Re: found a picture of evolution in process ...

In article <f3cts3$ak0$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Dirk Munk <munk@xxxxxxx> writes:
ultradwc@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On May 26, 12:17 pm, AEF <spamsink2...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 25, 8:48 am, ultra...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:





On May 24, 6:28 pm, AEF <spamsink2...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 23, 9:24 pm, David B Sneddon <dbsned...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 24, 12:54 am, AEF <spamsink2...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[...big snip...]
talk about thermodynamics.... Well, you get the idea.
AEF
It would seem that boob does not get the idea.
It also seems that boob never had the idea and
it also seems that boob will NEVER get the idea.
Why do you bother trying to explain anything to
him? He is a narrow minded bigoted self-righteous
homophobic christian fundamentalist creationist idiot.
Dave
There are others who read this.
I think it is important to stand up to stuff like this. We've barely
kept this out of public education in some communities so it is
important to act. I want Bob and others of his ilk to know that they
are going to be held to the same scrutiny and standards that
scientists are. I want it visible just what's wrong with sites like
this. It appears to me, from the parts I've read, that it makes a very
big deal about "gaps" and uncertainties and problems with the theory
and uses these things, blowing their importanct all out of proportion,
to say that the theory must be wrong. I think it is important that
people speak up about this and say what's wrong with these type sites.
I'm just doing my small part here. I'm making sure that Bob know that
at least some people will catch on to why these sites are no good and
will let others know. I noticed that his 2nd post in this thread is
already missing. And note that Bob is not advocating "Intelligent
Design" but instead full blown religion.
you are talking like other leftist atheist scientists that are in
a state of denial ...
Denial? Based on what?

the facts are the facts ...
Yeah...

you are grasping
at straws ...
No...

science is and will continue to prove you and
your evolutionist buddies wrong ...
How so? Most scientists are on the evolution side.

Bob, have you actually read any of my other posts on this topic? I
exposed the method of the whoisyourcreator Web site as bogus. The
primary argument seems to be that because of minor gaps in or problems
with the theory, it must be bogus. I demonstrated how this is invalid
logic yet you continue with this kind of stuff with short sound bites
without any supporting evidence or reasoning. You asked about
intermeidate species and I supplied them and do again below. I
explained why the thermo section of whoisyourcreator is not right. Yet
you continue as if nothing had happened.

Anyway, here are some more facts for you to chew on. From Asimov's New
Guide to Science (1984) p. 771: (Note that Asimov is one of the
authors quoted in your whoisyourcreator Web site!)

Evolution

It is almost impossible to run down the roster of living things, as I
have just done, without ending with a strong impression that there has
been a slow development of life from the very simple to the complex.
The phyla can be arranged so that each seems to add something to the
one before. Within each phylum, the various classes can be arranged
likewise; and within each class, the orders.

Furthermore, the species often seem to melt together, as if they were
still evolving along their slightly spearate roads from common
ancestors not very far in the past. Some species are so close together
that under special circumstances they will interbreed, as in the case
of the horse and the donkey, which, by appropriate cooperation, can
produce the mule. Cattle can interbreed with buffaloes, and lions with
tigers. There are also intermediate species, so to speak -- creatures
that link together two larger groups of animals. The cheetah is a cat
with a smattering of doggish characteristics, and the hyena is a dog
with some cattish characteristics. The platypus is a mammal only
halfway removed from the reptile. There is a creature called the
_peripatus_, which seems half worm, half centipede. The dividing lines
become particularly thin when we look at certain animals in their
youthful stages. the infant frog seems to be a fish; and there is a
primitive chordate called _balanoglossus_, discovered in 1825, which
as a youngster is so like a young echinoderm that at first it was so
classified.

Well, that's enough typing for me. I'd like to include the next two
paragraphs, but that's too much typing for now. Maybe I'll type it in
later. Better yet, get the book. It's a great book and has the history
of science, not just evolution and biology. Strongly recommended.

Bob, I ask you to get this Asmiov book (or a more recent incarnation
thereof) and read it. You can also read the Evolution article on
Wikipedia. These writings answer your questions and that of
whoisyourcreator.com. Please read them before you post again on this
topic.

Thanks.

AEF- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

so your genius Darwin was a Christian who turned againset
God because of some tragic event in his life and became an
atheist who set out to prove God is not real, and of course
the devil gave him a lie to deceive all you so called geniuses ...
so it now turns out you are one of Darwins fools ...

http://www.gotquestions.org/creation-evolution.html

I have a question for you Bob.

Let us assume evolution is true, and God designed the universe like
that. I'm sure you will agree with me God is capable of doing that.

Now the question:
How could that have been written down in the Bible? No one who lived
some 3000 to 4000 years ago could have understood such a concept.

Reminds me of a short science fiction story. I thought it was by Asimov but I
can't find it.

In the story Moses is about to write down the story of the creation, what will
become Genesis, after having being told how it happened by God. But before he
writes it down he is discussing it with Joshua.
So he starts explaining how God has told him about this big explosion which
ocurred some 10 billion years ago and how billions of years later the Sun was
created and that the Sun is this gigantic ball of gas which has been burning
for billions of years since. Joshua then interrupts him and tells him that
he can't write that down - noone will believe in anything so fantastic or such
long periods of time. Better just say the world was created in seven days.

David Webb
Security team leader
CCSS
Middlesex University


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: found a picture of evolution in process ...
    ... it also seems that boob will NEVER get the idea. ... I want Bob and others of his ilk to know that they ... Most scientists are on the evolution side. ... Furthermore, the species often seem to melt together, as if they were ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: found a picture of evolution in process ...
    ... It would seem that boob does not get the idea. ... I want Bob and others of his ilk to know that they ... Most scientists are on the evolution side. ... atheist who set out to prove God is not real, ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: found a picture of evolution in process ...
    ... It would seem that boob does not get the idea. ... I want Bob and others of his ilk to know that they ... Most scientists are on the evolution side. ... atheist who set out to prove God is not real, ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: found a picture of evolution in process ...
    ... it also seems that boob will NEVER get the idea. ... I want Bob and others of his ilk to know that they ... Most scientists are on the evolution side. ... Furthermore, the species often seem to melt together, as if they were ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: Theres no escaping the subject it would seem...
    ... >>Bob wrote: ... >>> evolution has a mechanism, ... >>> and god help those who disagree with you. ... It is said that Science corrects itself. ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading