"Evolution isn't science"

[Buckaroo]

I've just given up hope with him. He's obviously not interested in a discussion.

Yeah. I'm wondering if he's legitimate, or just some punk troll who's trying to see how long he can drag out this thread. Are we being suckered?

He just wants to spout and have us go "Oh, yes, Little Mr. Fundy. We're all lost and need JEEEBUS! Oh Laudy-Laud!"

Maybe I'd be tempted, if it wasn't for the fact that Jesus sucks.

Until he does show that he's taken whats been presented, and at least can give cogent arguments against it, I'm not interested in anything he's got to say.

Damn straight.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

And don't forget Atomic Theory is "just a theory"--and a far more controversial one than evolution by natural selection. (Assuming "controversial" means how many times the basic theory has been challenged and revised to fit observable facts.)

Therefore, I deny the existence of all atomic weapons. The predictions that led to their development were all dependent on atomic theory.

 

[CACTUSJACKmankin]

1) How did the eye evolve?
2) How did our hearts evolve?
3) How about our lungs?
5) what evolved first the skelital, muscular, nervous, respritory, digestive or digestive system?

The eye, while seemingly an evolutionary leap of faith, is fairly well understood in evolutionary terms. This is due to the fact that the eye has evolved 40 separate times. Also the intermediary stages of the eye is represented in living molluscs and fossil trilobites. An eye starts out as a light sensing nerve cell. This cell can only detect the presence or absence of light. Keep in mind that each subsequent stage is beneficial because detecting light is better than not, 5% vision is better than 4% and so on.

Fish have a two chambered heart, amphibians and reptiles have a three chambered heart(which evolved from fish), and mammals have a four chambered heart (which evolved from reptiles). Mammals and birds both have four chambered hearts thus, far from being unevolvable it has arisen two separate times.

The terrestrial vertebrate lung is derived from the fish swim bladder, fish gulp air in order to help them with buoyancy control. These arise from the same embryonic tissues.

The different systems formed different parts at different times. The skeletal system was originally nothing more than a cartilagenous notochord(similar to the spine). The cartilage became bone in the ancestors of bony fishes. Nervous system is very ancient as are muscles. Our invertaebrate ancestors possesed these. However the coellescing of nerve cells into a centralized brain and the encapsulation of that brain with a skull is one of the things that distinguished our ancestors from their invertebrate relatives. But that's just the first instances of each of these systems. Our brain is the most intelligent in the animal kingdom, so that has been improving over the two thirds billion years since it first arose. Different organs arose as time went on and each system was improved. These systems didnt have to include everything we see in humans to serve any vital purpose at all, we can see that;s not the case simply by looking at living species that have many fewer organs than we do yet function quite well.

 

[kmortis]

And why did God have to rest on the 7th day when he is omnipotent?

1) Love the new avatar, Glenn
2) I can answer this one. If you read between the lines, you'll notice that according to the creation myth in Gen 1, he creates plants (including barley, yeast would have been on this day too, but they're too small for our Bronzed Aged friends to notice) THEN he makes man. He tells man to be happy (ok, not in that many words, but bear with me), obviously how God man Adam pass out was by the use of beer. He got Adam drunk. How do you get a man drunk? You drink with him. Plus, doesn't a frosty brew taste good at the end of a busy week?

That's right, God didn't rest on the seventh cause he was strung out from working too hard. He was hungover. We can see the reverberations in this in all the time that He doesn't take the pain away from our hangovers. He knows how they feel, and wants to share.

 

[kmortis]

Yeah. I'm wondering if he's legitimate, or just some punk troll who's trying to see how long he can drag out this thread. Are we being suckered?

Maybe I'd be tempted, if it wasn't for the fact that Jesus sucks.

Damn straight.

If I were a betting man, I'd say that he's genuine. I've known one too many people just like him.

 

[kmortis]

And don't forget Atomic Theory is "just a theory"--and a far more controversial one than evolution by natural selection. (Assuming "controversial" means how many times the basic theory has been challenged and revised to fit observable facts.)

Therefore, I deny the existence of all atomic weapons. The predictions that led to their development were all dependent on atomic theory.

And let's never forget that gravity, as well, is just a theory. We should teach the controversy between Newtonian Gravity and Intelligent Falling.

If he can use Kent Hovind as a source, then I can use the Onion

Not that the Onion is as slimy. At least they admit to being satire.

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

I posted a lengthy response to JF's chick tract teacher/student story concerning hominid fossils and rebutted the Creationist myths about Nebraska man and I see a day and just a few pages later he posts the same Creationist myths about Nebraska Man. I'm not going to waste my time with moronic troll.

Have fun guys.

 

[Eos of the Eons]

I posted a lengthy response to JF's chick tract teacher/student story concerning hominid fossils and rebutted the Creationist myths about Nebraska man and I see a day and just a few pages later he posts the same Creationist myths about Nebraska Man. I'm not going to waste my time with moronic troll.

Have fun guys.

Yeah. No kidding. He doesn't even want to learn, never reasons through the answers presented, and only wants to "win" the debate. Then he can run back to his fundie friends and tell them we couldn't answer any one of his questions, and that we're just a bunch simple "blind beleevers" of evolution.

JF can't even answer my simple question on what he is doing here in the first place.

 

[H3LL]

Before I consign this thread to unsubscribe oblivion I think we should give JF one last chance.

Following the thread (sporadically) it seems abundantly clear both here and in his Bible thread that JF is completely oblivious to what constitutes evidence or a valid scientific method.

We have been a little insensitive and assumed that a person indoctrinated from the pulpit is suddenly going to be aware of the scientific method and what constituted appropriate evidence.

It is reasonable to assume that he is deeply entrenched in his beliefs and that Appeal to Authority is the norm for him.

For example, maybe he fails to understand that even if Darwin wrote twenty books denouncing evolution and claimed all creatures were created last Thursday by a pajama-clad moose, this would have zero impact on the validity of evolution as a theory.

Also evidence is not valid just because it's written down. JF seems to think that any data from one of his creationist websites is equally as valid as data from a scientific source with little understanding of why this is not so.

If you agree and JF does also, I believe it is worth pursuing this notion and attempt a discourse discussing these things. JF can Q&A untill he is clear and then we can move ahead on the OP's of both threads.

JF must be willing and I ask JREF forum members to cut him some slack if he is willing to have a go.

It's up to you Jesus_Freak.....

Thoughts?

.

 

[Victor Meldrew]

At this point I'm curious -- what are we trying to accomplish here? Are we trying to change JF's mind? Educate him? By now, we can see this is futile, as it is clear that (and I say this in all seriousness) he is either mentally ill, or deeply and profoundly stupid, as evidenced by his inability to either comprehend our points, or acknowledge his many errors after they have been pointed out.

The only other thing that I can figure is that we're making sport out of toying with an inadequate intellect. Isn't this just cruelty on our part?

Aw, to hell with that. Schadenfreude is frakkin' FUN.

Bucky, I don't think that JF is necessarily inherentally STUPID. There are people who are mentally backward who can't learn, and there are people who are mentally normal who REFUSE TO LEARN. I think JF falls in the latter category, and to boot, he thinks that if he carries on quoting all the rubbish that he quotes, we will all eventually turn round and say "oh, JF you are so right, and we are so wrong!"

Now, watch him quote the last bit of that last sentence, by itself, as proof that we now all believe in god and disbelieve in evolution.

 

[skeptifem]

you can tell he refuses to read anything you post because so far into the thread he STILL thinks that evolution tries to explain the origin of life. He doesnt care enough to even read and consider the science side of things. I agree that this is a lost cause at this point.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Over 270 ancient civilizations have stories and historic records of The Great Flood...I wonder why that would be?...

But of course this is a lie. This is why you have no evidence for it.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Can you explain please?

Yes, that's a result of actual geology. It could not possibly be explained by the insane lies of fundamentalists. This is why you haven't posted an explanation, and why you never will.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Also am I wrong in assuming that everyone here believes in Macroevolution...meaning a change in species?

Of course we all believe in changes in species --- this has been observed many times, and we are not lunatics in denial of reality.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Mr. Jesus_Freak, please answer my question:

Q: So, you agree that you don't "know" for a certainty what the term "servant" means in Titus 2:9 (Y/N)?

A:My NASB version say "bondslaves" and yes I think that is a direct refernce to slaves.Not sure what this has to do with evolution but nowhere in the New Testament does it condone or condemn slavery

In the New Testament, Jesus compares God to a slave-owner whipping his slaves (Luke 12:47-48 *); who has them tortured (Matthew 18:35 *) and who is prepared to recover a debt by having the debtor's wife and children sold into slavery (Matthew 18:25 *).

 

[ArmillarySphere]

I will add one example of fairly-recent evolutionary adaptation: People with native American ancestry has an inherited sensitivity to alkaloids that those descended from later immigrants lack. The reason is believed to be the high number of poisonous plants and mushrooms containing alkaloids that exist in the New World.

 

[kmortis]

I will add one example of fairly-recent evolutionary adaptation: People with native American ancestry has an inherited sensitivity to alkaloids that those descended from later immigrants lack. The reason is believed to be the high number of poisonous plants and mushrooms containing alkaloids that exist in the New World.

I don't follow this. Are you saying that since there is an increased amount of alkaloid-containing plants in the New World, that the Native Americans have a genetic disposition to be more reactive to those substances.

Alkaloids tend to be quite toxic. So, being more sensitive to them would seem to indicate that the people with that sensitivity would die off easier, and therefore be less and less prevlant in the given population.

Or, is the sensitivity in the sense that the psychoactive portions are more...um...psychoactive, and the toxicity is less pronounced? That would fit your statement. Would be interesting to see a report to this, gotta linky?

 

[UnrepentantSinner]

I think JF is a waste of bandwidth, but Dr. A, I just wanted to make this request - if a thread about evolution is in the Science, etc subforum, can you ignore all apologetical posts by the Creationists and just address their rediculous, bogus long falsified scientific claims? The apologetical tangents just give them more chances to spew their BS.

 

[DangerousBeliefs]

I imagine JF is in church right now...

Or sleeping off the meds...

JF... anybody can put up a website about anything so it's important to CHECK THE SOURCES. You'll find creationist page upon page, many with very professional looking bibliographies but if you actually check them, they're either quoting information which is massively out of date or it's information from another creationist source (which is probably quoting yet another source which is probably quoting something which is massively out of date, out of context, or disproven 30-100 years ago).

This is the best evidence against evolution JF... seriously, evolution is a fact in that we know from the fossil record that it happened (less complex organisms in older strata, moving toward more and more complex as we get to newer strata). And we can see it happening today, especially with advances in genetics. Do you believe scientists are lying when they create a new strain of corn or a new breed of cat?

You may say, well make a corn plant into a cat and then I'll believe! That is not what the theory of evolution is about. The theory deals with how and why species change over time. Changes that we'll see in our lifetimes will at best be small ones for most species, but we do see those changes as well.

 

[Buckaroo]

Bucky, I don't think that JF is necessarily inherentally STUPID. There are people who are mentally backward who can't learn, and there are people who are mentally normal who REFUSE TO LEARN. I think JF falls in the latter category, and to boot, he thinks that if he carries on quoting all the rubbish that he quotes, we will all eventually turn round and say "oh, JF you are so right, and we are so wrong!"

Now, watch him quote the last bit of that last sentence, by itself, as proof that we now all believe in god and disbelieve in evolution.

Point taken, but I would regard a refusal to learn in the face of reality as a form of stupidity.

Yeap, he'll quote it, all right.