The tip of the ice berg

[Bungle_Bear]

Well yeah a talking raccoon is unique

Sorry, but it isn't.

 

[BPPLEE]

Sorry, but it isn't.

Raccoons will talk when pigs fly

 

[Aussie Pete]

Odd how it is always "brilliant" svientists who reject
evolution.
Not so odd that nobody has ever come up with data to
disprove evolution.

So why do any scientists " reject" it?

Not for scientific reasons, as noted.
The reason is always religious.


Example: a Dr. K Wise, PhD paleontology!
".....even if all the evicence turns against YEC, I will still be YEC,
as that is what the bible seems to indicate."

He openly admits the evidence goes against him.
He knows theres no disproof of ToE; if he found it, he would
win a Nobel and be a great YEC hero.

Believe / disbelieve the bible, any aspect of science as
it may suit, its everyone' s right.

To think that the work of any scientist or philosopher
disproves the theory of evolution, though, is just foolishness.

"Proof" is in the eye of the beholder. Flat earth believers are impossible to enlighten, no matter how much evidence they are shown. Evolutionists are the same. It does not matter what evidence is presented, they reject it, usually resorting to insults because they have no real arguments. You cannot prove evolution. Don't give me that rubbish about adaptation being proof. That idea just demonstrates how intellectually dishonest ToE believers are.

I am not against science. I am against pseudo science, aka evolution theory. The issue is not religion v science. The issue is truth. The truth is that God created all that is seen. How do I know? He told us. I'm not YEC, but I understand why Christians are. The fundamental truth does not change. It is God who created all things.

 

[Aussie Pete]

No one “believes” in evolution, though some incorrectly use that term. Evolution is not a belief system but a valid scientific theory with all of the attributes of such a theory. Creationism should not be taught in science classes because, unlike evolution, it is not science. It is a religious belief based on a certain interpretation of Genesis that is not universally accepted.
Evolution does not preclude the existence of G-d.

Creation is truth. How do I know? God says so. Either you accept what God says or you reject it. Evolution is hardly scientific. If people do not believe in evolution, how come they rush to its defence the moment anyone says a word against it? Such zeal! Such enthusiasm! It's borderline religious.

 

[Belk]

"Proof" is in the eye of the beholder. Flat earth believers are impossible to enlighten, no matter how much evidence they are shown. Evolutionists are the same. It does not matter what evidence is presented, they reject it, usually resorting to insults because they have no real arguments. You cannot prove evolution. Don't give me that rubbish about adaptation being proof. That idea just demonstrates how intellectually dishonest ToE believers are.

I am not against science. I am against pseudo science, aka evolution theory. The issue is not religion v science. The issue is truth. The truth is that God created all that is seen. How do I know? He told us. I'm not YEC, but I understand why Christians are. The fundamental truth does not change. It is God who created all things.

So are all the biologists over the past 200+ years stupid, or is it a vast conspiracy?

 

[Astrid]

"Proof" is in the eye of the beholder. Flat earth believers are impossible to enlighten, no matter how much evidence they are shown. Evolutionists are the same. It does not matter what evidence is presented, they reject it, usually resorting to insults because they have no real arguments. You cannot prove evolution. Don't give me that rubbish about adaptation being proof. That idea just demonstrates how intellectually dishonest ToE believers are.

I am not against science. I am against pseudo science, aka evolution theory. The issue is not religion v science. The issue is truth. The truth is that God created all that is seen. How do I know? He told us. I'm not YEC, but I understand why Christians are. The fundamental truth does not change. It is God who created all things.

Dont give you rubbish about adaptation being proof?

Im not the one clueless about what proof is.

Nobody in his right mind says there is proof for
evolution.
Making up something and attributing it
to "evolutionists", then calling it a demonstration of
Intellectual dishonesty on the part of (all) who accept
TOE is, well, it sure is something. Maybe a demonstration of
a clueless, bankrupt argument.
Maybe something else.
But it sure isnt intellectual, and it sure isnt honest.

 

[Astrid]

So are all the biologists over the past 200+ years stupid, or is it a vast conspiracy?

That, plus there are some who, with a minimal grasp
of basic concepts, somehow know more than any
scientist on earth.

Why why Why dont they turn this vast ability to the cure for cancer?
Cold fusion?

 

[Aussie Pete]

So are all the biologists over the past 200+ years stupid, or is it a vast conspiracy?

Not all the biologists over the last 200 years accept evolution. No, I don't say that evolutionists are stupid. I do say that they are wedded to a theory and unwilling to accept anything that contradicts it. Flat earthers are not stupid either. But they also are unwilling accept anything that disproves their convictions.

 

[Aussie Pete]

That, plus there are some who, with a minimal grasp
of basic concepts, somehow know more than any
scientist on earth.

Why why Why dont they turn this vast ability to the cure for cancer?
Cold fusion?

I don't know everything, but I know who does. And I know of a Christian who is also a scientist, who has developed nano machines that can be used to treat cancer. He's also restored a rat with a severed spinal cord to almost full movement. Further research is being done to do the same for human spinal cord injuries. His name is James Tour.

"Tour is on the board and working with companies including Weebit (silicon oxide electronic memory),[44] Dotz (graphene quantum dots),[45] Zeta Energy (batteries),[46] NeuroCords (spinal cord repair),[47] Xerient (treatment of pancreas cancer), LIGC Application Ltd. (laser-induced graphene),[48] Nanorobotics (molecular nanomachines in medicine),[49] Universal Matter Ltd. (flash graphene synthesis),[50] Roswell Biotechnologies (molecular electronic DNA sequencing),[51] and Rust Patrol (corrosion inhibitors).[52]

Tour's lab's research into graphene scaffolding gel has been shown to repair spinal cords of paralyzed mice.[42]"

 

[Astrid]

Not all the biologists over the last 200 years accept evolution. No, I don't say that evolutionists are stupid. I do say that they are wedded to a theory and unwilling to accept anything that contradicts it. Flat earthers are not stupid either. But they also are unwilling accept anything that disproves their convictions.

Of course not all accept it.

But

Nobody has any data based reason.

Its always religious reasons.

 

[Astrid]

I don't know everything, but I know who does. And I know of a Christian who is also a scientist, who has developed nano machines that can be used to treat cancer. He's also restored a rat with a severed spinal cord to almost full movement. Further research is being done to do the same for human spinal cord injuries. His name is James Tour.

"Tour is on the board and working with companies including Weebit (silicon oxide electronic memory),[44] Dotz (graphene quantum dots),[45] Zeta Energy (batteries),[46] NeuroCords (spinal cord repair),[47] Xerient (treatment of pancreas cancer), LIGC Application Ltd. (laser-induced graphene),[48] Nanorobotics (molecular nanomachines in medicine),[49] Universal Matter Ltd. (flash graphene synthesis),[50] Roswell Biotechnologies (molecular electronic DNA sequencing),[51] and Rust Patrol (corrosion inhibitors).[52]

Tour's lab's research into graphene scaffolding gel has been shown to repair spinal cords of paralyzed mice.[42]"

Terrif.

Now, his data disproving ToE?

Anyone who knows its false knows more than,any scientist on earth.

Wheres yourc breakthroughs?

 

[Belk]

Not all the biologists over the last 200 years accept evolution. No, I don't say that evolutionists are stupid. I do say that they are wedded to a theory and unwilling to accept anything that contradicts it. Flat earthers are not stupid either. But they also are unwilling accept anything that disproves their convictions.

Flat earthers have been discredited. Evolution is the corner stone of biology and is taught in just about every school on earth. I understand your analogy, that they refuse to look at evidence. I'm pointing out that your analogy falls flat in that institutions that do look scrupulously at evidence find the theory valid and well supported.

I'm wondering how you can ignore the fact that this is accepted by every major scientific body we have? People who are known for their ability to assess evidence find it credible.

 

[driewerf]

Creation is truth. How do I know? God says so. Either you accept what God says or you reject it.

The truth is that God created all that is seen. How do I know? He told us. I'm not YEC, but I understand why Christians are. The fundamental truth does not change. It is God who created all things.

Except "god told us so", you don't offer lot of evidence. Actully no evidence at all.
You are a prime example of what was described in the OP: below the ToE lies a whole iceberg that is at stake: and that is the notion of going there where the evidence leads you. What is at stake is the notion of science itself. Because except an argument from authority you offer nothing.

 

[driewerf]

Not all the biologists over the last 200 years accept evolution. No, I don't say that evolutionists are stupid. I do say that they are wedded to a theory and unwilling to accept anything that contradicts it. Flat earthers are not stupid either. But they also are unwilling accept anything that disproves their convictions.

And again you check a box on the OP bingo card. The postmodern argument that biologists cling to the ToE just because it's "their story". The essay linked in the OP was spot on:
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.568.8855&rep=rep1&type=pdf

 

[driewerf]

I don't know everything,

That's obvious.

but I know who does.

I doubt that such a person exists, let alone that you know her.

And I know of a Christian who is also a scientist, who has developed nano machines that can be used to treat cancer. He's also restored a rat with a severed spinal cord to almost full movement. Further research is being done to do the same for human spinal cord injuries. His name is James Tour.

James Tour doesn't know everything. He is a brilliant organic chemist, but there it stops.

"Tour is on the board and working with companies including Weebit (silicon oxide electronic memory),[44] Dotz (graphene quantum dots),[45] Zeta Energy (batteries),[46] NeuroCords (spinal cord repair),[47] Xerient (treatment of pancreas cancer), LIGC Application Ltd. (laser-induced graphene),[48] Nanorobotics (molecular nanomachines in medicine),[49] Universal Matter Ltd. (flash graphene synthesis),[50] Roswell Biotechnologies (molecular electronic DNA sequencing),[51] and Rust Patrol (corrosion inhibitors).[52]

Tour's lab's research into graphene scaffolding gel has been shown to repair spinal cords of paralyzed mice.[42]"

Yes? Your point being?

 

[ottawak]

Creation is truth. How do I know? God says so. Either you accept what God says or you reject it.

No, apparently we have to accept what you say "God says" or reject it.

 

[ottawak]

I don't know everything, but I know who does. And I know of a Christian who is also a scientist, who has developed nano machines that can be used to treat cancer. He's also restored a rat with a severed spinal cord to almost full movement. Further research is being done to do the same for human spinal cord injuries. His name is James Tour.

"Tour is on the board and working with companies including Weebit (silicon oxide electronic memory),[44] Dotz (graphene quantum dots),[45] Zeta Energy (batteries),[46] NeuroCords (spinal cord repair),[47] Xerient (treatment of pancreas cancer), LIGC Application Ltd. (laser-induced graphene),[48] Nanorobotics (molecular nanomachines in medicine),[49] Universal Matter Ltd. (flash graphene synthesis),[50] Roswell Biotechnologies (molecular electronic DNA sequencing),[51] and Rust Patrol (corrosion inhibitors).[52]

Tour's lab's research into graphene scaffolding gel has been shown to repair spinal cords of paralyzed mice.[42]"

What's the point of brining James Tour into it? So far as I know he is not a biblical creationism and his criticisms seem mostly directed against abiogenesis.

 

[Aussie Pete]

What's the point of brining James Tour into it? So far as I know he is not a biblical creationism and his criticisms seem mostly directed against abiogenesis.

James Tour is a micro biologist. Supposedly it is impossible to be a biologist and a Christian at the same time. He has also something to say about evolution. I've seen some of the remarks directed against Professor Tour. Aristotle said something to the effect that when someone can't win an argument on facts, they resort to insults. Jim Tour can testify to that.

Professor Tour focuses on abiogenesis because that is his field of expertise. He has also entered the evolution discussion.

 

[BPPLEE]

What's the point of brining James Tour into it? So far as I know he is not a biblical creationism and his criticisms seem mostly directed against abiogenesis.

Tour is also fearless. He joined more than a thousand other scientists in signing the “Scientific Dissent from Darwinism.” More recently, he has become a thorn in the side of the origin of life research community, offering blunt assessments of the current state of origin of life research.

 

[Aussie Pete]

Dont give you rubbish about adaptation being proof?

Im not the one clueless about what proof is.

Nobody in his right mind says there is proof for
evolution.
Making up something and attributing it
to "evolutionists", then calling it a demonstration of
Intellectual dishonesty on the part of (all) who accept
TOE is, well, it sure is something. Maybe a demonstration of
a clueless, bankrupt argument.
Maybe something else.
But it sure isnt intellectual, and it sure isnt honest.

According to the vast majority of evolutionists I've spoken to, and been lectured by, evolution is fact. I said that using adaptation as evidence for macro evolution is intellectually dishonest. I don't presume to know if every evolutionist believes adaptation proves evolution, but so far I've not come across one who does not.