Macro Evolution is a Dead Theory

[Strife767]

I love the way you keep referencing this atheistic website.

I love the way you are never able to address any argument I put forward, and are always forced to shrink back into immature sniveling and fallacies.

Talkorigins is not an "atheistic" website. And it's obvious you will prejudge any atheist as a liar no matter what they say. How sad indeed.

If you're not smart enough to recognize the stupidity of people like Keith Robison, I can't help you.

I see you're still obsessed with attacking others (shallowly, as you've failed to put a dent in any of the arguments, and usually it's just personal attacks instead of actually addressing the science) instead of defending yourself. What's the matter? Can't you offer any proof for ID?

The Darwiniacs are losing ground as science continues to develop more sophisticated tools to examine cell structure at the molecular level.

Prove it--cite some evidence of any significant number of scientists abandoning the Theory of Evolution in favor of ID. Come on, you can do it--or can you?

And the more they discover, the more scientists realize it's more than serendipity.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Straw man. The Theory of Evolution is not, and never was, a claim that evolution happened through pure chance.

[Stixx3969]

I love the way you keep referencing this atheistic website.  If you're not smart enough to recognize the stupidity of people like Keith Robison, I can't help you.    The Darwiniacs are losing ground as science continues to develop more sophisticated tools to examine cell structure at the molecular level. And the more they discover, the more scientists realize it's more than serendipity.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Did anyone hear the recent news story about this guy who sat down and figured out how many deaths were in the bible?

God was responsible for over 2,000,000

Satan was responsible for 10

What's up with that?

[Guest Tom]

I love the way you keep referencing this atheistic website.  If you're not smart enough to recognize the stupidity of people like Keith Robison, I can't help you.    The Darwiniacs are losing ground as science continues to develop more sophisticated tools to examine cell structure at the molecular level. And the more they discover, the more scientists realize it's more than serendipity.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In your dreams. Why is it that evolution continues to be applied in medicine, more and more every year?

Does reality matter to you, or are you content to spend your life making it up as you go along?

[Guest Guest]

Did anyone hear the recent news story about this guy who sat down and figured out how many deaths were in the bible?

God was responsible for over 2,000,000

Satan was responsible for 10

What's up with that?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Looks like crack has claimed another brain.

[Strife767]

Looks like crack has claimed another brain.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, actually, he's right on target. Notice that things like Noah's flood aren't even counted against God in the Bible because no exact number is given.

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/20...tan-or-god.html

[Strife767]

Looks like crack has claimed another brain.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/20...god-killed.html

(note to self: will be added to previous post to prevent double-posting)

[Stixx3969]

Looks like crack has claimed another brain.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So, are you saying that I'm a cracked for asking a simple question? If so, I would really like to know how you came to that conclusion.

[Guest 2smart4u]

I love the way you are never able to address any argument I put forward, and are always forced to shrink back into immature sniveling and fallacies.

Talkorigins is not an "atheistic" website. And it's obvious you will prejudge any atheist as a liar no matter what they say. How sad indeed.

I see you're still obsessed with attacking others (shallowly, as you've failed to put a dent in any of the arguments, and usually it's just personal attacks instead of actually addressing the science) instead of defending yourself. What's the matter? Can't you offer any proof for ID?

Prove it--cite some evidence of any significant number of scientists abandoning the Theory of Evolution in favor of ID. Come on, you can do it--or can you?

Straw man. The Theory of Evolution is not, and never was, a claim that evolution happened through pure chance.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dr. Michael Denton, Molecular Biologist and author of "Evolution: A Theory In Crisis"

Alvin Plantinga, Biology Professor, Notre Dame U.

Peter van Inwagen, Biology Professor, Syracuse U.

Dr. Walter Bradley, Professor , Taxas A & M University

Tom Bethell, The Hoover Institute

Richard John Neuhaus, Editor, First Things (Medical Biology Publication)

Dr. Siegfried, Biology Chair, Univ. of Konstanz, Germany

What do all of the above have in common ?? They all agree with Michael J. Behe that macro evolution is dead. There are people that will cover their eyes in a forest and deny the existence of trees ( strife and Calybos come to mind), so I'm sure we'll see that kind of blather in response.

[Stixx3969]

This arguement is hopless, be it intelligent design or whatever. One does not have the right to force thier beliefs on another.

[Guest A Christian]

So, are you saying that I'm a cracked for asking a simple question? If so, I would really like to know how you came to that conclusion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'll respond for 2smart4u. "a cracked" ?? No, a crackhead.

[Guest bewildered]

Dr. Michael Denton, Molecular Biologist and author of  "Evolution: A Theory In Crisis"

    Alvin Plantinga, Biology Professor, Notre Dame U.

    Peter van Inwagen, Biology Professor, Syracuse U.

  Dr. Walter Bradley, Professor , Taxas A & M University

    Tom Bethell, The Hoover Institute

    Richard John Neuhaus, Editor, First Things (Medical Biology Publication)

    Dr. Siegfried, Biology Chair, Univ. of Konstanz, Germany

    What do all of the above have in common ??  They all agree with Michael J. Behe that macro evolution is dead.  There are people that will cover their eyes in a forest and deny the existence of trees ( strife and Calybos come to mind), so I'm sure we'll see that kind of blather in response.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

2dim is a lying son of a B**ch. A quick Google search revealed this:

Michael Denton's book "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis" has been disproved here:

www.talkorigins.org/faqs/denton.html

Alvin Plantinga and Peter van Inwagen both have doctorates in philosophy and they teach it at their universities. They have no science background.

Dr Walter Bradley teaches mechanical engineering. He has no training in any science.

Tom Bethell is a journalist. The Hoover Institute is a neocon think tank. No connection to any science.

Richard John Neuhaus is a theologian. He is a right-wing Roman Catholic zealot--he's a convert. They tend to be zealots.

I could not find "Dr Siegfried" anywhere. Is Siegfried his or her first name or last name.

I don't know what creationist crap you are using; they are making this stuff up.

Come on.

[Calybos]

Dr. Michael Denton, Molecular Biologist and author of  "Evolution: A Theory In Crisis"

    Alvin Plantinga, Biology Professor, Notre Dame U.

    Peter van Inwagen, Biology Professor, Syracuse U.

  Dr. Walter Bradley, Professor , Taxas A & M University

    Tom Bethell, The Hoover Institute

    Richard John Neuhaus, Editor, First Things (Medical Biology Publication)

    Dr. Siegfried, Biology Chair, Univ. of Konstanz, Germany

That's eight--out of a population of thousands. Congratulations, you've found a few fellow crackpots with degrees to make you feel smart.

Now, as I said: If you can provide some actual PROOF that Behe's fallacies are in fact correct, I'll be waiting. And as soon as the consensus of the scientific community goes your way, I'll be more than willing to have ID taught in legitimate science courses.

Till then, keep whining and sniping. It's fun to watch.

[Guest Guest]

2dim is a lying son of a B**ch.  A quick Google search revealed this:

Michael Denton's book "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis" has been disproved here:

www.talkorigins.org/faqs/denton.html

Alvin Plantinga and Peter van Inwagen both have doctorates in philosophy and they teach it at their universities.  They have no science background.

Dr Walter Bradley teaches mechanical engineering.  He has no training in any science.

Tom Bethell is a journalist.  The Hoover Institute is a neocon think tank.  No connection to any science.

Richard John Neuhaus is a theologian. He is a right-wing Roman Catholic zealot--he's a convert.  They tend to be zealots.

I could not find "Dr Siegfried" anywhere.  Is Siegfried his or her first name or last name.

I don't know what creationist crap you are using; they are making this stuff up.

Come on.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Read the Kitzmiller case, the federal court case on so-called intelligent design, tried in Pennsylvania in the autumn of 2005. The federal court made a finding that Behe's "evidence" was worthless, and held the proponents of so-called intelligent design to be out-and-out liars. You can find the entire text of the decision here:

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/images/12/20/kitzmiller.pdf

The right has long accused people they don't agree with of lying. Here the right is lying. Intelligent and reasonable people can't resolve these disputes any more merely by telling both sides to be nice, or by trying to cut the truth down the middle of two extremes. Truth has a content and a basis in fact. Using lies as a basis for power is very dangerous to our society.

When you have to lie to "defend" what you believe, isn't it time to reconsider your beliefs?

[Guest 2smart4u]

That's eight--out of a population of thousands. Congratulations, you've found a few fellow crackpots with degrees to make you feel smart.

Now, as I said: If you can provide some actual PROOF that Behe's fallacies are in fact correct, I'll be waiting. And as soon as the consensus of the scientific community goes your way, I'll be more than willing to have ID taught in legitimate science courses.

Till then, keep whining and sniping. It's fun to watch.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What's wrong with this picture: A high school grad calling PhD's crackpots. Kool-aid has some curious side-effects. LOL.

[Stixx3969]

What's wrong with this picture:  A high school grad calling PhD's crackpots.      Kool-aid has some curious side-effects.  LOL.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

and your credentials are..........?

[Calybos]

What's wrong with this picture:  A high school grad calling PhD's crackpots.      Kool-aid has some curious side-effects.  LOL.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And yet you call pretty much 99% of the biology PhDs in the world crackpots by insisting that ID is related to science. Where's your doctorate, 2dim?

[Strife767]

Dr. Michael Denton, Molecular Biologist and author of  "Evolution: A Theory In Crisis"

    Alvin Plantinga, Biology Professor, Notre Dame U.

    Peter van Inwagen, Biology Professor, Syracuse U.

  Dr. Walter Bradley, Professor , Taxas A & M University

    Tom Bethell, The Hoover Institute

    Richard John Neuhaus, Editor, First Things (Medical Biology Publication)

    Dr. Siegfried, Biology Chair, Univ. of Konstanz, Germany

    What do all of the above have in common ??  They all agree with Michael J. Behe that macro evolution is dead.

LOL, seven is not a significant number, buddy. There are more than seven people in the country who think Elvis is still alive. Barely one-tenth of a percent of the about 500,000 scientists in the USA working in fields which heavily incorporate the Theory of Evolution believe that "creation science" is a valid theory. That's the reality.

There are people that will cover their eyes in a forest and deny the existence of trees ( strife and Calybos come to mind),

You seem to like this analogy, but the funny thing is that since no one can see your god, using it just makes you look retarded.

so I'm sure we'll see that kind of blather in response.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You mean like the fallacy of appeal to authority (http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php?showtopic=3843&view=findpost&p=42888), or ad hominem (http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php?showtopic=3843&view=findpost&p=42888)?

[Strife767]

2dim is a lying son of a B**ch.  A quick Google search revealed this:

Michael Denton's book "Evolution: A Theory in Crisis" has been disproved here:

www.talkorigins.org/faqs/denton.html

Alvin Plantinga and Peter van Inwagen both have doctorates in philosophy and they teach it at their universities.  They have no science background.

Dr Walter Bradley teaches mechanical engineering.  He has no training in any science.

Tom Bethell is a journalist.  The Hoover Institute is a neocon think tank.  No connection to any science.

Richard John Neuhaus is a theologian. He is a right-wing Roman Catholic zealot--he's a convert.  They tend to be zealots.

I could not find "Dr Siegfried" anywhere.  Is Siegfried his or her first name or last name.

I don't know what creationist crap you are using; they are making this stuff up.

Come on.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nice work.

[Strife767]

What's wrong with this picture:  A high school grad calling PhD's crackpots.

Considering any PhDs you listed are not PhDs in any field of science tied to the Theory of Evolution (http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php?showtopic=3843&view=findpost&p=43139), I'd say that it is you who is full of shit.

Just keep digging yourself deeper. You can't even come up with relevant scientists in your appeals to authority now.

[Calybos]

What's wrong with this picture:  A high school grad calling PhD's crackpots.      Kool-aid has some curious side-effects.  LOL.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

PhD's... none of whom are biologists, and none of whom know any more about biology than you do. Yeah, these are some real credible "experts" you've offered.

Meanwhile, what do ACTUAL biologists say? Oh yeah... they say ID is garbage. Guess who's more believable?

[Stixx3969]

I'll respond for 2smart4u.  "a cracked"  ??  No, a crackhead.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Gee Mr. Christain,

Thank you ever so much for pointing out my typo, is it because you do think that I'm a crackhead?

[Guest bewildered]

Nice work.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have uncovered additional information. None of the men mentioned have shown neither that they ever believed in evolution nor are recent converts to creationism.

Alvin Plantington was both a student and instructor at Calvin College. Calvin College is related to the Christian Reformed Church which teaches bible inerrancy.

Walter Bradley has been a creationist since at least 1987. He is debunked here:

http://www.leaderu.com/offices/bradley/doc...worthiness.html

Tom Bethell wrote an article against evolution in 1976. He also doesn't believe in global warming or that HIV causes AIDS.

Richard John Neuhaus went to Concordia Seminary in St Louis. Concordia is affiliated with the very conservative Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. He espoused liberal causes but switched his views in 1972 when Roe v Wade was handed down.

Could Siegfried possibly the Siegfried half of Siegfried and Roy?

[Guest 2smart4u]

And yet you call pretty much 99% of the biology PhDs in the world crackpots by insisting that ID is related to science. Where's your doctorate, 2dim?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

99% ?? Are they your poll numbers ? LMAO.

[Guest 2smart4u]

PhD's... none of whom are biologists, and none of whom know any more about biology than you do. Yeah, these are some real credible "experts" you've offered.

Meanwhile, what do ACTUAL biologists say? Oh yeah... they say ID is garbage. Guess who's more believable?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Put the Kool-aid down and read the post from "Graduate Student".

[Strife767]

99% ?? Are they your poll numbers ?  LMAO.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually, 99.8% is closer. Barely one tenth of a percent of scientists in relevant fields of science (i.e. biology and other life sciences) think ID has any merit at all.