Evolutionist Caught in a Lie (page 3)

Terry

Maybe this is just the opinion of a semi-uneducated american,
But, I was wondering if there was anyone else out there that simply doesn't care?

That is a VERY IMPORTANT question, actually.

The people who shape our world also shape our lives. We are touched in every way by agendas, beliefs, policies and protocols culled from religious views. How much man-handling will we tolerate? How long can we stay neutral without losing our grasp on a life worth living since it is others who fashion our enviorns?

It seems to me that the best defense to the ideology of others is FACT and DATA. Otherwise, we are statistically vulnerable because of the snippets of factoid parading as data.

Our children are shaped by their school experiences and what they teach in schools is politically sensitive. If we, as parents (for example) don't arm our children with knowledge about the propaganda parading as fact they are likely through pressure to succumb.

In my very own case I was victimized by my own indifference!

When I met my best friend, Johnny, in the 6th grade I was completely indifferent to the Bible, Evolution or religion. I had, however, been taught that the Bible was the word of God.

When Johnny began asking questions and provoking discussions I had NO DATA to thwart him. I was vulnerable to his seemingly plausible and logical description of what this "word of God" was actually all about.

Stop! Ask yourself (as I have asked myself) if my vulnerability would have been possible if I had taken the trouble to investigate the origins of Jehovah's Witnesses or even the sources of scripture?

If the Terry of today could mysteriously appear to argue with the Johnny of yesterday, do you think I or he would still be JW's? I wasted almost 20 years of my life just because I didn't have the facts at my disposal and a means of expressing them in an effective counter-argument.

Millions of JW's were once vulnerable and tepid people who were overwhelmed by the purported powerhouse logic of Watchtower reasonings. They were fence-sitting. JW's knocked them off the fence!

So, my answer to your question (above) is that neutrality is very very dangerous about either religion or politics or science for that matter.

It is our personal responsibility to ourselves to be as informed as humanly possible.

Search out the sources for opinions parading as fact. Be aware when you are manipulated. Watch out for insidious policies "for your own good" fashioned by ideologues.

The result might change your life.

hawkaw

Well said running man and heathen please start reading with an open mind to understand how science works.

BTW a scientist needs "facts" that are observable. A scientific theory explains the "facts".

One other point I noted. Someone stated the following regarding the grand canyon:

No Way it is made up of Granite Rock that could not have eroded in 40 day's I don't care how much water went over it.

If memory serves I thought it was made up of sandstone bedrock. Sandstone is a sedimentary rock that consists of sand textured sized particules has have been "cemented" with either silca mineral (quartz) or a calcium mineral (Calcite). Sedimentary rock forms when sediments (eg. cobbles, sand, silt and/or clay), deep within the earth undergo extreme pressure and heat. These sediments get deep within the earth due to tens to hundreds of thousands of years of deposition. Sandstone is usually a very hard type of bedrock.

Interestingly and if memory serves, at the very bottom of the grand canyon you will find metamorphic and igneous bedrock of the Canadian Shield. Some igneous rock of the Canadian Shield can be plutonic in nature and thus, forming Granite. The Canadian Shield is primarily exposed to the earth's surface in northern Manitoba, middle to northern Ontario, Quebec and part of the Northeasten U.S. States thanks to the four glaciation events over the last 120,000 years or so.

Either way the so-called great flood would not have caused the grand canyon erosion process.

hawk.

Terry

No facts are known, as of yet, that anyone has found anything new

NEW?

What has "new" got to do with evolution????

Slight changes which turn out to be advantageous is what it is all about.

NEW is a question of context ultimately.

I am different from my most distant ancestors as you are to yours.

The religious view is that our ancestors were SUPERIOR to us!

Utter poppycock.

Strange how we inferior devolved decendants of perfect humans seem to have all the advantages while they scratched fleas and lice off their germ-laden bodies as they scrambled for a way to avoid devils and appease local gods.

the_classicist

Evolution, in terms of genetic change and improvement, is definitely proven.

Neo-Darwinism is debatable. Macroevolutionary jumps (hopeful monsters) would certainly explain the gaps in evolution, but I think the Darwinist school of thought has already thrown out this hypothesis (there was a good reason too, but I forget it).

hawkaw

I though maybe the following may help:

Scientific theories are validated by empirical testing against physical observations. Theories are not judged simply by their logical compatibility with the available data. Independent empirical testability is the hallmark of science—in science, an explanation must not only be compatible with the observed data, it must also be testable. By "testable" we mean that the hypothesis makes predictions about what observable evidence would be consistent and what would be incompatible with the hypothesis. Simple compatibility, in itself, is insufficient as scientific evidence, because all physical observations are consistent with an infinite number of unscientific conjectures. Furthermore, a scientific explanation must make risky predictions— the predictions should be necessary if the theory is correct, and few other theories should make the same necessary predictions.

Source: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

skyman

Yes not all the rocks are Granite but alot are look at Google Grand Canyon National Park - Nature & Science
The Grand Canyon’s excellent display of layered rock is invaluable in unraveling the
... Three “Granite Gorges” expose crystalline rocks formed during the ...
www.nps.gov/grca/pphtml/subnaturalfeatures14.html - 33k - Aug 2, 2005 -

heathen

I would be interested in seeing this evidence of life forms mutating into higher life forms in the laboratory , so if you could just produce the evidence . and don't give me the tadpol growing into a frog crap either ....... I'm not here to convert anybody because I don't practice religion but still believe in a creator .As far as how was God created is a kinda moronic question tho .

Quotes

Heathen, friend, if you stopped rolling your eyes long enough to read any of the multiple sources already pointed out, you would have your answer.

Of course, if you haven't bothered to do your own homework, and insist on being spoon-fed, I don't expect you to learn anything from my post -- please go back to rolling your eyes, and imagine that because you haven't allowed yourself to see the ample evidence that you are wrong, then you must be right.

For the benefit of those who want to learn, please see "Observed Instances of Speciation" http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html (especially section 5.0 Observed Instances of Speciation) or "Some More Observed Speciation Events" http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html

~Quotes, of the "Loves a good eye roll" class

Quotes

"As far as how was God created is a kinda moronic question tho"

--- um, why is it "moronic"???

The point is: those who hide their creationist fantasy with the politically correct term "Intelligent Design" argue thusly: anything and everything which is complex and/or intelligent must have an intelligent "designer". Humans, for example, are far, far too complex and intelligent to not have a "designer", therefore they must have been designed (by god).

So this begs the question: if everything complex and/or intelligent MUST have a "designer", then what about god? He/she/it must be orders of magnitude more complex and more intelligent than us puny humans; therefore god must have his/her/its own creator, which is, in turn, orders of magnitude more complex & intelligent that what we call god. Repeat ad infinitum.

See? The entire "Intelligent Design" argument collapses in under the weight of its own illogic.

Now, don't get me wrong. I agree with you, if what you are saying is that any mention of "god", as a scientific explanation for anything, since the end of the Dark Ages, *IS* moronic. But the point is: I.D. fans really have to play by the rules of they game that they made. And that is not moronic, it is only fair.

ithinkisee

Heathen,

You shouldn't even make the comments you do - if you aren't gonna read the sources people quoted. I just learned a helluva a lot on theory vs fact by the links they just posted.

So I guess in some ways your ignorance and unwillingness to listen helped me out.

-ithinkisee

Evolutionist Caught in a Lie

Share this