The Lorax Posted March 6, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 183 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 1,892 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/24/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/07/1985 Author Share Posted March 6, 2007 (edited) What is your problem with using the ToE and Darwinism interchangeably I have 4 problems: (1) I have a problem with dishonesty. If I said "TOE", don't say I said "Darwinism." That's untrue. (2) The TOE is a scientific term. "Darwinism" is colloquial and ambiguous. (3) DIFFERENT MEANINGS. In the past, you have weaseled abiogenesis into your definition of Darwinism. The TOE, however, does not include abiogenesis or any origin theory. So when you switch them, you have altered my arguments. (4) Your integrity. If you can't address an argument in its original wording and context, you are a hack. I don't waste my time with hacks. Is this reason enough for you to stop putting words in my mouth? and who are you to warn me on how to post? Do you have some type of delusional grandeur disorder? When you put words in my mouth, I will correct you. And what exactly is your "actual argument" - you apear to say much but mean little. Read the post. Everyone else has been able to understand it. Darwinism is a term for the underlying theory in those ideas of Charles Darwin concerning evolution and natural selection. ~ Wikipedia ...And you have, in the past, claimed it includes abiogenesis. Edited March 6, 2007 by Angry Dragons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lorax Posted March 6, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 183 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 1,892 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/24/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/07/1985 Author Share Posted March 6, 2007 (edited) Oh, you're right. I must be delusional to expect something so grandiose as a debate in which my arguments are taken for what they are, not reworded as a straw man you can handle. Edited March 6, 2007 by Angry Dragons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lorax Posted March 6, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 183 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 1,892 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/24/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/07/1985 Author Share Posted March 6, 2007 It amazes me you were able to pull 8 questions out of that one line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lorax Posted March 6, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 183 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 1,892 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/24/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/07/1985 Author Share Posted March 6, 2007 Go ahead, do your worst. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 Thank You Dear Brother Go ahead, do your worst. Fundamentally Speaking "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." (Genesis 1:27) All men are brothers! There is only one race of man! How about that Science Fiction fans! Fundamentally Speaking "And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:" "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." (Genesis 2:16-17) Man was perfect! There was no death! How about that Science Fiction fans! Fundamentally Speaking "And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat." (Genesis 3:6) Perfect man fell! The earth was cursed with death! How about that Science Fiction fans! Fundamentally Speaking "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;" (Romans 3:23) All men are now sinners. How about that Science Fiction fans! Fundamentally Speaking "But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me love death." (Proverbs 8:36) All men hate God! All men love death! How about that Science Fiction fans! Fundamentally Speaking "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." (Romans 6:23) All men stand under a death sentence! All men are offered a free pardon! How about that Science Fiction fans! Fundamentally Speaking "..... Ye must be born again." (John 3:3) There is a new creation! Miracles still happen! How about that Science Fiction fans! Fundamentally Speaking "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16) "Why art thou cast down, O my soul? and why art thou disquieted within me? hope in God: for I shall yet praise him, who is the health of my countenance, and my God." (Psalms 43:5) Fundamentally Speaking Love, Joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lorax Posted March 6, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 183 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 1,892 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/24/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/07/1985 Author Share Posted March 6, 2007 (edited) Horizoneast, all he was saying was that the racism in those times was not limited to Darwinists and it still isn't today. Yep. Blaming racism on Darwinism is like blaming murder on gun manufacturers. Any tool can be misused. Racism is not limited to just white people mistreating black people. However, when someone points that out, they are immediately labelled a racist!! Sad but true. This really bothers me too. I went to a diverse college (~40% non-white) and I'm reminded of their skewed policy on racism. "Racism is racial discrimination backed by an institution." They defined racism in such a way that white people cannot be the victims of racism, and if they are, it's not called racism. Every sensible person knows that any act of discrimination based on race is, by definition, racist. I'm pretty sure my school redefined the term so they wouldn't have to admit affirmative action is a racist policy. Edited March 6, 2007 by Angry Dragons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dakota190 Posted March 6, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 97 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 640 Content Per Day: 0.10 Reputation: 4 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/14/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted March 6, 2007 The monkey could type randomly forever and forever, and still never type any consecutive string that is a sonnet at all, much less a specific piece by Shakespear. First you are rounding an infinitesimal to 0, then you are underestimating forever. Assuming there is no reason why any particular string of letters of a given length is any less likely than any other, then, given an infinite amount of time, the complete works of shakespear WILL be written. And they will be written an infinite many times. And they will be written with one letter wrong an infinite many times etc etc etc. Of course, if you have your little monkey going on this project, there is no garuntee that at any time when you check on him, he will have written anything legible, no matter how long you wait. In fact, you can't check on him at all, because doing so applies a finite time constraint, no matter when you do it (you can't check on him after forever, because forever hasn't elapsed yet and it never will). not that i expect for any nonbeliever to believe anything that would admit to God, because that would mean they were responsible for their own actions. without the existance of God they could comfortably behave in any way they wish and could not be held accountable. they would have to admit, right and wrong, evil and good, are not relative. they are a constant, unmutable, unchanging. however, these words from Dr. Duane T. Gish, Ph.D. "There were no human witnesses to the origin of life, and no physical geological evidence of its origin exists. speaking of the origin of a hypothetical self replicating molecule and its structure, Pross has recently admitted that "The simple answer is we do not know, and we may never know." later concerning the question of the origin of such a molecule, Pross said, "...one might facetiously rephrase the question as follows: given an effectively unknown reaction conditions, reacting to give unknown products by unknown mechanisms, could a particular product with a specific characteristic... have been included amongst the reaction products? that pretty well summarizes the extent of the progress evolutionists have made toward establishing a mechanistic, atheistic scenario for the origin of life after more than half a century of physical, chemical and geological research. it is possible, however, to derive facts that establish beyond doubt that an evolutionary origin of life on this planet would have been IMPOSSIBLE. the origin of life could only have resulted from the action of an intelligent agent external to and independent of the natural universe. listed below are only a few of the insuperable barriers to an evolutionary origin of life. 1. the absence of the required atmosphere- evolutionists persist there was no oxygen in the earths early atmosphere. however, that would be fatal to an evolutionary origin of life. (look it up) 2. all forms of raw energy are destructive- "the rates of destruction of biological molecules by all sources of raw energy vastly exceed their rates of formation by such energy."" early raw energy consists of primarily radiation from the sun, witrh some energy from electrical discharges (lightening) and minor sources of energy from radioactive decay and heat. (remember, in an atmosphere without oxygen, see above) 3. an evolutionary scenario for the origin of life would result in an incredible clutter. (you'll have to look this one up, it is too lengthy to list here) 4. micromolecules do not spontaneously combine to form macromolecules. 5. DNA could not survive without repair mechanisms. this information came from "the institute for creation research" www.icr.org instead of debating this on nonsense levels look it up and get the facts. nonbelievers can disbelieve anything they wish that does not change reality. what is, is,and will remain so. they are wrong but will not see it or at least admit it until forced to do so and maybe not even then. but, that is God's job, all we are required to do is inform them. that we have done! over and over! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oh Hamburgers! Posted March 6, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 10 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,144 Content Per Day: 0.34 Reputation: 163 Days Won: 1 Joined: 02/02/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/05/1985 Share Posted March 6, 2007 I think that Darwinism is not a racist theory by nature, but rather it was used as a political means to advocate racism in earlier times. You can still be a Darwinist and disagree with some of those who used it as a tool to assert white supremacy. It's kinda similar to how religion can sometimes be used for evil, ala the Crusades. Christianity isn't evil by nature, yet ideas were drawn from it and used as a medium to inspire death. Therefore some results of the Crusades were evil, yet the religion it was drawn from was not. In the same way, I think that Darwinism was used by some to inspire hatred, but the theory itself is not a racist one. Sorry, just had to stick my nose in. Carry on Go back and read the works of Darwin. He plainly laid out the levels of advancement of the races. That doesn't matter, there is plenty of information to be derived from Darwinism, evolution isn't a "racist" theory, just the notion that different races are superior is. I don't care what Darwin's views were, that doesn't make the entire idea of Darwinism a "racist" idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Lorax Posted March 6, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 183 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 1,892 Content Per Day: 0.30 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 02/24/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/07/1985 Author Share Posted March 6, 2007 (edited) Darwinian Evolutionary theory drove Hitler's murderous actions. No. Hitler's murderous actions were driven by hatred. He only attempted to justify them by misusing evolutionary ideas. Racist. Modern evolutionists will not say the black race is inferior to the white race, they say the black race is older than the white race. Wrong. Scientists no longer use the concept of "race" at all. Race is not a valid biological category, and it is no longer used in the life sciences. Geneticists have even proved the idea of race false. http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/sc...etics-race.html Same thing, older equals inferior in evolutionary theory. Evolution is a racist theory, and those who hold to it are advocating a theory that says black man is inferior to white man. Wow. Wrong again. Like "race", "inferiority" and "superiority" aren't evolutionary concepts either. The closest idea would be fitness. In evolutionary ecology, a species' fitness is based on how well it is adapted to its particular ecological niche. But with fitness, no single species can be strictly "inferior" or "superior" to another one--they can't be, because no two species share the exact same niche. These concepts that you are describing don't even exist anywhere in the life sciences. It really sounds more like you've gotten science lessons from Hitler. Darwin held that the black man was inferior to the white man. His entire theory is racist. If Einstein had been racist, would his theory of relativity be racist? You know those atheists who come in here and insult Christianity when they clearly don't know a thing about it? You are behaving exactly as they are, only about evolution. Please, before you continue blabbing about science, get educated in it. Edited March 6, 2007 by Angry Dragons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hatsoff Posted March 6, 2007 Group: Nonbeliever Followers: 0 Topic Count: 5 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 107 Content Per Day: 0.02 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 10/09/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted March 6, 2007 You keep jumping into the proverbial snares. You again showed where modern evolutionists have totally re-written the theory to avoid its orig. problems. The hilarious thing is that you do not even know what your own theory has taught throughout its life. Hitlers hate was fueled by his racism, not his racism by his hate. The theory of evolution is simply not racist. Science does not hold, nor has it ever, that black people are somehow inferior to whites. That's just silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts