No you didn't. But let's get back to the topic.
Please tell me about the books you have studied that present the scientific case for evolution.
Evolution or Creation Poll
by Vanderhoven7 81 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
slimboyfat
Well it could have been written more clearly, but I understood what he meant, and you are only half quoting what he wrote, missing the end of his sentence and changing the meaning:
“half of the number of forum members believe in special creation rather than the theory of evolution”.
-
cofty
Evolution-deniers are motivated by a commitment to biblical literalism (or the quran) and not by an honest and objective consideration of the facts.
Almost all evolution deniers are wilfully ignorant of the facts - and proud of it.
There is no conspiracy of scientists to undermine Genesis, fame and riches awaits any scientist who could show it was wrong. The vast majority of xtians have no problem accepting the fact of evolution.
-
Vanderhoven7
<<But let's get back to the topic. Please tell me about the books you have studied that present the scientific case for evolution.>>
How many books I've read is not the topic. Neither is how many books you have read against evolution. This line of questioning reminds me of the JWs who ask where I get my information about them. I tell them that the information I get can come from the devil himself if it is true.
Let me show you how to get back to the topic. What I have done thus far on this thread is to report on the poll results, state that I do not believe in microbe to man evolution and posted videos with findings that need to be critiqued.
For example:
Why do you think not one of the university students interviewed in the first video could support that their belief in evolution amounted to more than faith? They certainly had faith in their professors. Do you think perhaps they might not have read the right number of books?
In the second video, do you support the answers given by the professor to the simplistic questions asked? Do you agree with his closing assertion as to what he had to say was "Science"?
In the third video, how do you respond to Meyer's claim that random mutations in the genetic code could not mathematically amount to anything significant?
-
Vanderhoven7
<<Vandy with all due respect even my year 8 kids could answer the multiple choice questions posed in the video (the two sitting at the desk). I'm absolutely gobsmacked that adults can hold such an event and think it does anything but make the questioner look foolish.>>
Yes, and the fact that the professor treated some of the questions seriously and attempted to answer them made him look equally foolish.
-
Earnest
What I find most interesting about this poll is that almost 31% of those who have voted believe in "special creation". I would not have expected so high a number based on participation in the many threads on the subject of evolution.
I think the assertion that those who deny all species evolved from a single cell over/within 3.5 billion years are "not motivated by an honest and objective consideration of the facts" is far too sweeping. The same could be said of those who maintain all species evolved from a single cell and would be just as true.
It would be interesting to have polls on other matters so people can express their honest views without having to identify themselves and be subject to opprobrium.
-
cofty
The same could be said of those who maintain all species evolved from a single cell and would be just as true.- Earnest
I don't agree Earnest. We were all die-hard creationists once. I was proud of my ability to 'destroy' evolutionists. I knew everything that could be known about creationists arguments.
I would have asserted that I knew about evolution but that was dishonest. My only source of information about evolution was from writers who were rejected evolution. When I actually studied the subject from science books - literally dozens of books over many years - I discovered how ignorant &/or dishonest creationist authors are.
It is not easy to admit one of your foundational beliefs are wrong. The default position is to ignore actual scientific sources and cherry-pick creationist websites and YouTube videos that reinforce your ignorance. And of course they have not a clue how facile the arguments are that so impress them because they don't know the science - through choice.
So no, there is no comparison in intellectual rigour and honesty between creationists who reject evolution, despite admitting never having read a single science book in their entire lives, and exJWs who have done the work and follow the evidence.
One is motivated by fear and dogma, the other by curiosity and a love of learning.
I have posted 40 threads of evidence for evolution, every one of them entirely in my own words based on countless hours of research and backed up by peer-reviewed papers. Creationists ignore them, post copy-paste and YouTube videos and pretend they are engaging in honest debate.
Debating a creationist is like accepting a challenge against a bull in a china shop. He gets ten minutes to rampage and then you get ten minutes to put it all back together again.
-
cofty
How many books I've read is not the topic. Neither is how many books you have read against evolution. This line of questioning reminds me of the JWs who ask where I get my information about them. I tell them that the information I get can come from the devil himself if it is true. - Vander
Actually it is absolutely the topic.
Truth is not a popularity contest. It's interesting that 16 forum members reject evolution but until they have done the work of studying the science their opinions have no bearing on what it actually true. They are nothing but expressions of religious dogma.
And no it's nothing like a JW asking you where you got your information from at all. Imagine you go up to a JW and tell them that you 'know' all sorts of outlandish things about the organisation's beliefs. He asks you where you got these ideas from and you tell him you heard it on the internet. He asks if you have ever read any WT books, browsed the official website or even had a conversation with a JW. You admit that you have not but you trust the internet. THAT is what is like.
And just for the record, I have read many, many creationist books and articles. I doubt there is a creationist argument I haven't heard. I know both sides of the debate. You admit to holding an unassailable belief despite knowing only your own side.
Let me show you how to get back to the topic. What I have done thus far on this thread is to report on the poll results, state that I do not believe in microbe to man evolution and posted videos with findings that need to be critiqued.
No your videos don't 'need' to be critiqued. If they contain any interesting arguments why not present those in your own words and I will happily discuss them with you. I could post a thousand videos and so could you. It will get us nowhere.
-
hooberus
Cofty wrote:
I have posted 40 threads of evidence for evolution, every one of them entirely in my own words based on countless hours of research and backed up by peer-reviewed papers.
Its interesting how much your early threads parallel articles from the “talk origins” pro evolution site. You never credit talk origins in your opening thread posts.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section4.html#protein_redundancy
Even some of the titles and order are similar:
“Protein functional redundancy” talk origins
(“Protein Finctional Redundancy”) Cofty
”DNA coding redundancy” talk origins
(“DNA Functional Redundancy”) Cofty
Your diagram for your ERV thread looks lifted from the talk origins article too.
No credit sited.
-
Finkelstein
I think it disingenuous and intellectually dishonest when creationist cite " Darwin's theory of Evolution " and then break it down from him and his basic knowledge, when in reality there have been much more over the years to support it in tests, pieces of evidence, newly formed sciences from a wide number of Universities and peer review endeavors over the past 100 + years.
All of these sciences support each other such as the Earth's own geological evolution, the evidences in outer space and its evolutionary change in time evaluation. .
Did the ancients have this knowledge in hand ? of course not and thats why they expressed their mythological expressions, such as the ancient Hebrews in creating their own Genesis account.
Human ignorance of the world in which we live is an indefensible fact , accept it with intellectual honesty. .