Discussion:
Evolution is Science?
(too old to reply)
Apobetics
2007-03-28 21:30:46 UTC
Permalink
Evolution is Science?

Science requires three things:

1. Observation of the facts.
2. Measurability of the facts.
3. Repeatability of the facts.

Evolution cannot provide any of the three.

Therefore evolutionism is just another man made religion...

Evolutionism consists of fairy tales, just so stories, wishful
thinking, science fiction but never 1. 2. 3. facts.

Don't forget to couch your arguments in name calling now...
(which indicates that your have no argument and you have lost).
Steven J.
2007-03-28 22:04:02 UTC
Permalink
Evolutionism is Science?
1. Observation of the facts.
These would be such things, in the case of evolution, as the
consistent nested hierarchy of life (first noted but not explained by
the creationist Linnaeus), the biogeographical distribution of living
and fossil species, the existence of parahomologous (similar
"designs"
for dissimilar functions) and analogous (dissimilar "designs" for
similar functions) organs in living things, faunal succession and
transitional fossils in the fossil record, and so forth. There are a
great mass of facts that fall under these various categories, from,
e.g. the skull ER1470. which some creationists call a "fully-formed
human" and others call a "fully-formed ape" (but which none
acknowledge to be clearly intermediate between human and nonhuman
apes), or shared pseudogenes between humans and other primates. None
of this data is explicable under the assumption of recent separate
creation; some of it (e.g. feathered dinosaur fossils or fossil
whales
with legs) clearly struck creationists as unexpected and in bad
taste.
2. Measurability of the facts.
Sequence similarity between the DNA of different species is quite
measureable, as are rates of change in gene frequency in populations
under different selective regimes, as are both the brain dimensions
of
successive hominid species and the rate of change in brain size over
time, as are quite a lot of features of the data adduced to support
evolution.
3. Repeatability of the facts.
Normally, what scientists ask for is "repeatability of observations."
It's not quite clear what you're asking for with "repeatability of
facts." Do you mean repeating the course of evolution from basal
archosaurs to birds? That was a unique, unrepeatable event, but
then,
so is every arson or homicide investigated with the techniques of
forensic science. Indeed, at a fine enough level of detail, even the
simplest chemistry experiment cannot be repeated perfectly (done with
the same exact atoms at the exact same point in time and space a
second time). On the other hand, mutations are repeatedly
observable,
as is reproduction, inheritance, and the effects of natural
selection. It seems to me that evolutionary theory has
"repeatability
of facts" to the same extent as other sciences.
Evolution cannot provide any of the three.
False, false, and, again, false. You at least have the virtue of
consistency.
Therefore evolutionism is just another man made religion...
Here you are wrong on two counts. First, of course, you are mistaken
or lying about evolutionary theory and the applicability of
scientific
methods to evolutionary questions, as noted above. But even if you
were correct (a conceivable if yet unevidenced state of affairs), an
unscientific claim is not a religious claim. Few mentally normal
people consider that, e.g. astrology or homeopathy are religions.
Karl Popper famously denounced both Marxism and Freudian psychology
as
untestable by scientific standards, yet never suggested that either
was a religious claim or system.

You seem to be assuming that any claim that contradicts a religious
claim is, itself, a religious claim. There are creationists who
insist, on biblical grounds, that the sun orbits the Earth, but this
does not make heliocentric astronomy a religion, "man-made" or
otherwise.
Evolutionism consists of fairy tales, just so stories, wishful
thinking, science fiction but never 1. 2. 3. facts.
Repetition of empty claims does not fill them with evidence. You
really need, if you wish to even begin to make you case, to
elaborate:
which evolutionary claims do you dispute, and how do you deal with
the
evidence offered to support them?
Don't forget to couch your arguments in name calling now...(which
indicates that your have no argument and you have lost).
If you insist. You are a coward, an ignoramus and a poltroon who has
neither the ability nor the inclination to defend his assertions, yet
is offended that they are treated with no more respect that might be
granted any primate hurling his feces about the internet. If you
wish, you may show me mistaken by actually defending your claims and
answering the arguments presented against them; if you do this, I
will
retract my insults (even though, please note, you LITERALLY asked for
it).

-- Steven J.
Phlogeus
2007-03-29 00:28:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steven J.
You are a coward, an ignoramus and a poltroon who has
neither the ability nor the inclination to defend his assertions, yet
is offended that they are treated with no more respect that might be
granted any primate hurling his feces about the internet. If you
wish, you may show me mistaken by actually defending your claims and
answering the arguments presented against them; if you do this, I
will retract my insults (even though, please note, you LITERALLY asked
for it).
Post by Steven J.
-- Steven J.
I would hate to see such an accurate summary of Apo go to waste by being
withdrawn.

Both as IKH and as APO this poster has placed the most appalling garbage
on religious newsgroups - claiming evolution to be a religion (in which
case all evolutionary theorists should be receiving tax breaks ) and
religion to be science. This idiot doesn't know his arse from his elbow

Therefore I happily endorse your comments and am quite prepared to "share
ownership" of them to ensure they are NEVER withdrawn

The man is a mullet.

Your post was excellent and I thank you for it
TimK
2007-03-29 01:01:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Phlogeus
The man is a mullet.
Harsh, but fair;)
TimK
2007-03-28 22:34:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Apobetics
Evolution is Science?
1. Observation of the facts.
2. Measurability of the facts.
3. Repeatability of the facts.
Evolution cannot provide any of the three.
Therefore evolutionism is just another man made religion...
Evolutionism consists of fairy tales, just so stories, wishful
thinking, science fiction but never 1. 2. 3. facts.
Don't forget to couch your arguments in name calling now...
(which indicates that your have no argument and you have lost).
Your concept of what constitutes science is limited to the point of being
incorrect. But I'll play:
The "fact" is that gene frequencies change. That has been observed. Strike
one for you.
Change of gene frequencies has indeed been measured. Strike two for you.
Those measurements were repeated enough to come up with the Hardy Weinberg
equation, to name but one.
Strike three, you are out.
idiot
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-28 23:50:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Apobetics
Evolution is Science?
1. Observation of the facts.
2. Measurability of the facts.
3. Repeatability of the facts.
Evolution cannot provide any of the three.
If it makes you feel better, I'll start by saying that non-theists sound just as ridiculous with their misassumptions about people of faith, on the widest range of topics imaginable. The intellectual landscape for debate in this country is as dry as a fossil bone. For instance, I don't think there's non-theist in the country who realizes that upper middle class white people aren't the only Christian demographic. That being said, I will close by saying this tired old argument you post here doesn't cut it any more. It's time to throw out the old Creation Research Institute text books. While evolution may in fact be a lot of clap trap, it's not for the bogus reasons you listed above. Get some new material. This stuff is a dead end. I've been listening to it for 35 years and it's convinced no one. Why don't you guys do some research and really start hitting 'em where it hurts. Start a "separation of science and state movement." Now there's a good one. Look at the relationship between government funding and bogus science aimed at keeping the cash cow milked.
TimK
2007-03-29 00:28:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Apobetics
Evolution is Science?
1. Observation of the facts.
2. Measurability of the facts.
3. Repeatability of the facts.
Evolution cannot provide any of the three.
While evolution may in fact be a lot of clap trap, it's not for the bogus
reasons you listed above.

Pray tell this dumb biologist why the only theory that makes sense with what
is observed in nature is "clap trap"...
idiot
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 02:26:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
While evolution may in fact be a lot of clap trap, it's not for the bogus
reasons you listed above.
Pray tell this dumb biologist why the only theory that makes sense with
what is observed in nature is "clap trap"...
idiot
I think Phillip Johnson summed it up nicely in Darwin on Trial. Yep, I've
read the critiques of his work too. Science mixed with government IS worse
than religion mixed with government. Evolution per se isn't clap trap.
Just a lot of the bullshit that goes along with the process of science is.
TimK
2007-03-29 12:31:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Jonathan Hartley
While evolution may in fact be a lot of clap trap, it's not for the bogus
reasons you listed above.
Pray tell this dumb biologist why the only theory that makes sense with
what is observed in nature is "clap trap"...
idiot
I think Phillip Johnson summed it up nicely in Darwin on Trial. Yep, I've
read the critiques of his work too. Science mixed with government IS
worse than religion mixed with government. Evolution per se isn't clap
trap. Just a lot of the bullshit that goes along with the process of
science is.
I'm sorry but you're an idiot. You don't know the first fucking thing about
science or how it works. Worse, you don't even understand your own
ignorance.
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 12:36:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by TimK
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Jonathan Hartley
While evolution may in fact be a lot of clap trap, it's not for the
bogus reasons you listed above.
Pray tell this dumb biologist why the only theory that makes sense with
what is observed in nature is "clap trap"...
idiot
I think Phillip Johnson summed it up nicely in Darwin on Trial. Yep,
I've read the critiques of his work too. Science mixed with government
IS worse than religion mixed with government. Evolution per se isn't
clap trap. Just a lot of the bullshit that goes along with the process of
science is.
I'm sorry but you're an idiot. You don't know the first fucking thing
about science or how it works. Worse, you don't even understand your own
ignorance.
Well boy, I bet I can keep pace with your intellect with no problem. I
don't think you know much about the subject either. Fuck you.
Ralph
2007-03-29 13:08:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by TimK
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Jonathan Hartley
While evolution may in fact be a lot of clap trap, it's not for the
bogus reasons you listed above.
Pray tell this dumb biologist why the only theory that makes sense with
what is observed in nature is "clap trap"...
idiot
I think Phillip Johnson summed it up nicely in Darwin on Trial. Yep,
I've read the critiques of his work too. Science mixed with government
IS worse than religion mixed with government. Evolution per se isn't
clap trap. Just a lot of the bullshit that goes along with the process
of science is.
I'm sorry but you're an idiot. You don't know the first fucking thing
about science or how it works. Worse, you don't even understand your own
ignorance.
Well boy, I bet I can keep pace with your intellect with no problem. I
don't think you know much about the subject either. Fuck you.
He certainly knows more than you.
TimK
2007-03-29 13:16:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by TimK
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Jonathan Hartley
While evolution may in fact be a lot of clap trap, it's not for the
bogus reasons you listed above.
Pray tell this dumb biologist why the only theory that makes sense
with what is observed in nature is "clap trap"...
idiot
I think Phillip Johnson summed it up nicely in Darwin on Trial. Yep,
I've read the critiques of his work too. Science mixed with government
IS worse than religion mixed with government. Evolution per se isn't
clap trap. Just a lot of the bullshit that goes along with the process
of science is.
I'm sorry but you're an idiot. You don't know the first fucking thing
about science or how it works. Worse, you don't even understand your
own ignorance.
Well boy, I bet I can keep pace with your intellect with no problem. I
don't think you know much about the subject either. Fuck you.
He certainly knows more than you.
And when you press these dolts for some sort of reason they think science is
crap, the best they can do is cite some junk work like "Darwin on Trial."
Unbelievable.
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 14:53:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by TimK
And when you press these dolts for some sort of reason they think science
is crap, the best they can do is cite some junk work like "Darwin on
Trial." Unbelievable.
Don't worry Tim. We'll let you win. So what books have you published? I'd
love to read them.
TimK
2007-03-29 15:43:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by TimK
And when you press these dolts for some sort of reason they think science
is crap, the best they can do is cite some junk work like "Darwin on
Trial." Unbelievable.
Don't worry Tim. We'll let you win. So what books have you published?
I'd love to read them.
I have Natural History of the Indian River Lagoon in work, and I have
published papers on limnology of ephemeral ponds in Florida, a paper on
archeology, and have two in work for vegetation and geomorphology of
mangrove islands. I'm a doctoral student in science education and work in
aerospace.
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 16:36:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by TimK
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by TimK
And when you press these dolts for some sort of reason they think
science is crap, the best they can do is cite some junk work like
"Darwin on Trial." Unbelievable.
Don't worry Tim. We'll let you win. So what books have you published?
I'd love to read them.
I have Natural History of the Indian River Lagoon in work, and I have
published papers on limnology of ephemeral ponds in Florida, a paper on
archeology, and have two in work for vegetation and geomorphology of
mangrove islands. I'm a doctoral student in science education and work in
aerospace.
Sure. I'd love to read them. How about the relevant info. Or, email me a
copy. Also, anything you have written on debate tactics or "winning people
to my point of view." No, I'm serious, where's the papers?
TimK
2007-03-29 16:46:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by TimK
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by TimK
And when you press these dolts for some sort of reason they think
science is crap, the best they can do is cite some junk work like
"Darwin on Trial." Unbelievable.
Don't worry Tim. We'll let you win. So what books have you published?
I'd love to read them.
I have Natural History of the Indian River Lagoon in work, and I have
published papers on limnology of ephemeral ponds in Florida, a paper on
archeology, and have two in work for vegetation and geomorphology of
mangrove islands. I'm a doctoral student in science education and work
in aerospace.
Sure. I'd love to read them. How about the relevant info. Or, email me
a copy. Also, anything you have written on debate tactics or "winning
people to my point of view." No, I'm serious, where's the papers?
I told you about them you can call me a liar if you like - I notice no cites
from you, nothing to back up your ignorant views. You have nothing to say.
Enjoy your darkness.
<plonk>
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 17:08:25 UTC
Permalink
"TimK" <***@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message news:460bed6a$1$17145$***@roadrunner.com...

Tim! You are a flamer! Who did you file that limnology paper with? I'd
love to read it. You never asked me for cites Timmy. You didn't need them.
You didn't ask me for my views. You had it all figured out. But hey, if
you regret being so immediately hostile, I'll take you on in an intellectual
pissing match. See, I think you are a 15 year old kid who doesn't have a
job and you're a flamer. Aren't you?
Post by TimK
I told you about them you can call me a liar if you like - I notice no
cites from you, nothing to back up your ignorant views. You have nothing
to say. Enjoy your darkness.
<plonk>
Ralph
2007-03-29 17:33:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Tim! You are a flamer! Who did you file that limnology paper with? I'd
love to read it. You never asked me for cites Timmy. You didn't need
them. You didn't ask me for my views. You had it all figured out. But
hey, if you regret being so immediately hostile, I'll take you on in an
intellectual pissing match. See, I think you are a 15 year old kid who
doesn't have a job and you're a flamer. Aren't you?
And I think you are full of shit, but that is only my opinion and we all
know about opinions and assholes, don't we Johnny?
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 17:45:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph
And I think you are full of shit, but that is only my opinion and we all
know about opinions and assholes, don't we Johnny?
Ralphy! The quadruple whammy! I bet this foursome of posts will sound
identical, won't they! Have a lollipop! Change into a dry diaper! Relax!
I bet you hate every minute of this trivial argument, when you'd much rather
be reading a good dissertation on something scientific in a non-religious
newsgroup category.
Ralph
2007-03-29 18:10:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Ralph
And I think you are full of shit, but that is only my opinion and we all
know about opinions and assholes, don't we Johnny?
Ralphy! The quadruple whammy! I bet this foursome of posts will sound
identical, won't they! Have a lollipop! Change into a dry diaper! Relax!
I bet you hate every minute of this trivial argument, when you'd much
rather be reading a good dissertation on something scientific in a
non-religious newsgroup category.
I can't think of anything I would rather do than respond to your trolling.
Got lots of time on my hands and this acts as therapy for me. Been dealing
with assholes like you for ten years on Usenet and in case you think I will
just go away you need to check my history :-).
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 18:21:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph
I can't think of anything I would rather do than respond to your trolling.
Got lots of time on my hands and this acts as therapy for me. Been dealing
with assholes like you for ten years on Usenet and in case you think I
will just go away you need to check my history :-).
No Ralph, checking your history is pointless. I believe you will persist
because you really are an idiot. Ten Years? Dude, you should be shot
between the eyes and put out of your misery. Tell me the truth. Have you
ever had sex with a human female? A real human female, who wasn't employed
for the purpose of sex? I'm bored with you Ralph. I'm going to block your
posts from showing up on me monitor screen. Why shouldn't I? I mean, if I
want to see useless spuge on the screen, I'll throw a plate of spaghetti on
it. Bye bye dum dum
Ralph
2007-03-29 19:44:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Ralph
I can't think of anything I would rather do than respond to your
trolling. Got lots of time on my hands and this acts as therapy for me.
Been dealing with assholes like you for ten years on Usenet and in case
you think I will just go away you need to check my history :-).
No Ralph, checking your history is pointless. I believe you will persist
because you really are an idiot. Ten Years? Dude, you should be shot
between the eyes and put out of your misery. Tell me the truth. Have you
ever had sex with a human female? A real human female, who wasn't
employed for the purpose of sex? I'm bored with you Ralph. I'm going to
block your posts from showing up on me monitor screen. Why shouldn't I?
I mean, if I want to see useless spuge on the screen, I'll throw a plate
of spaghetti on it. Bye bye dum dum
Didn't take long to get rid of that fool.
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 14:50:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph
He certainly knows more than you.
Wow. You really got me with that one. Give yourself a big high five,
science groupee.
TimK
2007-03-29 15:43:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Ralph
He certainly knows more than you.
Wow. You really got me with that one. Give yourself a big high five,
science groupee.
You've actually said *nothing* in support of your position so I'm about to
write you off as a fuckwit troll.
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 16:53:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by TimK
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Ralph
He certainly knows more than you.
Wow. You really got me with that one. Give yourself a big high five,
science groupee.
You've actually said *nothing* in support of your position so I'm about to
write you off as a fuckwit troll.
Right. You didn't give me the chance. A better strategy is to give your
opponent enough rope to hang him or herself. Don't be so rabid.
Emotionalism betrays a lack of confidence. See, I didn't go after you with
the old "God only made the universe look old to test our faith" argument.
I'm not a fundie. I'm an agnostic who is interested in exploring the truth.
You are, after all, posting on religious newsgroups. You should expect to
be hearing dissent. There is absolutely no proof in either direction for
the existence of God, Timmy. You have to accept the fact that, if God
exists.... notice that I said IF.... then you put yourself in a position
that isn't really necessary. Namely, to deal with the following question,
"IF God exists, does it mean evolution is wrong?" "If God exists, is
science made worthless?" You set the equation up to be a win-lose
proposition, when it really is a non-sequitar issue.

And noone has the corner on this question Tim. Being a biologist doesn't
make one a good philosopher. "Darwin on Trial" contained some errors, but
it is on the whole a book that raises valid questions. You would do well
to realize that Christianity in America is exactly what most things are:
shallow, pop-culturized and highly individualized. Do you realize that 90
percent of Christians have never read the Bible? And, when I watch atheists
respond to them, I see equivalent stupidity.
Ralph
2007-03-29 17:33:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Ralph
He certainly knows more than you.
Wow. You really got me with that one. Give yourself a big high five,
science groupee.
Obvious from your posts how little you know.
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 17:46:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Ralph
He certainly knows more than you.
Wow. You really got me with that one. Give yourself a big high five,
science groupee.
Obvious from your posts how little you know.
ATTENTION: This is a tit for tat posting number two from Ralphy, the
science groupy.

My response: Oh? You've read them all?
Ralph
2007-03-29 18:12:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Ralph
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Ralph
He certainly knows more than you.
Wow. You really got me with that one. Give yourself a big high five,
science groupee.
Obvious from your posts how little you know.
ATTENTION: This is a tit for tat posting number two from Ralphy, the
science groupy.
My response: Oh? You've read them all?
All that are on the record Johnny, I just get your profile and pull up your
meager posts in both quality and content. Unless you are one of my defeated
opponents drifting back under a nym, you would be just a babe in the woods.
TimK
2007-03-29 13:14:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by TimK
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Jonathan Hartley
While evolution may in fact be a lot of clap trap, it's not for the
bogus reasons you listed above.
Pray tell this dumb biologist why the only theory that makes sense with
what is observed in nature is "clap trap"...
idiot
I think Phillip Johnson summed it up nicely in Darwin on Trial. Yep,
I've read the critiques of his work too. Science mixed with government
IS worse than religion mixed with government. Evolution per se isn't
clap trap. Just a lot of the bullshit that goes along with the process
of science is.
I'm sorry but you're an idiot. You don't know the first fucking thing
about science or how it works. Worse, you don't even understand your own
ignorance.
Well boy, I bet I can keep pace with your intellect with no problem. I
don't think you know much about the subject either. Fuck you.
If you're going to tell everyone what a load of crap science is, you might
want to choose another medium. Using electrons pretty much pegs you as
stooopid.
How do people as dumb as you manage to get dressed in the morning...
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 14:55:05 UTC
Permalink
"TimK" <***@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message news:460bbbc6$1$18933$***@roadrunner.com...

Okay Tim. Maybe I'll move over to the religion boards. What a minute...
I'm already there. You're a fraud Tim. Bye.
Post by TimK
If you're going to tell everyone what a load of crap science is, you might
want to choose another medium. Using electrons pretty much pegs you as
stooopid.
How do people as dumb as you manage to get dressed in the morning...
TimK
2007-03-29 15:44:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Okay Tim. Maybe I'll move over to the religion boards. What a minute...
I'm already there. You're a fraud Tim. Bye.
I'm a "fraud" because you claim so. nice
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 16:54:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by TimK
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Okay Tim. Maybe I'll move over to the religion boards. What a minute...
I'm already there. You're a fraud Tim. Bye.
I'm a "fraud" because you claim so. nice
You've got to be able to take it Timmy, when you dish it out. Logic is a
hallmark of intelligence.
Ralph
2007-03-29 17:36:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by TimK
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Okay Tim. Maybe I'll move over to the religion boards. What a
minute... I'm already there. You're a fraud Tim. Bye.
I'm a "fraud" because you claim so. nice
You've got to be able to take it Timmy, when you dish it out. Logic is a
hallmark of intelligence.
That is why we know you aren't intelligent. If and when you post something
of substance we will reply to it. Meanwhile it is a fun game of I piss, you
piss.
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 17:47:59 UTC
Permalink
"Ralph" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:yOSOh.9139$***@bignews1.bellsouth.net...

The only substance you've seen is in the bottom of a deep fat fryer, Ralphy.
I'll take my burger with extra onions please.
Post by Ralph
That is why we know you aren't intelligent. If and when you post something
of substance we will reply to it. Meanwhile it is a fun game of I piss,
you piss.
Ralph
2007-03-29 18:14:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
The only substance you've seen is in the bottom of a deep fat fryer,
Ralphy. I'll take my burger with extra onions please.
Post by Ralph
That is why we know you aren't intelligent. If and when you post
something of substance we will reply to it. Meanwhile it is a fun game of
I piss, you piss.
Gee, a top posting asshole and it was only a three line post. Come on
Johnny, surely you are that lazy and worthless.
Mike Henry
2007-03-29 14:57:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by TimK
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Jonathan Hartley
While evolution may in fact be a lot of clap trap, it's not for the
bogus reasons you listed above.
Pray tell this dumb biologist why the only theory that makes sense with
what is observed in nature is "clap trap"...
idiot
I think Phillip Johnson summed it up nicely in Darwin on Trial. Yep,
I've read the critiques of his work too. Science mixed with government
IS worse than religion mixed with government. Evolution per se isn't
clap trap. Just a lot of the bullshit that goes along with the process
of science is.
I'm sorry but you're an idiot. You don't know the first fucking thing
about science or how it works. Worse, you don't even understand your own
ignorance.
Well boy, I bet I can keep pace with your intellect with no problem. I
don't think you know much about the subject either. Fuck you.
If you can't stand a flame don't cross-post to alt.talk.creationism

--
Geo. Michael Henry
"And one of the hot topics for me is the number of Christian atheists who
are fully committed to living
according to the teachings of Jesus, but unwilling to accept the idea of
God."
TimK
2007-03-29 16:05:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Henry
If you can't stand a flame don't cross-post to alt.talk.creationism
No doubt - that's all this place is - flames.
Post by Mike Henry
Geo. Michael Henry
"And one of the hot topics for me is the number of Christian atheists who
are fully committed to living
according to the teachings of Jesus, but unwilling to accept the idea of
God."
Nice quote. One needn't believe all that associated nonsense to feel that
Christ, as a philosopher, was an OK guy.
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 16:58:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by TimK
No doubt - that's all this place is - flames.
So, put a stop to it Tim. I'm ready to hear you offer some rebuttals on top
of the critiques already offered on Phillip Johnson.
Ralph
2007-03-29 17:38:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by TimK
No doubt - that's all this place is - flames.
So, put a stop to it Tim. I'm ready to hear you offer some rebuttals on
top of the critiques already offered on Phillip Johnson.
You could be a tad more specific there, Johnny old boy.
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 17:50:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by TimK
No doubt - that's all this place is - flames.
So, put a stop to it Tim. I'm ready to hear you offer some rebuttals on
top of the critiques already offered on Phillip Johnson.
You could be a tad more specific there, Johnny old boy.
Could I now Ralphy? Well, I bet you're giving yourself a big pat on the
back right now as you tighten the trucks on your skateboard. Is this the
last of the "postings of doom" from you? Or, are you moving on to a good
book on astrophysics now?
Ralph
2007-03-29 18:16:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Ralph
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by TimK
No doubt - that's all this place is - flames.
So, put a stop to it Tim. I'm ready to hear you offer some rebuttals on
top of the critiques already offered on Phillip Johnson.
You could be a tad more specific there, Johnny old boy.
Could I now Ralphy? Well, I bet you're giving yourself a big pat on the
back right now as you tighten the trucks on your skateboard. Is this the
last of the "postings of doom" from you? Or, are you moving on to a good
book on astrophysics now?
Actually my 'Astronomy' magazine for this month just came and I am looking
forward to reading the special they have on cosmology this month. Check with
your teacher and see if your 'Weekly Reader' has anything on cosmology this
week.
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 16:56:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Henry
If you can't stand a flame don't cross-post to alt.talk.creationism
I take it you are the moderator? Otherwise, why get involved. Why not ask
the narrow minded evolutionist why he is posting on alt.talk.creationist if
he only wants the flames to go one way.
Ralph
2007-03-29 17:39:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Mike Henry
If you can't stand a flame don't cross-post to alt.talk.creationism
I take it you are the moderator? Otherwise, why get involved. Why not
ask the narrow minded evolutionist why he is posting on
alt.talk.creationist if he only wants the flames to go one way.
There are no moderators here, jerk face.
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 17:54:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Mike Henry
If you can't stand a flame don't cross-post to alt.talk.creationism
I take it you are the moderator? Otherwise, why get involved. Why not
ask the narrow minded evolutionist why he is posting on
alt.talk.creationist if he only wants the flames to go one way.
There are no moderators here, jerk face.
Hey Ralphy....

"jerk face" Wow, give yourself a high five for that put down, Jim Carrey.
I bet you cooked that one in the microwave for a few minutes, because it
HURT bad.
I knew you couldn't quit with the last four failures. Still waiting for
some intelligent conversation....and you are welcome to watch.
Ralph
2007-03-29 18:18:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Ralph
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Mike Henry
If you can't stand a flame don't cross-post to alt.talk.creationism
I take it you are the moderator? Otherwise, why get involved. Why not
ask the narrow minded evolutionist why he is posting on
alt.talk.creationist if he only wants the flames to go one way.
There are no moderators here, jerk face.
Hey Ralphy....
"jerk face" Wow, give yourself a high five for that put down, Jim Carrey.
I bet you cooked that one in the microwave for a few minutes, because it
HURT bad.
I knew you couldn't quit with the last four failures. Still waiting for
some intelligent conversation....and you are welcome to watch.
If you ever make a post that has any salient points we could have a
conversation, but unfortunately that will never happen.
Wombat
2007-03-29 10:32:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Apobetics
Evolution is Science?
1. Observation of the facts.
2. Measurability of the facts.
3. Repeatability of the facts.
Evolution cannot provide any of the three.
If it makes you feel better, I'll start by saying that non-theists sound just as ridiculous with their misassumptions about people of faith, on the widest range of topics imaginable. The intellectual landscape for debate in this country is as dry as a fossil bone. For instance, I don't think there's non-theist in the country who realizes that upper middle class white people aren't the only Christian demographic. That being said, I will close by saying this tired old argument you post here doesn't cut it any more. It's time to throw out the old Creation Research Institute text books. While evolution may in fact be a lot of clap trap, it's not for the bogus reasons you listed above. Get some new material. This stuff is a dead end. I've been listening to it for 35 years and it's convinced no one. Why don't you guys do some research and really start hitting 'em where it hurts. Start a "separation of science and state movement." Now there's a good one. Look at the relationship between government funding and bogus science aimed at keeping the cash cow milked.
"This country" - do you think A.T.C. is for US consumption only?

Wombat
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 12:41:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wombat
"This country" - do you think A.T.C. is for US consumption only?
Wombat
So, you're a catty little faggot, aren't you? Give yourself a high five,
Ace Ventura.
Mike Henry
2007-03-29 15:03:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Wombat
"This country" - do you think A.T.C. is for US consumption only?
Wombat
So, you're a catty little faggot, aren't you? Give yourself a high five,
Ace Ventura.
<PLONK>

--
Geo. Michael Henry
"And one of the hot topics for me is the number of Christian atheists who
are fully committed to living
according to the teachings of Jesus, but unwilling to accept the idea of
God."
Wombat
2007-03-29 16:20:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Wombat
"This country" - do you think A.T.C. is for US consumption only?
Wombat
So, you're a catty little faggot, aren't you? Give yourself a high five,
Ace Ventura.
I made a reasonably polite comment that ATC is a worldwide forum and
you clearly lost your cool.
I suggest you take a remedial course in reading comprehension and a
simple lesson in courtesy. My cat is more polite than you and faggots
are nice served with gravy from a fish-and-chip shop.

Wombat
TimK
2007-03-29 16:27:07 UTC
Permalink
... and faggots are nice served with gravy from a fish-and-chip shop.
I had the pleasure in Stansted England... good stuff that!
Jonathan Hartley
2007-03-29 15:06:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wombat
"This country" - do you think A.T.C. is for US consumption only?
Wombat
So, you're a catty little faggot, aren't you? Give yourself a high five,
Ace Ventura.
SeppoP
2007-03-29 15:20:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Wombat
"This country" - do you think A.T.C. is for US consumption only?
Wombat
So, you're a catty little faggot, aren't you? Give yourself a high five,
Ace Ventura.
So, Jonathan, you're a self-confessed brainless prick, aren't you?
--
Seppo P.
What's wrong with Theocracy? (a Finnish Taliban, Oct 1, 2005)
TimK
2007-03-29 15:44:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jonathan Hartley
Post by Wombat
"This country" - do you think A.T.C. is for US consumption only?
Wombat
So, you're a catty little faggot, aren't you? Give yourself a high five,
Ace Ventura.
pussy
cactus
2007-03-28 23:58:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Apobetics
Evolution is Science?
1. Observation of the facts.
2. Measurability of the facts.
3. Repeatability of the facts.
Evolution cannot provide any of the three.
You are an ignorant liar. Evolutionary theory provides all three.
Evolution is the change in gene frequency over time.

This has been observed.
It can be quantified.
It has been observed and repeated in both lab (e.g. with fruit flies)
and in the field.
Post by Apobetics
Therefore evolutionism is just another man made religion...
Like Christianity, except that giving credence to evolutionary theory is
not religious in nature.
Post by Apobetics
Evolutionism consists of fairy tales, just so stories, wishful
thinking, science fiction but never 1. 2. 3. facts.
You describe your, and any, religion perfectly. Science and evolutionary
theory are not religions, so the description does not apply.
Post by Apobetics
Don't forget to couch your arguments in name calling now...
(which indicates that your have no argument and you have lost).
I'm not calling you names, or even describing you, let alone telling you
what I really think of you. Sorry to disappoint you, but this means I WIN!
Gary Eickmeier
2007-03-29 17:07:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Apobetics
Evolution is Science?
1. Observation of the facts.
2. Measurability of the facts.
3. Repeatability of the facts.
Evolution cannot provide any of the three.
Must be a troll, because Apobetics hasn't reappeared in his own thread
to answer any of this. Yet I wonder what thrill there is in trolling if
you don't read it afterward.

GAry Eickmeier
cactus
2007-03-29 19:37:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gary Eickmeier
Post by Apobetics
Evolution is Science?
1. Observation of the facts.
2. Measurability of the facts.
3. Repeatability of the facts.
Evolution cannot provide any of the three.
Must be a troll, because Apobetics hasn't reappeared in his own thread
to answer any of this. Yet I wonder what thrill there is in trolling if
you don't read it afterward.
GAry Eickmeier
This is a sock puppet for IKnowHimDoYou, who has been posting the same
drivel for a long time. He actually has responded on occasion, but for
the most part is as you describe him, a driveby-posting troll.
Gary Eickmeier
2007-03-30 17:03:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by cactus
Post by Gary Eickmeier
Post by Apobetics
Evolution is Science?
1. Observation of the facts.
2. Measurability of the facts.
3. Repeatability of the facts.
Evolution cannot provide any of the three.
Must be a troll, because Apobetics hasn't reappeared in his own thread
to answer any of this. Yet I wonder what thrill there is in trolling
if you don't read it afterward.
GAry Eickmeier
This is a sock puppet for IKnowHimDoYou, who has been posting the same
drivel for a long time. He actually has responded on occasion, but for
the most part is as you describe him, a driveby-posting troll.
So why are people answering to his threads???

Gary Eickmeier
John Baker
2007-03-31 19:12:03 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 13:03:18 -0400, Gary Eickmeier
Post by Gary Eickmeier
Post by cactus
Post by Gary Eickmeier
Post by Apobetics
Evolution is Science?
1. Observation of the facts.
2. Measurability of the facts.
3. Repeatability of the facts.
Evolution cannot provide any of the three.
Must be a troll, because Apobetics hasn't reappeared in his own thread
to answer any of this. Yet I wonder what thrill there is in trolling
if you don't read it afterward.
GAry Eickmeier
This is a sock puppet for IKnowHimDoYou, who has been posting the same
drivel for a long time. He actually has responded on occasion, but for
the most part is as you describe him, a driveby-posting troll.
So why are people answering to his threads???
I guess it's just that primitive part of us that can't resist taunting
the village idiot.
Post by Gary Eickmeier
Gary Eickmeier
Gary Eickmeier
2007-04-01 03:26:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Baker
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 13:03:18 -0400, Gary Eickmeier
Post by Gary Eickmeier
So why are people answering to his threads???
I guess it's just that primitive part of us that can't resist taunting
the village idiot.
HE'S NOT READING ANY OF IT AND CERTAINLY NOT RESPONDING TO YOUR COMMENTS.

Gary Eickmeier

Dave Oldridge
2007-03-29 21:05:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Apobetics
Evolution is Science?
1. Observation of the facts.
2. Measurability of the facts.
Uh, actually they don't need to be measurable so much as observable.
Post by Apobetics
3. Repeatability of the facts.
Or of the observations of them.
Post by Apobetics
Evolution cannot provide any of the three.
More lies. Does your father in hell reward you by the lie or do you have
to wait until you're dead to get your reward. What DID he promise you,
anyway and why aren't you suspicious of a guy who insists that YOU must
lie for him?
--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...