Darwinist
- Started
- Last post
- 592 Responses
- Gilt0010
I am the walrus, coo coo ka choo
- JazX0
where do you see yourself in five years?
uberdesigner
(Jan 5 06, 01:41)on the timeline? 5 years older.
geologically? on planet Earth.
spiritually? richer than you.
position? missionary, but still willing to experiment.
spongebob
(Jan 5 06, 01:55)
- xenicon0
extinction supports creationism?
oxymoron
- Baskerville0
kuz, I refuse to accept (macro) evolution because there is not a shred of scientific evidence to support it...
Nothing religious about that.
discipler
(Jan 5 06, 07:50)_____________________________
What I find strange is that a person who is obviously so caught up in his religious beliefs (I assume from the name discilper that he is religious) will on one hand believe in god with absolutely no evidence just blind faith to go on, but then on the other hand say (as above):
"I refuse to believe xyz because there is no proof to back it up"
must be strange to have such an inconsistent and illogical mind.
- Mimio0
...or parasitism, predator/prey food chains, to think those relationships were intentionally engineered is sadistic.
- Gilt0010
Wait a minute... created Adam out of mud 10,000 years ago??? Where would that put the dinosaurs??
- mrdobolina0
I am sorry I am not a scientist, I cant debate against discipler in scientific terms about something that he has obviously studied incredibly, right or wrong.
But dont get it twisted, this debate is all about god.
Discipler believes that the christian god is the designer. He has stated this in the past when I asked him and now he dances around it ALWAYS.
God is the elephant in the room that he never talks about anymore because it messes up his argument. He has learned this from past debates on this subject.
He talks about science incessantly, but then brings up things like the "uncaused-cause". Please explain to me the scientific basis of the uncaused cause.
ID is the trojan horse to inject religion into the public schools. This is why religious leaders are behind this.
- KuzII0
aye...
*breathes a sigh
- discipler0
Rubbish, kelpie. First off, no one is certain of the earth's age. The scientific evidence is thoroughly inconclusive, based on Carbon dating and Potassium Argon dating and the inconsistencies of the Geologic Column. It is also inconclusive Biblically, since the word "day" (yom in Hebrew) can mean an undisclosed period of time. This why both Young Earth and Old Earth Creationists exist. And frankly, it's a secondary issue. And why are you mentioning the 2nd law of Thermodynamics? Which simply states that the universe, both open and closed systems, are running out of useful energy - things deteriorate. So, I don't follow why you would say I'm an "anti" scientist. I'm not a scientist at all.
You ask what the "point" is if there was at some point a designer to spark things into motion. Well, the point is to let people know that this is the direction which science is pointing, and to let people know that the Darwinian Narritive is not an established fact, hardly. And to get people to consider the philosophical implications of both. Either we were created for purpose, or we are cosmic accident. Where does the evidence point?
- JazX0
Sure, the Great Flood of Noah for one.
- tkmeister0
i am peter pan. i can fly!
- Anarchitect0
"It's the fact that people are applying long overdue scrutiny to Darwinism that it's coming up short."
obscure blogs and interest groups
!=
scrutiny
- kelpie0
cosmic accident. clearly.
- Rand0
sorry, wrong thread
- gramme0
I lied about my identity. I am Wes Mantooth.
And that's the news.
- JazX0
*pokes head back into thread
ehhhh....
- discipler0
Yeah, the geolic column is a strange thing. In many places it would indicated a gradualistic development over a long period of time, but in other places it's the opposite. In places, we find layers that should be at the bottom, located at the top along with fossils that "should" be at the bottom, from a naturalistic perspective. We find fish and invertibrate fossils on mountaintops and fossils of animals in the throes of conflict and giving birth - indicating something catastrophic happened. We also see fossils which go thru more than one layer which would indicate sudden catastrophe.
- kelpie0
hey, I'm back - cheers for posting that Kuz, I was going to buy it last night but decided to place my faith in your inability to let anything slide ever ;)
please post the rest, please.
Para: I know a safe house in Renfrewshire if you need it. Oh damn I just said where it was. bugger. best of luck fighting the international lawmen. Don't go on any unmarked planes with guys in black suits and shades
- discipler0
geolic = geologic
- discipler0
kelpie, the burden is with you to show me where i've been inconsistent in the application of my position.