WrongPlanet.net an anti-christian site?

Post Reply New Topic

@Inuyasha

Did you learn your opinions about evolution from Glenn Beck? They are wrong, like it or not. The difference between your opinions and mine on this subject is I can present physical evidence to support my view, and that same evidence falsifies your view, like it or not.

As for macroevolution: many of what you call "bridge" species have been found that show the transition from one type of creature to another, such as from fish to land animals, from dinosaurs to birds, and from apes to human. Look up "transitional fossils" on wikipedia for some examples.

Yes of course dog breeds differ significantly from a cat, but about forty or fifty million years ago they had a common ancestor. Since they have split apart from a common ancestor so long ago, it is ridiculous to think that a dog could ever give birth to a cat, or vice versa, yet that is what some creationists claim would be "proof" of evolution. Your argument about single mutations and such creating a new species seems confused. Of course it takes more than one change in one individual organism for a group of creatures to diverge enough from their parent species to be considered a new species , but it is populations that evolve, not individuals. I thought I explained that in a recent post in this thread.

Your post is exactly what I'm talking about: when someone is so very wrong about something like evolution that has SO MUCH proof of so many different types that clearly show it happens, that lessens their credibility on any subject. Basically, if they are so out of touch with reality, and so gullible to swallow lies so easily proven false, it shows limitations either in their intelligence or reasoning skills. That is why I will always vote against any political candidate who thinks teaching creationism in science classrooms is a good idea. Besides spreading lies, what they propose is harmful to America and to humanity.

@TheBicyclingGuitarist:

I am sure you have seen my above quotes of TallyMan's posts, and this is the very kind of thing I am personally hoping we can all work together and reduce even more here on WP:

My apologies to anyone I offended, especially AngelRho, Inuyasha, and leejosepho.

As is evident, I have quite strong feelings on this subject. While I may have been wrong in how I presented my opinions, I stand by them nonetheless. And for those who disagree, ask yourselves why is it that in a dozen major court challenges to evolution the past forty years or so the creationists have never, not once, been able to present ANY scientific data that either supports their position or falsifies evolution.

In a recent post, I gave specific examples of the falsehoods spread by creationists and how one can easily check these out for oneself. If you want to believe the earth is flat, or whatever, more power to you. In some ways I envy your faith. I can no longer believe the earth is flat, and I'm sorry if some people get offended when I tell them there is lots of evidence it isn't flat after all.

Actually.. I agree with TBG here... Perhaps he could have said it differently, but I think he had to say it to get his meaning across.. Bible-believers worry for our soul and can't seem to understand why we don't view the Bible as truth. We get frustrated when it's presented as truth and not simply ideology... But that view that you have of us not believing the Bible, that's the same that we have for those who can't acknowledge the proofs of science. The Bible is unsubstantiated, science has been proven time and time again. You think it's scary and unbelievable that we can't place faith in something intangible, we think you're crazy for stubbornly denying the concrete proofs of science.
When we have "debates" about the Bible.. You tell us how wrong we are for not interpreting it right, but expect us to sit back silently when you dispute science with incorrect information.
It's just as frustrating for us as it is for you.

Amen - but with a qualifier.

'Science' is an ongoing project and regularly disproves itself, that is part of it's occaisional beauty. Unfortunately rligions are generally somewhat less self critical and opting for heresy trials akin to that which Lloyd Geering went through with the prespetarian church here in Aotearoa/NZ in the late 60's. He attempted to update the christian faith by denying the resurection, christs especial divinity and even the conventional concept of the existence of god while still claiming to be christian [endeavouring to live in a 'christ' like way].

peace j