism can never speak to the country with such hayseed Luddites dragging about its ankles, so I initially set about to add my voice to those offsetting any likely harmful effect of the clamor of creationists on FR. It turned out to be fun and educational.

Yes… Yes I see it now! Conservatism will be destroyed if we don’t all believe in evolution. Tell the President Vade! Tell him now!
He is a Christian; he is trying to reform education. This is going to destroy our society! Evolution is the most important issue in our world!

406 posted on 10/03/2002 7:18:37 PM PDT by Heartlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 395 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
The Mentality of Evolution

There seems to be a cart before the horse attitude i.e. evolution has occurred, that's a fact ( it is never stated who proved this fact ), therefore we just need to twist the evidence until it fits our pre-conceptions. Of course, science is supposed to look at the evidence, and then derive the theory, but as Karl Popper admitted, the theory of evolution has never been a scientific theory due to its lack of testability, so normal scientific standards do not and have never applied to the theory of evolution. It has always been an emotional issue and not a scientific one - on all sides it must be stated in fairness. The main difference is that the worshippers of mechanistic reductionist Newtonian materialism try to pretend they are objective, when in reality most of them are not. The following extract from Phillip Johnson's Darwin on Trial puts it quite nicely:-

407 posted on 10/03/2002 7:19:24 PM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 405 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
"Chandra Wickramasinghe has compared the neo-Darwinian account of evolution to saying that all of world literature came from the book of Genesis by occasional typos and paragraph swapping. The mechanism discussed here is analogous to stipulating that every text along the way was viable as literature. Such gradualistic series have not been shown to be possible in written text or computer programs. Nor have they been shown to exist in biology. If this is how new genes are supposed to evolve, the mechanism remains to be demonstrated."
408 posted on 10/03/2002 7:23:18 PM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 400 | View Replies]

To: Heartlander
Still no answer. Very odd.

What does it mean when you say you are not a creationist? What inferences are you proposing to replace all the ones you don't allow? After all, you're not a creationist.

What kind of a delaying action do you imagine you're fighting here? Why is it important to hide, tap-dance, snipe and run?
409 posted on 10/03/2002 7:23:51 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 406 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Gone for the evening placemarker.
410 posted on 10/03/2002 7:27:01 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 409 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
I am not asking you what you do not believe. I am asking you what you do believe. If you don't have a story, you don't have a horse in the race. And there no people who are militant believers in "Nobody knows anything." Ask yourself if your denials and tap-dancing are credible.

You are an agnostic. . I am a Christian. You straddle the fence with God - I straddle the fence with science. But regardless, we both know that science cannot have all the answers for our lives.

411 posted on 10/03/2002 7:27:27 PM PDT by Heartlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 403 | View Replies]

To: Heartlander
If the evidence convinced you that evolution (or the theory of common descent) was false, would your life change?

Any new data will bring an advance of some sort, even if it seriously revises our picture of evolutionary change. I wish we had the next 200 year's worth of data already.

But I can tell from how you formulate the question that you have no clue--as a matter of deliberate policy, I'm sure--how much evidence is already in that evolution does occur and has occurred by one mechanism or another.

412 posted on 10/03/2002 7:27:45 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 396 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
When is a Luddite for the Lord not a creationist?

You have not answered my question. Tap-dance? Projection!???

413 posted on 10/03/2002 7:30:01 PM PDT by Heartlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 409 | View Replies]

To: Heartlander
I am a Christian.

This should not be the holdup, but somehow it is for some people. Science isn't going to change for you. You need to rethink your attitude toward it. Until you do, you'll be an embarrassment to conservatism before the country and the world.

414 posted on 10/03/2002 7:30:40 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 411 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
FR evo missionary trying to enlighten us poor souls...no thanks!
415 posted on 10/03/2002 7:30:42 PM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 412 | View Replies]

To: Heartlander
You have not answered my question. Tap-dance? Projection!???

Oh, now I'm not answering you questions? This is getting rich. Formulate a complete-sentence question and I'll answer it. Then tell me what you think you're doing on this thread.

416 posted on 10/03/2002 7:32:11 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 413 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
"Theory of common descent" is my only problem with evolution. It is speculation.
417 posted on 10/03/2002 7:32:26 PM PDT by Heartlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 412 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Evolution makes you think your better than anything...bs!

Spare me your foolishness!

418 posted on 10/03/2002 7:33:01 PM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 414 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Evolution makes you think you're better than anything...bs!

Spare me your foolishness!

419 posted on 10/03/2002 7:34:17 PM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 416 | View Replies]

To: Heartlander
"Theory of common descent" is my only problem with evolution. It is speculation.

Ape-ancestry rejectionism? Tough! That's the way it happened.

420 posted on 10/03/2002 7:34:51 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 417 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 381-400401-420421-440 ... 601-602 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson