Macroevolution:

[lesliedellow]

Interesting, we both are waiting, you for "stupid remarks" and me for someone with the guts to engage in a serious Q & A type of discussion of what can be reasonably proven to be true.

Darwin's Gift to Science and Religion

There are many similar books written for the layman who is genuinely interested, but then, you are not, are you?

 

[HitchSlap]

At one time, I was almost convinced that these guys were sincere about their scientific method, until I learned that Pluto was no longer considered a planet, and saw these guys automatically ... automatically ... without question or complaint ... accept the IAU ruling, despite the fact that it was and still is contested.

It was then that I lost almost all my respect for them and they became "paper scientists" or "Internet scientists" in my mind.

I then noticed that amateurs shove the scientific method down our throats as well.

People who can't even spell very well or use proper grammar, telling me I need an education in the sciences is highly suspect to me.

Don't try to woo me with big scientific formulas and paradigms, if you can't first tell me the seven dispensations, and the order that they came in, what was expected of mankind during each one, and what judgement of God was initiated when each one failed.

Until then, I don't want to hear E is MC squared, and light travels at a constant, and we're descended from some jungle beast, who descended from a fish, and all that other bologna.

Lemmeseeifigotthisright... a handful of blokes on a scarcely traveled forum complicity accept the IAU's definition of planet, causes you reject everything else out of hand, doubling down on goddidit?

Somehow, I just don't believe you.

 

[lesliedellow]

So?

A contested reclassification.

And if it was "only a reclassification," why did they have to rig a vote behind closed doors?

The vote was not rigged, and there was nothing really fundamental which hung on it. If there had been something fundamental at stake, it would have needed to be settled through research; note a vote.

 

[AirPo]

1

Who is laurele?

 

[AV1611VET]

Lemmeseeifigotthisright... a handful of blokes on a scarcely traveled forum complicity accept the IAU's definition of planet, causes you reject everything else out of hand, doubling down on goddidit?

Well what I didn't tell you is that, even if they would contest it, it doesn't change my thinking that scientists today are mainly doing the work of the Devil.

That's because there's a powerful Biblical principle in effect:

Luke 12:34 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

And those who invest their time, treasures, and talents into learning the sciences without first prioritizing (getting saved), are prone to be victimized.

But I notice that even those who do get saved will defend their craft against the Bible as well.

It's a universal principle.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So?

A contested reclassification.

And if it was "only a reclassification," why did they have to rig a vote behind closed doors?

They didn't.

 

[lesliedellow]

But I notice that even those who do get saved will defend their craft against the Bible as well.

Correction. They will defend the Bible against fundamentalists.

 

[AV1611VET]

The vote was not rigged,

Suuuure it wasn't.

Had a Christian organization done that, and you guys would have hooted and hollered like a godless Mardi Gras celebration.

 

[Jimmy D]

I see Tevans has avoided responding to my posts and has retreated into the default creationist position of posting "quotes" and random PRATTs.

What a surprise.

 

[AV1611VET]

Who is laurele?

Beats me.

 

[lesliedellow]

Had a Christian organization done that, and you guys would have hooted and hollered like a godless Mardi Gras celebration.

I imagine people would have taken as much notice as they would of somebody classifying the Sun as a light bulb. If a group of eccentrics want to indulge their fancies in that way, who cares?

 

[HitchSlap]

Well what I didn't tell you is that, even if they would contest it, it doesn't change my thinking that scientists today are mainly doing the work of the Devil.

Well, how do you know the Devil's not the good guy, in your myth?

That's because there's a powerful Biblical principle in effect:

Luke 12:34 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

Yes, this is a well observed and documented function of our psyche. It helps us to understand how reasonable and educated people can compartmentalize beliefs. It's known as amathia, literally, "intelligent stupidity."

And those who invest their time, treasures, and talents into learning the sciences without first prioritizing (getting saved), are prone to be victimized.

Correct, many people don't think there's anything to get "saved" from.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well, how do you know the Devil's not the good guy, in your myth?

Has any creationist ever answered that question? I would think that perhaps some of the more honest Christians might have given it a shot.

On a related point he did not understand how Judas is a hero of the crucifixion story.

 

[HitchSlap]

Has any creationist ever answered that question? I would think that perhaps some of the more honest Christians might have given it a shot.

On a related point he did not understand how Judas is a hero of the crucifixion story.

Judas should be celebrated as a hero, for without his wisdom and resolve of action, there's no resurrection...

 

[AirPo]

Beats me.

That's a ringing endorsement of reliability.

Can't put it on the internet if it isn't true.

 

[lesliedellow]

Has any creationist ever answered that question? I would think that perhaps some of the more honest Christians might have given it a shot.

The person who created the universe, and set the show on the road, gets to be the Boss, and he makes the rules.

 

[AV1611VET]

Judas should be celebrated as a hero, for without his wisdom and resolve of action, there's no resurrection...

Isaiah 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

 

[AV1611VET]

That's a ringing endorsement of reliability.

Can't put it on the internet if it isn't true.

Can you highlight in red what she said wrong?

 

[pitabread]

Absolutely, can you learn to drive a car without having a car? And even if you could learn, how can you prove that you know how without performing the act?

Yes, in order to learn to drive a car, you first need a car. And likewise to learn about the evolution of life, we need to have life.

I'm pretty sure though that the existence of cars and life on Earth isn't up for debate here.

 

[Tinker Grey]

Suuuure it wasn't.

Had a Christian organization done that, and you guys would have hooted and hollered like a godless Mardi Gras celebration.

Tell ya what. Get a bunch of Christians together, form an organization and vote to make Pluto a planet.

See if it's not met with a colossal yawn.