Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Darwinian Sects, Lies and Evolutionists
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RufusAtticus" data-source="post: 264320" data-attributes="member: 2592"><p>I've looked at that list before, but not a single one is or was a population or evolutionary biologist. That is the field most familiar with the science of evolution, yet ICR's list is sorely lacking of individuals who should be at the best position to denounce evolution if the evidence truely wasn't there. Heck, most of them are not even practicing scientists. In fact, ICR requires members to pledge away their objectivity by stating that no matter what the evidence is, it will always support YEC. That's not a good sign that their denial of evolution was due to scientific study. You're really not helping your case here.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No, we just what you to put some effort into backing up your claims. You have yet to give us any basis that we should just accept your assertions.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>LOL. <em>Icons of Evolution</em> does nothing but expose the fraud of Wells own position. Here is a lengthy review of Wells's "scholarship:" <a href="http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/wells/" target="_blank">Icon of Obfuscation</a>.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Where? Since when? It might be what you might call logical and rational, but it is still a faith-based position that is maintained in spite of the evidence to the contrary.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Can you provide any sources from biology that makes either of those claims in regards to evolution? Unless you can, you are arguing against an inaccurate descritption. Thus, even if you do defeat the "evolution postions" as you have stated them, the actual positions of evolutionary biology remain unscathed. Evolution has gone through about 150 years of heated religious and political assualt yet it is still at the forefront of scientific study. If evolution isn't truely scientific, maybe you should be proactive and contact the Christians in Washington, DC and get them to revoke my NSF fellowship to study evolution and all the other government grants out there. I'm sure they will listen to you.</p><p></p><p>Furthermore, what proof do you have of the creationist position that <strong>only</strong> intelligence can <em>create</em> intelligence and that <strong>only</strong> life can <em>create</em> life.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well then, what "laws of science" does evolution violate? If you can clue me in, I'll anounce them to the class when I TA undergraduate Evolutionary Biology because it appears that the textbook and lecture notes has failed to note that.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RufusAtticus, post: 264320, member: 2592"] I've looked at that list before, but not a single one is or was a population or evolutionary biologist. That is the field most familiar with the science of evolution, yet ICR's list is sorely lacking of individuals who should be at the best position to denounce evolution if the evidence truely wasn't there. Heck, most of them are not even practicing scientists. In fact, ICR requires members to pledge away their objectivity by stating that no matter what the evidence is, it will always support YEC. That's not a good sign that their denial of evolution was due to scientific study. You're really not helping your case here. No, we just what you to put some effort into backing up your claims. You have yet to give us any basis that we should just accept your assertions. LOL. [i]Icons of Evolution[/i] does nothing but expose the fraud of Wells own position. Here is a lengthy review of Wells's "scholarship:" [url=http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/wells/]Icon of Obfuscation[/url]. Where? Since when? It might be what you might call logical and rational, but it is still a faith-based position that is maintained in spite of the evidence to the contrary. Can you provide any sources from biology that makes either of those claims in regards to evolution? Unless you can, you are arguing against an inaccurate descritption. Thus, even if you do defeat the "evolution postions" as you have stated them, the actual positions of evolutionary biology remain unscathed. Evolution has gone through about 150 years of heated religious and political assualt yet it is still at the forefront of scientific study. If evolution isn't truely scientific, maybe you should be proactive and contact the Christians in Washington, DC and get them to revoke my NSF fellowship to study evolution and all the other government grants out there. I'm sure they will listen to you. Furthermore, what proof do you have of the creationist position that [b]only[/b] intelligence can [i]create[/i] intelligence and that [b]only[/b] life can [i]create[/i] life. Well then, what "laws of science" does evolution violate? If you can clue me in, I'll anounce them to the class when I TA undergraduate Evolutionary Biology because it appears that the textbook and lecture notes has failed to note that. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Darwinian Sects, Lies and Evolutionists
Top
Bottom