-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What does the fossil record say?
- Thread starter Youtellme
- Start date
wilsoncole
Active Member
That is as dumb as they come!
You kiddin'? That's an impossible scenario! It really wouldn't matter what I say, if it isn't to your liking, then it mut be that I don't understand it. Right?
If, as you say, it is exactly what he meant, why in the world are you bothering to try to "explain" it? You don't think he's proficient enough?
Lie!
You are not qualified to teach me anything about evolution - you're not a biologist!
What you really mean is that you found out that I am no pushover - right?
If I was weak-minded, you'da had me. Well I'm not!
No unbeliever should ever use that word - dishonest. It is just like facing a mirror. No word could describe him better.
(\__/)
( . )
>(^)<
　
Wilson
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Actually, it's a young man.This is a woman!!!!!!!!
Used to be quite a nagger!
Dead!
(\__/)
( . )
>(^)<
　
Wilson
So, I guess this means you can't or won't bother to actually address the question.
I wonder why?
wa:do
wilsoncole
Active Member
By the way - did I write anything that added or took away from Lewontin's words?
Did I twist anything that he said? Or did I quote his exact words on materialism?
You tell me how I gave the wrong impression with his words - OK?
(\__/)
( . )
>(^)<
　
Wilson
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
Why don't you try me? Or do you just want to dodge the question?
No, it's because you're still dishonestly misrepresenting his statement as if it's some admission of dishonesty. It isn't; it's an admission of the fact that science, by it's nature, is materialistic, and non-materialistic explanations that cannot be tested are useless in science.
Besides which, I provided a link to the entire published piece, so I allowed his words to speak for themselves in any case.
Now, stop quote-mining.
ME: "... people like you and newhope will never understand anything unless we force-feed it to you and make you sit up and take notice."
YOU: "Then why do you keep trying? It will NEVER work!"
But I can very easily link you to the opinions of respected biologists, as well as peer-reviewed and published scientific papers by such biologists if you ask me to. If you don't want to take my word for something, you're more than welcome to ask me for a citation from a credited scientist.
You, on the other hand, take the words of non-credited scientists and expect them alone to stand as an argument. It's a lazy, dishonest and ignorant way to debate.
You're not weak-minded, just hard-headed.
Says the guy who has been caught-out quote-mining, lying and making up nonsense.
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
You gave the impression that what he was doing was indicating that scientists are dishonestly biased towards materialistic answers. That wasn't the point. His point, as was the point in the article, was that science is - by it's very nature - materialistic, and that non-materialistic nonsense such as ID is not science.
Furthermore, he also talks about how the supposed "dissent" from evolution theory comes not from science, but from religion, and that most of those "dissenters" will never be deterred from their position no matter how the facts stack up, because to them it's not about what's true or false. It's about eliminating what they perceive as a threat to their rigid, superstitious belief structures.
camanintx
Well-Known Member
Maybe he's just interested in course credit for the Christian Apologetics class at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary.
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Could be..
I wonder if by calling him a woman, Wilsoncole is saying, the fossil is fully human?
wa:do
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
Because you misunderstood what he meant and you simply quote mind a quote mind. Did you read his actual statements in the link provided?
Yet painted wolf is and you still refuse to listen.....but isn't it your contention that one doesn't have to just be a biologist to have an understanding of the ToE?
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
This is a woman!!!!!!!!
Used to be quite a nagger!
Dead!
(\__/)
( . )
>(^)<
　
Wilson
This whole thread could have been avoided had you simply admitted you know nothing of what the fossil record says. It's not a woman. It's a male.
wilsoncole
Active Member
Impression? So whatever impression you got is nothing but absolute truth - right?
Have I said a word about ID? Are you listening to voices in your head?
I added NOTHING to his words. I made no comment afterwards. I could do so now, but this is your paranoia showing and much too silly for me to bother with. For your own sake, I will stop now - you are beginning to crack.
Why are you bothering me with that? The mans words speak for themselves.
　
　
(\__/)
( . )
>(^)<
　
Wilson
wilsoncole
Active Member
So - HE was the nagger!
And its not dead either!
HAHAHA!
(\__/)
( ‘ .‘ )
>(^)<
　
Wilson
newhope101
Active Member
This is really laughable. How many pages have turned with this lot unable to accept that some very credentialed scientists still do not accept the theory of evolution.and to what end...none. Because even if they were correct it would still mean zilch.
Here, I'll put up these names and hope that this lot spend the next 24 hours or more wasting their life looking them up and discrediting them.
Index DAWKINS SAYS NO REPUTABLE SCIENTIST DISPUTES EVOLUTION
This lot remind me of frightened animals recoiling under threat and desperation.
Last edited:
wilsoncole
Active Member
On EVERY forum, there are people like these. Ready to pounce on any dissenter from evolution. They ALL seem to react the very same way: Its like they are programmed to do the same things:
Discredit opposers; dismiss the really tough questions; insist on the "mountains of evidence"; insult; demean; slander - ANYTHING to squash the voice of the opponent.
Let's pull their tails!
I'll go a little further and print them out just in case they don't visit the website:
"Richard Dawkins, the loud-mouthed anti-creationist, says in his recent book The Greatest Show in Earth, “Evolution is a fact. Beyond reasonable doubt, beyond serious doubt, beyond sane, informed, intelligent doubt, beyond doubt evolution is a fact. ... No reputable scientist disputes it, and no unbiased reader will close the book doubting it.”
Thus, according to Dawkins, if you reject evolution, you are unintelligent and your sanity should be questioned, and no reputable scientist disputes it. In our report “Scientists Who Believe the Bible,” we listed about 40 Ph.D.s who believe in biblical creation.
Consider A.E. Wilder-Smith (d. 1995), who had a Ph.D. in physical organic chemistry from Reading University, England, a Ph.D. in pharmacology from the University of Geneva, and a Ph.D. in pharmacological sciences from ETH
Consider biophysicist Raymond Damadian, M.D., recipient of the Lemelson-MIT Achievement Award as “the man who invented the MRI scanner.” In 1989, he was inducted into the Inventors Hall of Fame, an honor he shares with Thomas Edison, Samuel Morse, and the Wright Brothers. The first MRI scanner that Dr. Damadian and his colleagues built in 1977 resides at the Smithsonian Institution. Damadian, a Bible-believing Christian who attends a Baptist church, has stated that “the highest purpose a man can find for his life is to serve the will of God.”
Consider Richard Lumsden (1938-97), Ph.D., professor of parisitology and cell biology, who as dean of the graduate school at Tulane University, trained 30 Ph.D.s., published hundreds of scholarly papers, and was the winner of the highest award for parasitology.
Consider Dr. Maciej Giertych, head of the Department of Genetics at the Institute of Dendrology of the Polish Academy of Sciences, who has published 90 papers in scientific journals, or
Dr. Brian Stone, who has won a record number of awards for excellence in engineering teaching at Australian universities, or
Dr. Duane Gish, who has a Ph.D. in biochemistry and worked for many years in pharmaceutical research at Cornell University, the University of California, and the Upjohn Company, or
Dr. W. R. Thompson, world-famous biologist and former Director of the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control of Canada, or
Dr. Melvin A. Cook, Ph.D. in chemistry from Yale, winner of the Nitro Nobel Gold Medal for the invention of slurry explosives, or
Dr. Walter Lammerts, geneticist and famous plant breeder, or
the late Dr. J.J. Duyvene De Wit, Professor of Zoology at the University of the Orange Free State, South Africa, or
Dr. James Allan, who has a Ph.D. in genetics from the University of Edinburgh and was a senior lecturer in genetics at the University of Stellenbosch in South Africa.
There are hundreds of others, but Dawkins said there is NO reputable scientist who disputes evolution, so we have already more than demonstrated his gross error, his breath-taking arrogance, his astounding ignorance, and the fact that Dawkins himself is not a reputable scientist. Of course, even if NO reputable scientist disputed evolution, this does not mean it is correct.
Jesus said, “I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes” (Matthew 11:25)."
Index DAWKINS SAYS NO REPUTABLE SCIENTIST DISPUTES EVOLUTION
Let’s give them some more work!
To this list, I will add:
Dr. Ralph Seelke, Ph.D. in Microbiology from the University of Minnesota
Dr. Henry "Fritz" Schaefer III is a Computational and Theoretical Chemistry expert.
Dr. Raymond G. Bohlin, Ph.D. Molecular and Cell Biology (University of Texas at Dallas);
Dr. Yvonne Boldt, Ph.D. Microbiology (University of Minnesota);
Dr. William S. Harris, Ph.D. Nutritional Biochemistry (University of Minnesota),
Dr. Cornelius Hunter, Ph.D. Biophysics and Computational Biology (Illinois University);
Dr. Dean Kenyon, Ph.D. Biophysics (Stanford University),
Dr. Scott Minnich, Ph.D. Microbiology (Iowa State University),
Dr. Chris Williams, Ph.D. Biochemistry (The Ohio State University);
I have a lot more.
http://www.wayoflife.org/files/78b49a4c9fe1e586dcb0d784c243ea91-429.htmltable scientist dil
They are really behaving like frightened animals, boxed in and ready to lash out at anything closeby.
I think they have reason to fear.
Last edited:
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
Considering I read the entire article, presented the entire article, know that he is a respected scientist and also that you love misquoting, misreading and flat-out lying in order to defend your own position, yes.
Are you? I said he was talking about ID in the article, not you.
You're really quite desperate and pathetic aren't you, Wilson?
You are, of course, right.
And with you quoting him only partially, without citation, and highlighting certain parts of the quote in red in order to give a dishonest evaluation of what he was actually talking about, I felt he desired a less biased and more accurate representation than the one you gave.
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Gunfingers
Happiness Incarnate
Actually after googling a couple of these guys I find that their denial of evolution has, in many cases, severely tarnished their reputation.
But anyway, while you can find counterexamples to prove Dr Dawkins literally wrong (I've never been a fan of Dr Dawkins because of things like that, honestly) the gist of the statement, that evolutionary theory is overwhelmingly supported amongst those most knowledgable, remains true.
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
"no reputable scientist..."
I'm not a big fan of Dawkins, but he has a point.
I'm not a big fan of Dawkins, but he has a point.
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Your claim, you back it up.
BTW, still looking for how the fossil record in any way leads to a conclusion of Creationism.
Anyone...?