Flood Migration

[Split Rock]

So post something on a new thread explaining why you think evolution is nonsense. I have posted why I think flood geology is nonsense with detailed explanations of why it is nonsense and even if evolution is nonsense, that has nothing to do with the fact that flood geology is nonsense. You do know what the logical fallacy of the false dichotomy is don't you?

Not interested.

Of course you are "not interested." The fact that this is the "Creation & Evolution" subforum would certainly imply such a discussion is pertinent. I suspect that, in reality, you already know evolution is not "nonsense." You just don't like its implications for your religious beliefs. That is why you come here, like many of your ilk and make statements like: "evolution is nonsense," or "evolution is a fairytale for adults," or "evolution is SATAN's Big Lie."...etc, etc.

Of course you do not agree with the answer, if you did, you could hardly call yourself an apologist for evolution (or a skeptic of creation).

When has F.B. ever claimed to be "an apologist for evolution?" You see, we don't need apologetics like you do. Evolution is based on the physical evidence. No need for apologetics at all. I suppose you are also "not interested" in showing us otherwise... are you?

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

I dont remember claiming that he has answers to the question of marsupial migration. You seem to be confused about my post to "Hillard" who dogmatically asserts there are no answers to where the water went.

So in post 60 when you wrote

Most of the referred post has little to do with the casual quote from Sarfati. You summed it up in your first comment "that doesnt explain anything".

Yes you are right it doesnt. It would have been a far more credible argument if you picked out one of Jonathans articles where he does explain things or one of his colleagues. There is no way to tell from that prose whether you are strawmanning or not.

You weren't saying that Sarfati has answers to the biogeography question? And in post 66 when you linked to Creation Ministries website you weren't implying that he would have answers there? He doesn't.

(By the way so-called flood geologists don't have any realistic answer to where the water came from or where it went but that falsification of the flood myth is off topic for this thread. )

Great answer! Therefore in the same context, if there is something about evolution that you do not know, that means you realise evolution is absurd.

If you can't see that the idea that people took marsupial moles, kangaroos, echidna, kiwis, koalas, wombats, the platypus, Tasmania devils( a foul tempered bad smelling critter), bandicoots, Moas ( a giant predatory bird, now extinct), Cassowarys (a very dangerous bad tempered bird that is the second largest now living in the world) and the Thylacine (Tasmanian Tiger) to Australia and New Guinea along with all the other animals unique to the area there you won't evey understand anything.

No other words at all. Everyone has favorite topics, evolution is not one of mine. That is all you need to understand, its simple really.

So you don't really know anything evolution but confidently state that it is nonsense. Why am I not surprised?

I am right, you are wrong. There are no other words.

As others have already noted this statement from you proves my point. Thanks.

 

[marktheblake]

I would say it too. I think you'd be surprised how many people would agree with him. That should probably tell you something.

Not surprised at all - it is very obvious you all will.

Of course you are "not interested." The fact that this is the "Creation & Evolution" subforum

It would seem that you conveniently overlooked the "&" in the subforum Title. In plain english for those who have trouble understanding it, that means this is the place to discuss either one or both of Creation and Evolution. Last time I looked, there is no rule that says you must engage in both topics here.

You just don't like its implications for your religious beliefs.

You dont like what the implications are from Creation for your religious beliefs. So what, that means absolutely nothing, another pointless argument.

That is why you come here, like many of your ilk

I come here to read and participate in threads on Creation topics. So what, many of your ilk come here to Christian forums as well.

"evolution is nonsense," or "evolution is a fairytale for adults," or "evolution is SATAN's Big Lie."...etc, etc.

Such arguments carry no weight at all, so the likes of you should also stop using them. In fact I did make a specific statement that "evolution is nonsense" is an argument I do not use. But once again you clutch at straws.

When has F.B. ever claimed to be "an apologist for evolution?"

He doesn't have to claim such a thing, his actions speak it loud and clear.

So in post 60 when you wrote

You should have just quoted me saying "Yes you are right it doesn't" but I guess that would stuff your main argument up.

You weren't saying that Sarfati has answers to the biogeography question?

It is obvious that I wasn't. Plain english was used.

And in post 66 when you linked to Creation Ministries website you weren't implying that he would have answers there? He doesn't.

The words I used were pretty clear, plain english again. But I will restate it for you just so you get it this time.

I do not have a list of all the articles Jonathan Sarfati has written, but his website is creation.com, you can find articles he has written there.

That is very clear that I do not know whether he has answered your pet question.

So you don't really know anything evolution but confidently state that it is nonsense.

I told you that I do not use the nonsense claim as an argument, it is worthless point to make in any discussion. I wrote that in plain english. You seem to very quick to make accusations of not understanding yet you clearly have trouble understanding plain english yourself.

As others have already noted this statement from you proves my point.

Am sure they can have some sort of celebration and give you an award or something.

 

[Split Rock]

You dont like what the implications are from Creation for your religious beliefs. So what, that means absolutely nothing, another pointless argument.

The problem I have with creationism is that it makes no sense in light of what we have decerned about reality and the world we live in.

I come here to read and participate in threads on Creation topics. So what, many of your ilk come here to Christian forums as well.

If you only want to discuss creationism (I assume that is what you mean by "creation topics"), I wonder why you are posting here instead of in the creationism subforum.

Such arguments carry no weight at all, so the likes of you should also stop using them. In fact I did make a specific statement that "evolution is nonsense" is an argument I do not use. But once again you clutch at straws.

I agree that your argument that evolution is nonsense carries no weight. However, our arguments that creationism is nonsense do carry weight... as FB has demonstrated.

He doesn't have to claim such a thing, his actions speak it loud and clear.

Really? FM has done nothing but cite the physical evidence. Give me one example of his use of an apologetics argument.

 

[marktheblake]

The problem I have with creationism is that it makes no sense in light of what we have decerned about reality and the world we live in.

Thats funny 'cos that is exactly what the creationists say about you evolutionists!

If you only want to discuss creationism (I assume that is what you mean by "creation topics"), I wonder why you are posting here instead of in the creationism subforum.

This thread topic is about Creationism.

However, our arguments that creationism is nonsense do carry weight... as FM has demonstrated.

Demonstrating does carry weight. Saying something is nonsense does not.

Really? FM has done nothing but cite the physical evidence.

Most of this thread is hand waving, claims of nonsense, and the catchall 'I'm right your wrong" and the classic of all comebacks "You dont understand plain english". Nothing scientific about any of that at all.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Thats funny 'cos that is exactly what the creationists say about you evolutionists!

But you say it with no data or justification. We provide detailed scientific analysis.

This thread topic is about Creationism.

Demonstrating does carry weight. Saying something is nonsense does not.

But demonstrating that it is nonsense as is easily done with creationist attempts to explain biogeography should carry weight.

Most of this thread is hand waving, claims of nonsense, and the catchall 'I'm right your wrong" and the classic of all comebacks "You dont understand plain english". Nothing scientific about any of that at all.

Listing the specific marsupials and monotremes that are in Australia and some of their characteristics, pointing out that placental mammals are not there and pointing out that there is no way for this faunal distribution to have come about if the ancestors of all animals came off a boat together 4500 years ago, many thousands of miles away, on earth that had just spent a year under water is NOT handwaving. You obviously don't know what handwaving is. If you want to see what handwaving really is just read any of the alleged explanations of biogeography on any creationist website that addresses the subject.

Now if you have or can find any explanation for biogeography that is consistent with the global flood story and is not easily shown to be either irrelevant to the problem or absurd handwaving provide it. Otherwise admit you have nothing.

 

[marktheblake]

Listing the....is NOT handwaving

I said most not all. If you re going to make accusations of 'not understanding plain english' you should make sure you apply the same standards to yourself.

Otherwise admit you have nothing.

I already told you I do not know - in plain english. Yet you keep hammering away.

 

[Split Rock]

Thats funny 'cos that is exactly what the creationists say about you evolutionists!

True, but the ones who are honest admit that they reject evolution because it conflicts with their fallible interpretation of scripture. Not because there is anything illogical about the theory of evolution.

This thread topic is about Creationism.

All well and good. I still don't know why you made the statement about evolution being nonsense. Unless.... you are attempting to counter a truthful claim ("flood geology is nonsense") with an untruthful claim ("evolution is nonsense") by asserting they are both the same and both non-applicable. This reflects a typical creationist tactic of asserting parity. Trouble is, you guys haven't earned parity.

Demonstrating does carry weight. Saying something is nonsense does not.

He has demonstrated it, by citing the physical evidence.

Most of this thread is hand waving, claims of nonsense, and the catchall 'I'm right your wrong" and the classic of all comebacks "You dont understand plain english". Nothing scientific about any of that at all.

Why do you complain about such tactics when you have propagated them here in this thread? For example:

Wrong answer.

I am right, you are wrong. There are no other words.

Oh and btw... can you provide an example of FB using an apologetics argument in this thread or not?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Thats funny 'cos that is exactly what the creationists say about you evolutionists!

Which only shows how complete the creationist disconnect from reality is.

This thread topic is about Creationism.

Which invariably leads to a discussion of its shortcomings and failures.

Most of this thread is hand waving, claims of nonsense, and the catchall 'I'm right your wrong" and the classic of all comebacks "You dont understand plain english". Nothing scientific about any of that at all.

Indeed -- a pity Creationists such as yourself have little else to work with.

 

[Split Rock]

Frumious Bandersnatch:

Sorry about referring to you as "FM." Corrected now!

 

[rockaction]

Demonstrating does carry weight. Saying something is nonsense does not.

Wait, didn't you say "evolution is nonsense" then refuse to back up your claim?

 

[Split Rock]

Wait, didn't you say "evolution is nonsense" then refuse to back up your claim?

I believe it is just a tactic to deny the opposing claim that creationism is nonsense. He is being "fair" by claiming they are both useless assertions.

 

[rockaction]

I believe it is just a tactic to deny the opposing claim that creationism is nonsense. He is being "fair" by claiming they are both useless assertions.

I love it when that happens. Like when Creationists claim "but evolutionism is a religion!" It's like they realize they have a terrible argument and their only goal is to equate ours with it.

 

[Split Rock]

I love it when that happens. Like when Creationists claim "but evolutionism is a religion!" It's like they realize they have a terrible argument and their only goal is to equate ours with it.

Yeah.. they are so very desperate for parity. Too bad they haven't earned it.

 

[marktheblake]

I believe it is just a tactic to deny the opposing claim that creationism is nonsense.

It wasnt a tactic, I made it clear in the same paragraph that I would not use it as an argument. Nobody could have missed that, surely.....I guess i was wrong.

 

[Split Rock]

It wasnt a tactic, I made it clear in the same paragraph that I would not use it as an argument. Nobody could have missed that, surely.....I guess i was wrong.

I guess I will wait for you to explain why you mentioned it at all, if you weren't going to use it as an argument. I guess I will also continue to wait for you to give us an example of FB using an apologetics argument in this thread.

 

[marktheblake]

I guess I will wait for you to explain why you mentioned it at all, if you weren't going to use it as an argument.

No need to wait, but then again, actually reading what you are replying to is not one of your strong points.