Loosening Darwin's Grip

Citizen Magazine ^ | March 2003 | Clem Boyd

[Remedy]

Where is proto-man-opus? You know, the link between us and them (animals).

[Old Professer]

It would seem to me that the test for evolution would be success through complexity; where a current form of being was successful and remained so through chance advantageous mutation we would expect to find both forms, but where hardship forced adaption it would seem reasonable to find only the more complex form.

Nothing in history allows us to assume that the evolved form per se is better than the previous form, only more successful.

[Aquinasfan]

Thanks for the info. I'm an ID guy myself. The dam is breaking.

[Condorman]

Where is proto-man-opus? You know, the link between us and them (animals).

"Those don't count as transitionals because they aren't the ones I want to see."

[BMCDA]

Hmmm, déjà vu.

[ThinkPlease]

My goodness. That is pretty impressive. Let's not forget the ICR message boards, where even a hint of evolutionist thought is deleted as soon as it hits the board.

[f.Christian]

jr ...

Not all conservatives are scientifically-illiterate bohunks, but the Left likes to tar us with that brush owing mostly to the machinations of creationists.


254 posted on 02/25/2003 9:22 AM PST by Junior (I want my, I want my, I want my chimpanzees)

fC ...

the left does like the evolutionists --- apostles // brothers ...

you are the saints --- gods // evangelists of the left (( devils )) !

[Right Wing Professor]

Evolution is the status quo ante in biological science. The essence of conservatism is the rejection of ill-considered ideological revisions of the status quo ante - in essence, radicalism of any sort. Creationism is another form of radicalism; it requires one to set aside the body of scientific work in favor of an extraneous, unsubstantiated doctrine. Properly speaking, creationists don't belong on a conservative forum.

[f.Christian]

To: f.Christian

Dakmar...

I took a few minutes to decipher that post, and I must say I agree with a lot of what you said.

fC...

These were the Classical liberals...founding fathers-PRINCIPLES---stable/SANE scientific reality/society---industrial progress...moral/social character-values(private/personal) GROWTH(limited NON-intrusive PC Govt/religion---schools)!

Dakmar...

Where you and I diverge is on the Evolution/Communism thing. You seem to view Darwin and evolution as the beginning of the end for enlighted, moral civilization, while I think Marx, class struggle, and the "dictatorship of the proletariat" are the true dangers.

God bless you, I think we both have a common enemy in the BRAVE-NWO.

452 posted on 9/7/02 8:54 PM Pacific by Dakmar

[Junior]

So what are the evos doing on a conservative forum?

To show the world that not all conservatives are scientifically-illiterate bohunks.

[f.Christian]

you are the saints --- gods // evangelists -- MISSIONARIES of the left (( devils )) !

[f.Christian]

Once a year ... termites (( liberals )) swarm // fly --- RW liberal professor !

[BMCDA]

LOL!! The ICR message board, what a hoot! And I just thought the BaptistBoard was already at the bottom of the scale.

However, I must confess that not all creationist boards are that bad. Some, like the one at CARM.org are pretty good and the only thing that is censored are cuss words which keeps the discussions at a civil level.

[VadeRetro]

When the cult has Morton's Demon, how can the moderation of the forums they run not reveal the same phenomenon?

[gomaaa]

"So what are the evos doing on a conservative forum?
To show the world that not all conservatives are scientifically-illiterate bohunks. "


I have a lot of friends who think precisely that. I know it can't be true since I've met at least a few that defy that stereotype. I've found more than a few on this list, though there is also a fair share of bigots and fundamentalists.

To be honest I think I'd find a similar distribution on a left-leaning forum, just reversed in political leaning. Interesting idea for a future experiment...

[VadeRetro]

To be honest I think I'd find a similar distribution on a left-leaning forum, just reversed in political leaning.

Arguing with certain doctrinaire liberals is very similar to arguing with creationists. Some liberals also have what I've taken to calling Holy Warrior syndrome. If you're fighting for a better world (whether in this life or the next), then your perceived opponent is evil, perhaps even Satanic. You, OTOH, are a white knight on a charger.

You are not having a debate in which you calmly explain what you think and why. It's war. Twist, shout, evade, distract! You're allowed to lie. (You may need this dispensation, as you must make no concession of any significance unto the hated foe.) You may dump great buckets of slop over your opponent at any time. After all, he's evil and all the good people on your side already know you're right. That's not even at issue.

It's the same disease (Holy Warrior Syndrome) with left and right reversed.

[Youngblood]

Creationism is another form of radicalism; it requires one to set aside the body of scientific work in favor of an extraneous, unsubstantiated doctrine.

And if they get their way, this is just the beginning. If ID can be taught along side evolution in biology class, then why not Noah's flood in geology class? After all, certain individuals here claim that there is better evidence for flood geology than mainstream geology (!!). They'll get around to big bang theory too.

I wonder will they allow the critiques of ID to be presented to the kids?

[stanz]

So what are the evos doing on a conservative forum?

When I was growing up, being a political conservative meant being in favor of:

- a strong military and defense program
- minimal federal government intervention in our lives
- freedom from tax burdens
- providing free rein to the private sector to provide economic incentives
- fewer social programs and more emphasis on the work ethic.

Being a conservative had nothing to do with religion or lack of therein, gay vs. straight, or evolution vs. creationism. These are recent embellishments. IMHO, a conservative is a fiscally responsible individual who embraces the points mentioned above and whose religious and moral preferences are private matters.

[gore3000]

"there aren't any transitional fossils"

That's right there are none. Arranging a bunch of partial skeletons to tell a story is not evidence of anything except deception. The whole paleontological profession is completely phony. They mix and match bones, they assume dates with little or no evidence, and in general fit the evidence to the theory.

If evolution were true, we would see transitional fossils in the major transitions - reptile to mammals for example - in great abundance. There should be a vast amount of them because the transition is quite large and according to evolution, changes accumulate step by step gradually so there should be numerous such transitional reptile to mammal fossils (also because the transition is large, numerous species and individuals would have been needed to achieve such a change at random. Instead, the only 'transitional' is a partial head with the top crushed and pasted together and a fairly intact lower jaw from over 100 million years before we have clear examples of mammals. This scarcity in the largest transitions, shows quite well that evolution is not true.

[edsheppa]

Where is proto-man-opus? You know, the link between us and them (animals).

I wondered where the goalposts went.