hooberus

Joined

• started 119 topics
• posted 2,517 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by hooberus

• 
  22

  From ape to man via genetic meltdown: a theory in crisis

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  review of genetic entropy and the mystery of the human genome.

  http://creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/tj/j21_1/j21_1_43-47.pdf.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  Articles like the one posted by hooberus read like an emotional appeal to the "faithful" not to leave their belief in God. There's a hook in that bait, and yet you expect me to swallow it. I'm afraid you'll have to do better than that.
  
  Dave

  I think that even most of the review dealt with scientific facts related to evolutionist claims, rather than "emotional" appeals. However if you need more consider getting the book (a recent version is available from www.icr.org).

  I think that the book easily demonstrates (in a clear presentation) that continued belief in the "primary axiom" of darwinism requires emotional faith in spite of evidence.

  hooberus
• 
  22

  From ape to man via genetic meltdown: a theory in crisis

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  review of genetic entropy and the mystery of the human genome.

  http://creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/tj/j21_1/j21_1_43-47.pdf.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  Basic error: change is not degradation.

  But what if the "change" is several harmful (as in information robbing) mutations in each individual in each generation?

  Would you not call that degradation?
• 
  22

  From ape to man via genetic meltdown: a theory in crisis

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  review of genetic entropy and the mystery of the human genome.

  http://creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/tj/j21_1/j21_1_43-47.pdf.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  Review of Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Human Genome

  http://creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/tj/j21_1/j21_1_43-47.pdf
• 
  15

  Evolutionists Flock To Darwin-Shaped Wall Stain

  by BurnTheShips in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it's a miracle!.

  evolutionists flock to darwin-shaped wall stainseptember 5, 2008 | issue 4436. darwinic pilgrims claim the image fills them with an overwhelming feeling of logic.. dayton, tna steady stream of devoted evolutionists continued to gather in this small tennessee town today to witness what many believe is an image of charles darwinauthor of the origin of species and founder of the modern evolutionary movementmade manifest on a concrete wall in downtown dayton.. "i brought my baby to touch the wall, so that the power of darwin can purify her genetic makeup of undesirable inherited traits," said darlene freiberg, one among a growing crowd assembled here to see the mysterious stain, which appeared last monday on one side of the rhea county courthouse.

  the building was also the location of the famed "scopes monkey trial" and is widely considered one of darwinism's holiest sites.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  From the previous link (from a JWD evolutionary dogmatist).

  So design is not an acceptable alternative to chance in this case, as it just regresses to it. Is there an alternative explanation that might do? Yes there is. Darwin and Wallace's theory of natural selection - the nonrandom survival of random variations - provides a ladder that can explain all the complexity and apparent design we see in the natural world. It is such a beautiful and powerful theory that it inspires an almost religious awe in those who appreciate its strength. And it is, of course, supported by a huge amount of evidence from various fields. It can be used to make accurate testable predictions about the world. Without it, biology would be nothing but lists of facts, rather than the captivating subject it is.
• 
  15

  Evolutionists Flock To Darwin-Shaped Wall Stain

  by BurnTheShips in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it's a miracle!.

  evolutionists flock to darwin-shaped wall stainseptember 5, 2008 | issue 4436. darwinic pilgrims claim the image fills them with an overwhelming feeling of logic.. dayton, tna steady stream of devoted evolutionists continued to gather in this small tennessee town today to witness what many believe is an image of charles darwinauthor of the origin of species and founder of the modern evolutionary movementmade manifest on a concrete wall in downtown dayton.. "i brought my baby to touch the wall, so that the power of darwin can purify her genetic makeup of undesirable inherited traits," said darlene freiberg, one among a growing crowd assembled here to see the mysterious stain, which appeared last monday on one side of the rhea county courthouse.

  the building was also the location of the famed "scopes monkey trial" and is widely considered one of darwinism's holiest sites.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/122660/2286378/post.ashx#2286378
• 
  44

  How to Debate an Evolutionist (if you must)

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  this thread is primarily directed to biblical creationists and other non-evolutionists here (as such no or limited responses will be given to evolutionist posts here).

  please if you are a non-evolutionist attempt to refrain from debating evolutionists here on this thread, as they will likely try to derail any learning, or exposure of their tactics.

  i will try to avoid debating here but instead posting information in a series of posts.. i consider myself to be an informed biblical creationist and probably one of more experienced creation/evolution issue debaters to have been on this forum.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  Hooberus - even if you conceed that man decends from "ancient apes" not "modern apes" - your premise is still flawed. See my post above. Evolution does not declare that changes occur to every descendant equally and that all of one thing transform into all of another. In fact it says the exact opposite. Without diverse environmental impacts on different siblings, we would not have the diverse forms of life that we have. There is nothing to dictate how long one certain set of characteristics will stay around in one branch. If chimps are well suited to the jungle, and the jungle environment has been consistent, then we would EXPECT the ones that remained in that environment to not have changed much. Their evolution HAS given them different traits from their ancestors, like increased strength, agility, and limited social skills. Whereas our branch of the family must have had a much different environment in which abstract thought and communication were the skills necessary to survive.

  The fact that something similar to our ancestors still are alive is not a valid argument. It is a strawman falicy. I'm trying to help you hone your arguments because they're so uninformed at the moment it's not even interresting replying. A more informed debate would definitly be appreciated.

  To which of my specific comments are your referring? As far as I recall on this subject I have only been dealing with the specific issue of whether or not the alleged common ancestor of humans and modern apes was himself also an ape (albeit somehwat different from modern apes). Where did I even make the other arguments that you try to rebut?
• 
  44

  How to Debate an Evolutionist (if you must)

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  this thread is primarily directed to biblical creationists and other non-evolutionists here (as such no or limited responses will be given to evolutionist posts here).

  please if you are a non-evolutionist attempt to refrain from debating evolutionists here on this thread, as they will likely try to derail any learning, or exposure of their tactics.

  i will try to avoid debating here but instead posting information in a series of posts.. i consider myself to be an informed biblical creationist and probably one of more experienced creation/evolution issue debaters to have been on this forum.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  Back to the subject: If you are a non-evolutionist debating an evolutionist on the subject of man, I would recommend using reasonably qualified terminology such as "evolution teaches that people descended from lower animals such as ancient apes." Then if you are charged with error or "ignorance" by an evolutionist [though you shouldn't be -since you post was clear] point out that you said "ancient apes" not modern apes. If they still continue to deny that evolution teaches that people came from apes post the information here (especialy from George Gaylord Simpson).
• 
  44

  How to Debate an Evolutionist (if you must)

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  this thread is primarily directed to biblical creationists and other non-evolutionists here (as such no or limited responses will be given to evolutionist posts here).

  please if you are a non-evolutionist attempt to refrain from debating evolutionists here on this thread, as they will likely try to derail any learning, or exposure of their tactics.

  i will try to avoid debating here but instead posting information in a series of posts.. i consider myself to be an informed biblical creationist and probably one of more experienced creation/evolution issue debaters to have been on this forum.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  Though Darwin did state "But we must not fall into the error of supposing that the early progenitor of the whole Simian stock, including man, was identical with, or even closely resembled, any existing ape or monkey", he did however (immediately prior) admit that "The Catarrhine and Platyrrhine monkeys agree in a multitude of characters, as is shewn by their unquestionably belonging to one and the same Order. The many characters which they possess in common can hardly have been independently acquired by so many distinct species; so that these characters must have been inherited. But a naturalist would undoubtedly have ranked as an ape or a monkey, an ancient form which possessed many characters common to the Catarrhine and Platyrrhine monkeys, other characters in an intermediate condition, and some few, perhaps, distinct from those now found in either group. And as man from a genealogical point of view belongs to the Catarrhine or Old World stock, we must conclude, however much the conclusion may revolt our pride, that our early progenitors would have been properly thus designated. (16. Haeckel has come to this same conclusion. See 'Uber die Entstehung des Menschengeschlechts,' in Virchow's 'Sammlung. gemein. wissen. Vortrage,' 1868, s. 61. Also his 'Naturliche Schopfungsgeschicte,' 1868, in which he gives in detail his views on the genealogy of man.)" The Descent of Man

  http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/darwin/descent/dom09.htm
• 
  44

  How to Debate an Evolutionist (if you must)

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  this thread is primarily directed to biblical creationists and other non-evolutionists here (as such no or limited responses will be given to evolutionist posts here).

  please if you are a non-evolutionist attempt to refrain from debating evolutionists here on this thread, as they will likely try to derail any learning, or exposure of their tactics.

  i will try to avoid debating here but instead posting information in a series of posts.. i consider myself to be an informed biblical creationist and probably one of more experienced creation/evolution issue debaters to have been on this forum.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  Evolutionary theory teaches that in the distant past, humans and modern great apes had a common ancestor that shared some traits similar to modern apes and some traits similar to modern humans.

  The alleged common ancestor of humans and modern apes was even more "primitive" than the modern apes which supposedly descended from it. Therefore what (non-modern ape) specific "traits similar to modern humans" could such a creature have possessed?
• 
  44

  How to Debate an Evolutionist (if you must)

  by hooberus in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  this thread is primarily directed to biblical creationists and other non-evolutionists here (as such no or limited responses will be given to evolutionist posts here).

  please if you are a non-evolutionist attempt to refrain from debating evolutionists here on this thread, as they will likely try to derail any learning, or exposure of their tactics.

  i will try to avoid debating here but instead posting information in a series of posts.. i consider myself to be an informed biblical creationist and probably one of more experienced creation/evolution issue debaters to have been on this forum.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  hooberus

  I understand your desire for this to be a debate tutorial and not a debate thread in itself, so let me just correct you on this. Evolution doesn't teach that people came from apes. Trying to argue this point with an evolutionist will immediately show you as someone that is ignorant of the subject.

  See Simpson quote later added to my previous post.