Evolutionist Fraud

[Nathan Poe]

Haeckel's false drawing has no effect on the fact that chodates have pharyngeal gill slits, including mammals such as humans and monkeys. The pharyngeal gill slits are more evidence of common ancestory, and they themselves, are not fraudulant.

Indeed. Haeckel's tactics were dishonest, and it's always a good thing when frauds are exposed, but it turns out that what he was trying to prove through false means was true anyway.

Rather like a police officer planting a weapon to convict a suspect who was guilty anyway. The act is still wrong, and credibility suffers, but it doesn't change the facts.

 

[truth above all else]

Theodosius Dobzhansky wrote "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution". Vertebrate embryology is a an excellent illustration of his point. IMO it is not as important that embryology is evidence for evolution as it is that evolution makes sense of embryology. It explains why the 3rd and subsequent pharyngeal arches that become various structures in tetrapods look at one point like the gill slits that become gills in fish while the 1st arch forms the jaw and the second becomes the hyoid in all vertebrates. It explain features such as leg bud in snake, dolphin and whale embryos and why even human embryos go through a tail bud stage and why humans are occasionally born with tails.

Dobzhanskys pre-eminent position with the evolutionary establishment and indeed with Eastern Orthodoxy gave him supreme confidence and credibility with respect to influencing the masses. As a geneticist he was half reasonable, but his homilies on theitic evolution bordered on the absurd, one cannot take his work or opinions too seriously. He was filled with liberal Christian ideas that Genesis is symbolical,that mans awareness is the cause of the tragic meaninglessness in the world today, and that the only escape is for man to realise that he can cooperate with the enterprise of creation, for participation in this enterprise makes mortal man part of Gods eternal design...

 

[KerrMetric]

He was filled with liberal Christian ideas that Genesis is symbolical,that mans awareness is the cause of the tragic meaninglessness in the world today, and that the only escape is for man to realise that he can cooperate with the enterprise of creation, for participation in this enterprise makes mortal man part of Gods eternal design...

Liberal Christianity is what has saved the faith from ridicule and ceasing to exist except as a history lesson.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Dobzhanskys pre-eminent position with the evolutionary establishment and indeed with Eastern Orthodoxy gave him supreme confidence and credibility with respect to influencing the masses. As a geneticist he was half reasonable, but his homilies on theitic evolution bordered on the absurd, one cannot take his work or opinions too seriously. He was filled with liberal Christian ideas that Genesis is symbolical,that mans awareness is the cause of the tragic meaninglessness in the world today, and that the only escape is for man to realise that he can cooperate with the enterprise of creation, for participation in this enterprise makes mortal man part of Gods eternal design...

i'd be interested in learning more about his theological ideas. perhaps you could share your reading list on him with us so that we can catch up on his ideas.
thanks.

 

[truth above all else]

Liberal Christianity is what has saved the faith from ridicule and ceasing to exist except as a history lesson.

you're joking I presume

 

[KerrMetric]

you're joking I presume

I am most certainly not. Conservative Christianity is the branch that believes the Creationist nonsense, bogus dates for Gospel authorship, believes Revelation actually is worth something and believes the Bible is a valid history/science text. In other words all the nonsense fake scholarship that intelligent non-Christians use as ammunition against Christianity.

 

[truth above all else]

i'd be interested in learning more about his theological ideas. perhaps you could share your reading list on him with us so that we can catch up on his ideas.
thanks.

"The creation of Gods image in man is not an event but a process, and therefore the moral law is a product of an evolutionary development"(Dobzhansky- Ethics and values in biological and cultural evolution)

 

[Nathan Poe]

"The creation of Gods image in man is not an event but a process, and therefore the moral law is a product of an evolutionary development"(Dobzhansky- Ethics and values in biological and cultural evolution)

Sounds pretty sensible to me.

 

[Valkhorn]

you're joking I presume

Considering that Liberal Christianity is the only one that could keep up with scientific fact and not stick its fingers in its ears and go "LALALALA" every time contradictory facts were uncovered I'd say he's right on target.

 

[truth above all else]

Considering that Liberal Christianity is the only one that could keep up with scientific fact and not stick its fingers in its ears and go "LALALALA" every time contradictory facts were uncovered I'd say he's right on target.

I've yet to go LALALA or DOH RAY ME for that matter.
Modern science thinks it is knowledge par excellence and before its prestige Christians waver, apologizing for believing what seems unscientific , remaining content with the pietism or religious feeling, which is the place where the scientific establishment allows faith today
So called liberal Christianity has bowed down to un-Christian theories and speculations which often conflict with revelation because it does not have a critical approach to scientific findings and do not understand the nature of scientific evidence which supposedly supports evolution or whatever, nor does it know how to distinguish between fact and philosophy.
It is unecessarily awed by self proclaimed scientific experts and has allowed science and evolutionary philosophy to combine with religion a la Teilhard de Chardin and more recently Ken Wilber, this denaturing indeed adulteration of Christian truth does nothing for the genuine truth seeker

 

[Dannager]

I've yet to go LALALA or DOH RAY ME for that matter.

youre too immature to understand, go and do some homework

You're done here, truth above all else.

 

[JohnR7]

Christianity is the branch that believes the Creationist nonsense.

What branch of science do you feel could be most accredited with Godless Heathenism? Biology studies the wonder of life itself, yet darwinism turns it into something passive and mechanical. The attempt of science to simplify the complex so they can try to understand it does not ever fail to amaze me.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Dobzhanskys pre-eminent position with the evolutionary establishment and indeed with Eastern Orthodoxy gave him supreme confidence and credibility with respect to influencing the masses. As a geneticist he was half reasonable, but his homilies on theitic evolution bordered on the absurd, one cannot take his work or opinions too seriously. He was filled with liberal Christian ideas that Genesis is symbolical,that mans awareness is the cause of the tragic meaninglessness in the world today, and that the only escape is for man to realise that he can cooperate with the enterprise of creation, for participation in this enterprise makes mortal man part of Gods eternal design...

Dobzhansky had credibility as an evolutionary biologist but that is not the important point here. The point is that evolutionary biology makes sense of vertebrate embryology providing one of many illustrations of Dobzhansky's maxim that nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution. If you think there are factual reasons why vertebrate embryology is not consistent with evolution or can provide a better explanation of features I decribed give it to us.

The Frumious Bandersnatch

 

[Mallon]

What branch of science do you feel could be most accredited with Godless Heathenism? Biology studies the wonder of life itself, yet darwinism turns it into something passive and mechanical. The attempt of science to simplify the complex so they can try to understand it does not ever fail to amaze me.

Physical chemistry explains the interaction of molecules in a similarly "passive and mechanical" manner. Would you consider it "godless heathenism" as well and fight to have it taken out of the science curriculum?
In either case, what right do you have to make such an accusation of science, when you admitted elsewhere that you don't have a clue when it comes to the subject?

Why don't you ask science, how am I suppose to know. I am a student of the Bible.

 

[JohnR7]

In either case, what right do you have to make such an accusation of science, when you admitted elsewhere that you don't have a clue when it comes to the subject?

I am a creationist and a student of the Bible. I am willing to dialogue with science. If you want to have a discussion, that is fine, if you do not what to have a discussion, that is fine also. The main issue of couse is the student that is taking science and religion at the same time. If there is a lot of conflict between religion and science that can hinder or restrict the learning process.

Second of all, I never claimed to be here to have a discussion on a college level. Time and again I have stated that I am only interested in discussing science on a 8th grade level sense the average person does not even know that much about it.

This board is open to everyone and not just 3% of the population that has an advanced understanding or education in science. To insult me because you do not perceive me as being a part of that 3% is rude and crude to say the least.

 

[JGG]

Time and again I have stated that I am only interested in discussing science on a 8th grade level sense the average person does not even know that much about it.

Maybe, just maybe that's the attraction of creationism? Clean and neat, and made for people who don't want anything more sophisticated than what a 13 year old can understand.

I sympathize, but you may have to broaden your horizons, just a little.

 

[JohnR7]

Maybe, just maybe that's the attraction of creationism? Clean and neat, and made for people who don't want anything more sophisticated than what a 13 year old can understand.

I sympathize, but you may have to broaden your horizons, just a little.

Mark 10:15
Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.
Luke 18:17
Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.

We are told that you must be as a child to enter into the Kingdom of God. So if you feel that I am as a child, then I must be a part of God's Kingdom.

Verily is actually a very stong word. Today we may say something like "I assure you" that you must become like a Child to enter into God's Kingdom.

 

[JGG]

We are told that you must be as a child to enter into the Kingdom of God. So if you feel that I am as a child, then I must be a part of God's Kingdom.

Lovely. But if I recall (or look two posts above), it seems you were the one who wanted us to treat you as an 8th grader.

 

[Mallon]

I am a creationist and a student of the Bible. I am willing to dialogue with science. If you want to have a discussion, that is fine, if you do not what to have a discussion, that is fine also. The main issue of couse is the student that is taking science and religion at the same time. If there is a lot of conflict between religion and science that can hinder or restrict the learning process.

Admittedly, I don't understand what you mean by any of this. Your final sentence isn't even a complete thought. "If...", then what?

Time and again I have stated that I am only interested in discussing science on a 8th grade level sense the average person does not even know that much about it.

Fair enough. You have the scientific understanding of a 12 year-old. I can respect that. What I don't respect is your making the claims you do that go beyond your scope of understanding. If you had the scientific understanding of a college grad, some of your claims might have merit. But you don't, and you admit it, so this is an admission that is going to come back to haunt you every time you step outside your intellectual box.

To insult me because you do not perceive me as being a part of that 3% is rude and crude to say the least.

You admit yourself that you have the scientific understanding of an eighth-grader. If your admitted lack of knowledge places you outside of the upper third percentile in these forums, you have no one here to blame but yourself. I don't attend astrophysics conferences, of which I have little understanding, and then make the claim that my theories are just as valid as those professionals there. That would be exceedingly naive of me.

 

[Gracchus]

If there is a lot of conflict between religion and science(,) that can hinder or restrict the learning process.

Admittedly, I don't understand what you mean by any of this. Your final sentence isn't even a complete thought. "If...", then what?

"Commas? We don’t need no stinking commas!" It isn't just JohnR7's science that is at a grammar school level.