Falsify evolution

[Smilin]

Today at 05:54 PM Pete Harcoff said this in Post #39 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=659278#post659278)

I just figured a demon-possessed cat would be an appropriate avatar for a Christian message board.

That, and I like cats.

Well... wolves are thought to be possessed (by legend)

So... greetings from a canine possessed animal to a feline possessed animal....

(Umm... don't hang out near any Chinese restauraunts... just a warning... those fried things on a stick you know...)

 

[Arikay]

I think it very interesting that any genuine request for evidence of creationism or evidence that evolution is false is met with lies, false facts, or attacks against the questioners. Lieing is one of the many things that christianity considers a Sin. However it seems many think its ok to lie for "the greater good."

You begin to think that by lieing they are actually betraying the very thing they are trying to protect.

 

[Smilin]

Today at 06:05 PM Arikay said this in Post #42 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=659304#post659304)

I think it very interesting that any genuine request for evidence of creationism or evidence that evolution is false is met with lies, false facts, or attacks against the questioners. Lieing is one of the many things that christianity considers a Sin. However it seems many think its ok to lie for "the greater good."

You begin to think that by lieing they are actually betraying the very thing they are trying to protect.

Exactly Arikay,
Thus my point, Christians who alter known scientific facts to support their own religious agendas are no more than liars... (cough...Hovind....cough)

 

[JohnR7]

Today at 05:56 PM Smilin said this in Post #41

(Umm... don't hang out near any Chinese restauraunts... just a warning... those fried things on a stick you know...)

They don't fry dogs on a stick. They boil it in water and make it into a stew, because it is pretty tough and stringy.

 

[JohnR7]

Today at 06:08 PM Smilin said this in Post #43
(cough...Hovind....cough)

Did you get some gull caught in your throat there guy? OR should I say guile? Hovind site is filled with lots of good stuff that I am sure you guys would love for me to share with your. Here is a nice little diamond I found there:

"When Darwin presented a paper [with Alfred Wallace] to the Linnean Society in 1858, a Professor Haugton of Dublin remarked, `All that was new was false, and what was true was old.' This, we think, will be the final verdict on the matter, the epitaph on Darwinism."*Fred Hoyle and N. Chandra Wickramasinghe, Evolution from Space (1981), p. 159.

"Today our duty is to destroy the myth of evolution, considered as a simple, understood and explained phenomenon which keeps rapidly unfolding before us. Biologists must be encouraged to think about the weaknesses and extrapolations that the theoreticians put forward or lay down as established truths. The deceit is sometimes unconscious, but not always, since some people, owing to their sectarianism, purposely overlook reality and refuse to acknowledge the inadequacies and falsity of their beliefs."—*Pierre-Paul de Grasse, Evolution of Living Organisms (1977), p. 8.

 

[Arikay]

Smilin, I agree. Distorting science to prove what you want, is like distorting the bible so that you can murder.

From what I have understood about christianity from these forums, distorting science to serve your needs is the same as distorting gods word, a lie is a lie is a lie, no matter what you are lieing for.

Lieing is not a christian virtue, so it brings into question whether some creationists truly believe in christian virtues or their own.

 

[notto]

Yesterday at 11:24 PM JohnR7 said this in Post #45 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=659334#post659334)

"When Darwin presented a paper [with Alfred Wallace] to the Linnean Society in 1858, a Professor Haugton of Dublin remarked, `All that was new was false, and what was true was old.' This, we think, will be the final verdict on the matter, the epitaph on Darwinism."*Fred Hoyle and N. Chandra Wickramasinghe, Evolution from Space (1981), p. 159.

"Today our duty is to destroy the myth of evolution, considered as a simple, understood and explained phenomenon which keeps rapidly unfolding before us. Biologists must be encouraged to think about the weaknesses and extrapolations that the theoreticians put forward or lay down as established truths. The deceit is sometimes unconscious, but not always, since some people, owing to their sectarianism, purposely overlook reality and refuse to acknowledge the inadequacies and falsity of their beliefs."—*Pierre-Paul de Grasse, Evolution of Living Organisms (1977), p. 8.

Ah yes, the last desparate act - appeal to authority and quote mining. How does the quote from a professor in 1858 falsify evolution?

Have you heard of project
STEVE

You have yet to provide a SINGLE piece of evidence that falsifies evolution.

 

[anon5354]

I thought even AiG think Hovind's understanding of science is silly.

 

 

[JohnR7]

Yesterday at 07:53 PM anon5354 said this in Post #48 I thought even AiG think Hovind's understanding of science is silly. 

His stuff is not as bad as people say it is. He is just anti-evolution, so he comes under a lot of indiscriminate attack for that. People do not always go by what others say. Sometimes they do check it out for themselves. So I am sure the publicity does draw some people to his site. He even talks about all the anti-Hovind web sites that they have out there.

 

[chickenman]

most creationists are embarrassed by him

IDists want nothing to do with him

 

[Arikay]

My question is, if silicon chips are the mark of the beast, why does hovind use a computer?

If bar codes are the mark of the beast, I wonder if Hovind buys only items that lack bar codes?

 

[Smilin]

17th February 2003 at 06:08 PM JohnR7 said this in Post #44 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=659311#post659311)

They don't fry dogs on a stick. They boil it in water and make it into a stew, because it is pretty tough and stringy.

errr... they aren't dogs... lol..
Those little fried things on a stick are kittens... just so you know.

 

[Smilin]

18th February 2003 at 02:46 AM Arikay said this in Post #51 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=660110#post660110)

My question is, if silicon chips are the mark of the beast, why does hovind use a computer?

If bar codes are the mark of the beast, I wonder if Hovind buys only items that lack bar codes?

I thought Oprah Winfrey was the mark of the beast?????

 

[Smilin]

17th February 2003 at 06:24 PM JohnR7 said this in Post #45 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=659334#post659334)

Did you get some gull caught in your throat there guy? OR should I say guile? Hovind site is filled with lots of good stuff that I am sure you guys would love for me to share with your. Here is a nice little diamond I found there:.

and other web-sites are filled with 'great stuff' as well:

i.e... The Heaven's Gate Cult website, the group that claims we all are offspring of an ancient alien culture... blah.. blah... blah...

the 'myth of evolution' you mentioned. You still haven't shown me explanations for the examples of evolution I posed to you. To state evolution is a 'myth' is a lie. Lying is a sin... is it not?

 

[lucaspa]

17th February 2003 at 11:40 AM JohnR7 said this in Post #14

Nothing, I don't have a point. I am just giving you guys something to tear to shreds.

Evolutionary theory has been watered down to the point where all they can say is: evolution is change.

"In the broadest sense, evolution is merely change, and so is all-pervasive; galaxies, languages, and political systems all evolve.  The ontogeny of an individual is not considered evolution; individual organisms do not evolve."

So, what do you think, do individual evolve or not?

Absolutely not. Evolution is a theory about changes in populations.

You forgot to cite your source, John.  Where did you get the quote.  If you are truly interested in learning about evolution (which you confess you know nothing about), then I can give you some definitions by evolutionary biologists.

 

[Smilin]

17th February 2003 at 12:05 PM Smilin said this in Post #21 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=658552#post658552)

Organisms do no evolve?
How do you explain antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria?
How do you explain new breeds of dogs, cats, horses, cattle etc constantly appearing?
How do you explain 77,000 + new species of plants in the horticulture/nursery stock industry?
How do you explain the racial diversification of man?

Can you answer any of these questions without using evolutionary science?

John,
You still haven't answered my questions (without using evolutionary processes which you quote as a lie)
Can you explain the above observations without evolution or not?
Maybe Hovind can help you......

 

[lucaspa]

17th February 2003 at 11:50 AM JohnR7 said this in Post #15

There you go bubba, you just earned two IQ points, you win the prize you solved the riddle.

False witness again.  John, the whole quote was:

"As for John's assertions about evolution being falsified, I doubt that serious discussion of that can be achieved until he demonstrates at least a basic knowledge of two ideas:

1.  The theory of evolution - what does it actually say, how does it work(in general terms, since this quetion is still honestly debated), and what predictions does it make about the natural world?"

So far you haven't demonstrated the knowledge asked of you. What you did instead was try to take your ignorance and pretend that no one knows the answer. It's a slick attempt at a dodge, but transparent if you take the time to get the whole quote.

Most of the cr*p out there, that they call evolution, even what you find in text books, ain't evolution at all. The true scientist would easily falsify most of what people call evolution.

Give us some examples, please.

I agree, it is senseless to even have a discussion on evolution, if all your going to discuss is all the misconceptions of what it is. Usually in a attempt to simplify things so the average person can understand what they are saying, people so misrepresent evolutionary theory so as to create a false statement.

Since you have confessed elsewhere to ignorance about biology, including evolution, how would you know a false statement from a true one?  Now, you have implied that it would not be senseless to have a discussion about evolution between people knowledgable on the subject.  You have implied such knowledge in your many claims that evolution is falsified.  Contrast that to your confession of ignorance about biology and and we have nothing but an empty statement from you.

That is why so many people say: evolutionary theory is nonsense. Actually what they are refering to is what people call evolutionary theory which really is not evolutionary theory, it really is JUST nonsense being passed off as evolutionary theory.

The nonsense is, of course, exactly what the professional creationists like Hovind pass off as evolutionary theory.  Now, does doing this constitute being a "false prophet" or just a continuous false witness?  Doesn't Biblical theology state that both will end up condemned?

 

[lucaspa]

17th February 2003 at 12:05 PM Smilin said this in Post #21

Organisms do no evolve?
How do you explain antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria?
How do you explain new breeds of dogs, cats, horses, cattle etc constantly appearing?
How do you explain 77,000 + new species of plants in the horticulture/nursery stock industry?
How do you explain the racial diversification of man?

Can you answer any of these questions without using evolutionary science?

Individual organisms do not evolve.  Populations of organisms do.  Smilin, you missed the key word "individual".

 

[lucaspa]

17th February 2003 at 06:24 PM JohnR7 said this in Post #45

Hovind site is filled with lots of good stuff that I am sure you guys would love for me to share with your. Here is a nice little diamond I found there:

"When Darwin presented a paper [with Alfred Wallace] to the Linnean Society in 1858, a Professor Haugton of Dublin remarked, `All that was new was false, and what was true was old.' This, we think, will be the final verdict on the matter, the epitaph on Darwinism."*Fred Hoyle and N. Chandra Wickramasinghe, Evolution from Space (1981), p. 159.

"Today our duty is to destroy the myth of evolution, considered as a simple, understood and explained phenomenon which keeps rapidly unfolding before us. Biologists must be encouraged to think about the weaknesses and extrapolations that the theoreticians put forward or lay down as established truths. The deceit is sometimes unconscious, but not always, since some people, owing to their sectarianism, purposely overlook reality and refuse to acknowledge the inadequacies and falsity of their beliefs."—*Pierre-Paul de Grasse, Evolution of Living Organisms (1977), p. 8.

So Hovind found some quotes from anti-evolutionists.  So what? Is rhetoric what falsifies theories, John?  

Notice that neither of these present data. Hoyle and Wickramasinghe are expressing an opinion -- "we think" -- and De Grasse is engaging in ad hominen.  De Grasse gives no examples of deceit, just a general claim that there is widespread deceit. Conspiracy theory, anyone?

Education in science, John.  Rhetoric can't falsify a scientific theory.  Only data can do that.  Where is the data that falsifies evolution?

 

[PhantomLlama]

18th February 2003 at 06:57 AM JohnR7 said this in Post #49 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=660059#post660059)

He is just anti-evolution, so he comes under a lot of indiscriminate attack for that.

This explains why AiG have disowned him then, I suppose.