4Simpsons Blog- What I Want From Darwinians and Dawkinites

Tomk80 · #11 7th March 2008, 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by jwu

I'm wondering about the emphasis on "darwinian" evolution. The ToE has changed a lot since Darwin...

Another sign that speakabout has not done his homework.

Phred · #12 7th March 2008, 11:12 AM

Originally Posted by speakout

Stop demonizing people as anti-science religious fundamentalists just for criticizing Darwinian evolution. It is petty, it is bad debating and it reveals your insecurities.

As soon as the criticism rises above ignorance we can talk about petty, bad debating. If I were to continually criticize believers for their belief in the earth having two moons what would you think? First you'd point out that believers don't believe any such thing. Well, most of the arguments presented by those who "criticize" Darwinian evolution are just as off the mark. Yet we still hear about "missing links" and the "Paluxy footprints" and all such faldarall. Valid criticism is never dismissed.

St

op acting as if we have never read anything about Darwinian evolution and haven’t done our homework. We could be wrong, but these are cheap and unproductive debating tricks.

See the previous response.

Teach the debate and acknowledge the many flaws and gaps in your theory, such as going from single to double strand DNA, not having enough time to evolve and these.

That which has evidence to support it is taught. The history of how it has been learned is taught. There is no debate between any theories that have evidence to support them. There has been more than enough time to evolve. Flaws and gaps are presented to give students inspiration for areas to work upon. No areas that religionists pretend are gaps really are.

Admit that the movie “Inherit the Wind” was false and misleading propaganda and bears little resemblance to why and how the Scopes trial played out. Also, help ensure that it not be shown in public schools, unless as an example of how despicable propaganda can be.

It's an example of despicable religionists can be... of how ignorance and lies can be presented as "truth" and "good". When you deny that the forces of organized religion to this day railroad teachers into situations that force them to teach what they know is NOT the truth then we can talk about "Inherit the Wind".

Admit that the pre-Cambrian explosion fossil finds in China crushed your “science of the gaps” theory which held that your transition forms just didn’t fossilize.

At some point you're going to realize that organisms with bones fossilize much better than those without and your "explosion" is going to seem mighty silly.

Don’t pretend that you have lots of fossil evidence when even your leaders admit how big your problem is there.

Of the possibly 400,000 some species of dinosaur we have maybe 1400 of them fossilized. Sure... we'd like to have many more. And I'm sure that, as time goes on we'll find more. But with DNA and fossils and being able to date those fossils... we're able to reconstruct quite a bit. So don't pretend it's meaningless.

Remind people that even IF Darwinian evolution were true that it still doesn’t explain how the universe came into existence and where the first living cells came from. Therefore, even IF it were true one couldn’t use it as an atheistic manifesto as so many of your leaders do.

As long as you remind people that you don't know where your god came from and that the excuse of "He's an eternal being" is an excuse, not an explanation. Simply inventing an amazingly complex being and having it always exist is a much more unlikely event than a "Big Bang". Everything in this universe that we can see goes from simple to complex... simple to complex, simple to complex and here you come with the most complex thing that could ever be imagined to start it all. Doesn't make any sense.

Acknowledge that science is not some sin-free monolith where everyone has pure motives and no one disagrees. Just because an endeavor is scientific doesn’t mean that pride and greed won’t lead people to do bad things.

Sin is a concept that you've invented as a part of your faith. I don't recognize it nor accept it. I do however understand it. The original meaning is to "miss the mark". In the case of science the "mark" is to advance the knowledge of mankind. Science, in this case is also self-correcting. Should men do things that don't serve to advance the knowledge of mankind science will eventually find them and ruthlessly remove them from its ranks.

Acknowledge that science has done 180 degree turns on numerous topics.

Gladly.

Acknowledge all the frauds that have taken place with “missing links” (Piltdown Man, Haeckel’s Embryos, etc.) and agree that people have a right to be skeptical of your latest “find.

Who found those frauds? Scientists did. We clean our own house thank you. Be skeptical if you wish. I'd like to hear you elucidate why...

Please ask the ACLU to stop wasting our time and money with ridiculous lawsuits like the Cobb County, GA case where they “convinced judges to rule that that placing disclaimer stickers warning that evolution is “a theory, not a fact” in public school science textbooks is an unconstitutional government intrusion on religious liberty.” I’ve read the First Amendment a couple times and think it took a lot of creativity to find that the sticker either A) was due to a law passed by Congress or B) was an establishment of religion or even an endorsement. More here.

No. In fact, I'm sending them more money. Someone has to protect us from you idiots and your foolish eighth century rantings. That sticker was blatantly ignorant.

Acknowledge the logical conclusions of a materialistic worldview completely driven by random chemical reactions and the survival of the fittest. It leads to all kinds of horrific behavior. That isn’t a reason Darwinian evolution is wrong, but it is just one of the reasons it is important to expose its flaws.

No. That's your interpretation and I find it nonsense. If you can't be good without god then you're the one with the problem, not Darwin, not science.

uberd00b · #13 7th March 2008, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by speakout

Stop demonizing people as anti-science religious fundamentalists just for criticizing Darwinian evolution. It is petty, it is bad debating and it reveals your insecurities.

<op acting as if we have never read anything about Darwinian evolution and haven’t done our homework. We could be wrong, but these are cheap and unproductive debating tricks.

Teach the debate and acknowledge the many flaws and gaps in your theory, such as going from single to double strand DNA, not having enough time to evolve and these.

Admit that the movie “Inherit the Wind” was false and misleading propaganda and bears little resemblance to why and how the Scopes trial played out. Also, help ensure that it not be shown in public schools, unless as an example of how despicable propaganda can be. <LI class=MsoNormal>Admit that the pre-Cambrian explosion fossil finds in China crushed your “science of the gaps” theory which held that your transition forms just didn’t fossilize.

Don’t pretend that you have lots of fossil evidence when even your leaders admit how big your problem is there.

Remind people that even IF Darwinian evolution were true that it still doesn’t explain how the universe came into existence and where the first living cells came from. Therefore, even IF it were true one couldn’t use it as an atheistic manifesto as so many of your leaders do.

Acknowledge that science is not some sin-free monolith where everyone has pure motives and no one disagrees. Just because an endeavor is scientific doesn’t mean that pride and greed won’t lead people to do bad things. <LI class=MsoNormal>Acknowledge that science has done 180 degree turns on numerous topics.

Acknowledge all the frauds that have taken place with “missing links” (Piltdown Man, Haeckel’s Embryos, etc.) and agree that people have a right to be skeptical of your latest “find.

Please ask the ACLU to stop wasting our time and money with ridiculous lawsuits like the Cobb County, GA case where they “convinced judges to rule that that placing disclaimer stickers warning that evolution is “a theory, not a fact” in public school science textbooks is an unconstitutional government intrusion on religious liberty.” I’ve read the First Amendment a couple times and think it took a lot of creativity to find that the sticker either A) was due to a law passed by Congress or B) was an establishment of religion or even an endorsement. More here.

Acknowledge the logical conclusions of a materialistic worldview completely driven by random chemical reactions and the survival of the fittest. It leads to all kinds of horrific behavior. That isn’t a reason Darwinian evolution is wrong, but it is just one of the reasons it is important to expose its flaws.

Ah there you go Speakout. Proving once again that it is impossible to be both a creationist and honest at the same time.

Tomk80 · #14 7th March 2008, 12:15 PM

Originally Posted by Phred

No. That's your interpretation and I find it nonsense. If you can't be good without god then you're the one with the problem, not Darwin, not science.

I always find it very enlightning that when it comes to morality, virtually every creationists reasons like a sociopath.

USincognito · #15 7th March 2008, 12:23 PM

Ooooo! I haven't done this in a while so if I may repeat what others have said before me...

Originally Posted by speakout

Stop demonizing people as anti-science religious fundamentalists just for criticizing Darwinian evolution. It is petty, it is bad debating and it reveals your insecurities.

When the only people who are criticizing evolution (as noted, the science has come a long way since Darwin's time, but the man's observations, given his technological limitations were still genius and have been verified until this days) are anti-science religious fundamentalists, isn't it a bit disengenuous to ask not to be called something they are?

Originally Posted by speakout

op acting as if we have never read anything about Darwinian evolution and haven’t done our homework. We could be wrong, but these are cheap and unproductive debating tricks.

The vast majority of religiously motivated critics have never read anything about evolution. Even those like Mark Kennedy who try to get beyond Hovind/AiG/DI/etc. seem to get confused by things like ERVs and why orthology is so important to the evidence or befuddled by accellerated regions in our DNA like HAR1. This isn't even mentioning those who claim there are "no transitional fossils" or who think Nebraska Man was ever taken seriously by scientists.

Originally Posted by speakout

Teach the debate and acknowledge the many flaws and gaps in your theory, such as going from single to double strand DNA, not having enough time to evolve and {snip}

What debate? The objections raised by anti-science religious fundamentalists does not constitute "debate". Also I keep hearing about this supposed flaws and gaps, but every time someone claiming they are devestating to evolution brings up specifics, it turns out they:
Don't exist.
Are mischaracterized.
Are overstated.
Are an as yet unanswered question - which is exactly what Intelligent Design owes it's existance to.

Originally Posted by speakout

Admit that the movie “Inherit the Wind” was false and misleading propaganda and bears little resemblance to why and how the Scopes trial played out. Also, help ensure that it not be shown in public schools, unless as an example of how despicable propaganda can be.

How about we compromise? The movie "Inherit the Wind" was a drama which changed the names and location of everone and thing involved in the actual Scopes trial. Maybe when Creationists get similarly upset about the historical inaccuracies of "300", "Gladiator" and "Glory", I'll start taking their objections to "Inherit the Wind" seriously.

Originally Posted by speakout

Admit that the pre-Cambrian explosion fossil finds in China crushed your “science of the gaps” theory which held that your transition forms just didn’t fossilize.

Ediacara. You really need to read up on the Cambrain explosion and transitional forms (especially with the examples we have since the Cambrain and worse for your side, the genetic evidence) before you try and claim it's a "fatal" flaw for evolutionary theory.

Originally Posted by speakout

Don’t pretend that you have lots of fossil evidence when even your leaders admit how big your problem is there.

We do have lots of fossil evidence. Mountains of it literally when it comes to microfossils. Who are these leaders and what is this supposed problem you refer to?

--------------------------

Originally Posted by speakout

Remind people that even IF Darwinian evolution were true that it still doesn’t explain how the universe came into existence and where the first living cells came from. Therefore, even IF it were true one couldn’t use it as an atheistic manifesto as so many of your leaders do.

Conflating evolution, which is a biological theory about the development of existing life on Earth with every other area of scientific study only weakens your case. If you want to argue against atheism, try General Apologetics.

Originally Posted by speakout

Acknowledge that science is not some sin-free monolith where everyone has pure motives and no one disagrees. Just because an endeavor is scientific doesn’t mean that pride and greed won’t lead people to do bad things.

Metaphysics and philosophy are down the hall. When you want to discuss science, come back with something less value based and more factual.

Originally Posted by speakout

Acknowledge that science has done 180 degree turns on numerous topics.

Name 2 and then we can discuss "numerous."

Originally Posted by speakout

Acknowledge all the frauds that have taken place with “missing links” (Piltdown Man, Haeckel’s Embryos, etc.) and agree that people have a right to be skeptical of your latest “find.

Leaving aside for a moment that I've made a very convincing case why Creationists should never cite Piltdown (see the Formal Debate subforum) or that while I keep hearing claims that Haeckel's Embryos are still being used in textbooks to "prove evolution" I have never seen a single example of one doing so - why are you citing frauds that are 95 and 105 or so years old? Don't you have anything more recent?

(btw, just to pre-empt: Lucy's knee joint is a Creationist lie, and Archeoraptor was uncovered within months of actual paleontologists, not editors at National Geographic investigating the claim)

Originally Posted by speakout

Please ask the ACLU to stop wasting our time and money with ridiculous lawsuits like the Cobb County, GA case where they “convinced judges to rule that that placing disclaimer stickers warning that evolution is “a theory, not a fact” in public school science textbooks is an unconstitutional government intrusion on religious liberty.” I’ve read the First Amendment a couple times and think it took a lot of creativity to find that the sticker either A) was due to a law passed by Congress or B) was an establishment of religion or even an endorsement. {snip propaganda site link}

So what were the "scientific" objections to evolution the Cobb County school board thought warrented the textbook disclaimer? If the case was rediculous, why did Cobb County lose? If the Cobb County school board wouldn't rectify their failure to understand what a scientific fact and scientific theory were - why shouldn't they have been sued by concerned parents? Oh, and why shouldn't the concerned parents have consulted the ACLU for legal help since it was just citizens who wanted proper education for their children bringing suit, not some all powerful organization that can't initiate without an affected citizen claiming harm (see all the way back to Scopes)?

Originally Posted by speakout

Acknowledge the logical conclusions of a materialistic worldview completely driven by random chemical reactions and the survival of the fittest. It leads to all kinds of horrific behavior. That isn’t a reason Darwinian evolution is wrong, but it is just one of the reasons it is important to expose its flaws.

Godwin's law. Learn it. Avoid it. Also learn something about the scientific method and how it has to rely on methodoligical naturalism and how evolutionary theory doesn't claim that evolution is "completely" random.

Having gone over your cut and pasted list of objections, I have to say they're all hat and no horse.

***The red line above btw is the demarkation between science and religion/metaphysics and politics in the list of supposed objections to evolution... note how quickly we moved from the science to the other subjects.

ranmaonehalf · #16 7th March 2008, 12:28 PM

Stop demonizing people as anti-science religious fundamentalists just for criticizing Darwinian evolution. It is petty, it is bad debating and it reveals your insecurities.

i think most of the time they call people anti science when they do emotional pleading, demand creationism be taught next to evolutoin in school ect..

<op acting as if we have never read anything about Darwinian evolution and haven’t done our homework. We could be wrong, but these are cheap and unproductive debating tricks.

well many of you are pretty ignorant and you cant blame us for believing you ignorant when the words you type (not necissarily you) show the ignorance.

Teach the debate and acknowledge the many flaws and gaps in your theory, such as going from single to double strand DNA, not having enough time to evolve and these.

this is where a basic understanding of evolution and its related theories would be usefull. Evolutionary development would be a good one to direct your lack of understanding at.

Admit that the movie “Inherit the Wind” was false and misleading propaganda

never heard of it, (was it sponcored by the EEC)

Don’t pretend that you have lots of fossil evidence when even your leaders admit how big your problem is there.

no pretending, there is lots of evidence supporting evolutoin. COuld you list the problems and our leaders

Remind people that even IF Darwinian evolution were true that it still doesn’t explain how the universe came into existence and where the first living cells came from.

well duhhh.. once again this is why we ask you to learn about evolution. we constantly have to remind you and other ignorant creationists that evolutoin had nothing to do with how life came to be initially or how the universe formed.

Therefore, even IF it were true one couldn’t use it as an atheistic manifesto as so many of your leaders do.

huh? EAC now?

Acknowledge that science is not some sin-free monolith where everyone has pure motives and no one disagrees. Just because an endeavor is scientific doesn’t mean that pride and greed won’t lead people to do bad things. <LI class=MsoNormal>Acknowledge that science has done 180 degree turns on numerous topics.

sin does not exists. (perhaps you could define it). science is nto a being. science is greate because people can disagree and it can change as we learn. (religion typically cant)

Acknowledge all the frauds that have taken place with “missing links” (Piltdown Man, Haeckel’s Embryos, etc.) and agree that people have a right to be skeptical of your latest “find.

skeptism is fine. and we have acknowledge frauds have taken place. (hey conartists exists, should you discount christ cause the shrowd is a forgery? those peices fo toast with the virgin marry on them?) as for finds in general, it is the scientific community (not creationists) that debate over and uncover these frauds.

Please ask the ACLU to stop wasting our time and money ....

dang lawyers,....

Acknowledge the logical conclusions of a materialistic worldview completely driven by random chemical reactions and the survival of the fittest. It leads to all kinds of horrific behavior. That isn’t a reason Darwinian evolution is wrong, but it is just one of the reasons it is important to expose its flaws.

wow, arugment of (i dont want life to as it is.... waaaa.)
since you agree this isnt a reason why darwin evolution would be wrong. (of course none of these are ) why dont you delete it. Oh wait another emotional plea(plea to ignorance too).

Phred · #17 7th March 2008, 01:50 PM

Originally Posted by Tomk80

I always find it very enlightning that when it comes to morality, virtually every creationists reasons like a sociopath.

QFT.

NailsII · #18 7th March 2008, 08:04 PM

Originally Posted by speakout

A 4Simpsons Blog guest posed a couple good questions
I would like to ask you, what is it that you want from the evolution scientists? What would you like them to say or do?
These were so important that I decided to do another post on them. Here are a few things I’d like from Darwinian evolutionist scientists. Note that none of these are terribly time consuming and mainly center on being candid.
Stop demonizing people as anti-science religious fundamentalists just for criticizing Darwinian evolution. It is petty, it is bad debating and it reveals your insecurities.

<op acting as if we have never read anything about Darwinian evolution and haven’t done our homework. We could be wrong, but these are cheap and unproductive debating tricks.

Teach the debate and acknowledge the many flaws and gaps in your theory, such as going from single to double strand DNA, not having enough time to evolve and these.

Admit that the movie “Inherit the Wind” was false and misleading propaganda and bears little resemblance to why and how the Scopes trial played out. Also, help ensure that it not be shown in public schools, unless as an example of how despicable propaganda can be. <LI class=MsoNormal>Admit that the pre-Cambrian explosion fossil finds in China crushed your “science of the gaps” theory which held that your transition forms just didn’t fossilize.

Don’t pretend that you have lots of fossil evidence when even your leaders admit how big your problem is there.

Remind people that even IF Darwinian evolution were true that it still doesn’t explain how the universe came into existence and where the first living cells came from. Therefore, even IF it were true one couldn’t use it as an atheistic manifesto as so many of your leaders do.

Acknowledge that science is not some sin-free monolith where everyone has pure motives and no one disagrees. Just because an endeavor is scientific doesn’t mean that pride and greed won’t lead people to do bad things. <LI class=MsoNormal>Acknowledge that science has done 180 degree turns on numerous topics.

Acknowledge all the frauds that have taken place with “missing links” (Piltdown Man, Haeckel’s Embryos, etc.) and agree that people have a right to be skeptical of your latest “find.

Please ask the ACLU to stop wasting our time and money with ridiculous lawsuits like the Cobb County, GA case where they “convinced judges to rule that that placing disclaimer stickers warning that evolution is “a theory, not a fact” in public school science textbooks is an unconstitutional government intrusion on religious liberty.” I’ve read the First Amendment a couple times and think it took a lot of creativity to find that the sticker either A) was due to a law passed by Congress or B) was an establishment of religion or even an endorsement. More here.

Acknowledge the logical conclusions of a materialistic worldview completely driven by random chemical reactions and the survival of the fittest. It leads to all kinds of horrific behavior. That isn’t a reason Darwinian evolution is wrong, but it is just one of the reasons it is important to expose its flaws.

Do you know there is someone from the debate forums who follows me all over the christian forums and complains.

I do not know what to do with these forums because the moderators do not look at the overall discussion, sometimes someone is going to be told to go home and re-organise their thinking, afterall this is a debate.

I am just going to post this and will be back but I will not be going back and forth just bcause you will claim you were flamed.

OK, I'll demonize creationists for being closed-minded religous zealots with one foot 2,000 years in the past instead.
I know you have read a little about Darwin's theory, but you havn't taken any of it in, have you?
I can't be bothered with this, it really is sensless.

Next!

sbvera13 · #19 8th March 2008, 01:44 AM

Here I was expecting some serious points. Silly me. Turns out you want us to acknowledge things as fact that we can prove, with 20 secs on google, are false. And people wonder why we don't like you creationist types.

Gracchus · #20 8th March 2008, 02:33 AM

A few points in the OP I feel I would like to address:

Originally Posted by speakout

Please ask the ACLU to stop wasting our time and money with ridiculous lawsuits ...

Since I've been a card-carrying member for many years, it would be my money they are wasting, but I think it money well spent.

... like the Cobb County, GA case where they “convinced judges to rule that that placing disclaimer stickers warning that evolution is “a theory, not a fact” in public school science textbooks is an unconstitutional government intrusion on religious liberty.” I’ve read the First Amendment a couple times and think it took a lot of creativity to find that the sticker either A) was due to a law passed by Congress or B) was an establishment of religion or even an endorsement. More here.

The courts found that the intent of the stickers was religious. You would have to be an idiot to think it was not.

Acknowledge the logical conclusions of a materialistic worldview completely driven by random chemical reactions and the survival of the fittest. It leads to all kinds of horrific behavior.

The psychological mechanism is called projection: Attributing your own motivations, lusts and actions to everyone else. Just because you refrain from evil only through fear, does not mean everyone is so depraved.

That isn’t a reason Darwinian evolution is wrong, but it is just one of the reasons it is important to expose its flaws.

The first independent clause is absolutely correct. And science works studiously to to expose the flaws of theory. That is, in fact, what science if for.

Do you know there is someone from the debate forums who follows me all over the christian forums and complains.

In my experience, if the infraction is not pretty serious, the mods will tend to ignore it, especially if it is committed by the anti-evolution side.

I assure you, it is not me. Truth is the light of heaven and the fire of hell. I cheer when hypocrites and arrogant ignoramuses unwittingly reveal their shame, I don't complain.