Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 03-07-2002, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by randman:
Originally posted by randman:
By the way, how about this guy? Paul Chien
<a href="http://www.discovery.org/crsc/fellows/PaulChien/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.discovery.org/crsc/fellows/PaulChien/index.html</a>

..

How about him? He is a marine biologist, not a paleontologist, who seems to have ignored evolution until he started teaching, and then started accumulating evidence against it. His motivation is religious, not scientific (except for some vague statements about evolution not making sense to him.)

See this interview with him <a href="http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9701/chien.html" target="_blank">here.</a> He says there "I wouldn't use scientific findings as evidence to support Biblical creation."

Kosh · 03-07-2002, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by randman:
Originally posted by randman:
By the way, how about this guy? Paul Chien
<a href="http://www.discovery.org/crsc/fellows/PaulChien/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.discovery.org/crsc/fellows/PaulChien/index.html</a>

Kosh, you ignorantly claim no evolutionary biologist has ever supported creationism/ID. I give you a name, then you say, hey, I can give you thousands more. Tell you what buddy. Go ahead and find 10,000 names.
Kosh, if you are really so convinced of evolution, why do you resort to lies to defend it?
Obviously, a great many scientists including biologists embrace ID. Moreover, I think paleontology has more pertinent relevance concerning evolution than biology in terms of proving or disproving it. It is hard for me to beleive you are past about 15 years of age.

Well, once again you're showing us your lack of
thoroughness. You're mistaking me with another
poster again. Please try to keep track
of who you're talking to.

YOu also seem to have a somewhat narrow perspective on things. LIke last night when I
posted my plans for the rest of the evening,
you assumed it was too late for my wife.
At that time it was what, 1 am in Florida? But
of course on the west coast, it was only
10 pm. Not too late for adults. This simply
underscores how you don't do your homework before
shooting your mouth off.....

RufusAtticus · 03-07-2002, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by randman:
Originally posted by randman:
By the way, how about this guy? Paul Chien
<a href="http://www.discovery.org/crsc/fellows/PaulChien/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.discovery.org/crsc/fellows/PaulChien/index.html</a>

Kosh, you ignorantly claim no evolutionary biologist has ever supported creationism/ID. I give you a name, then you say, hey, I can give you thousands more. Tell you what buddy. Go ahead and find 10,000 names.
Kosh, if you are really so convinced of evolution, why do you resort to lies to defend it?
Obviously, a great many scientists including biologists embrace ID. Moreover, I think paleontology has more pertinent relevance concerning evolution than biology in terms of proving or disproving it. It is hard for me to beleive you are past about 15 years of age.

If you are refering to my challenge, then you haven't met it. I specifically stated evolutionary biologist. From the your link, it appears that Chein is a developmental biologist, which is not what I asked for. Would you even know an evolutionary biologist if one read Futyuma to you?

By the way, citing obscure members of the ID camp is not compelling, since IDist differ widly on thier opinions of evolution. Some like Behe and Denton are evolutionists and disagree with abiogenesis. Other's like Wells are staunch anti-evolutionists. Unless you provide more information, I don't even know where Chein falls. Nevertheless, it'll still be irrevelant since he is a developmental biologist and not an evolutionary biologist. Would you care to try again?

By the way, how about answering my challenge in this thread. <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=000367" target="_blank">http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=000367</a>

-RvFvS

Vorkosigan · 03-07-2002, 07:24 PM

randman, it's really time. Put up the best argument for the Flood from AiG. Answer some of the questions.

Michael

randman · 03-08-2002, 05:28 AM

Guys, I am not going to waste hours with you over AIG articles. I was taught evolution so I can debate that. I made the comment that ya'll seemed to be avoiding their best arguments, and when I have some time, I will show you some articles that I think are interesting, but personally, until creationism is taught in the schools, you cannot expect people to know much about it.
Evolution though has been taught, and it has relied on disinformation and propoganda tactics to maintain a predominance, and I don't see that as good science. If evolution were to turn out to be true, it's proponents would have doen it a great diservice by teaching so many distortions. One such distortion was stating the fossil record proved evolution when in fact, the fossil record showe dthe exact opposite. Most species exhibit stasis. It is only when one assumes species evolved, that species that appear fully-formed can be considered "transitinal."

Kosh · 03-08-2002, 05:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by randman:
 but personally, until creationism is taught in the schools, you cannot expect people to know much about it.

Anybody remember Father Guido Sarducci's
"5 minute college"? I think we could squeeze
Genesis 1&2 in there somewhere....

Yeah that's it Randman, we just haven't been
edumacated on the "Godidit" mechanism...

Kevin Dorner · 03-08-2002, 06:25 AM

randman: I notice that you are still posting in other threads, avoiding <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=000370" target="_blank">this thread</a>. You claimed to need until this weekend to research, yet still have enough time to respond here.

To other posters here, if possible please avoid responding to randman with anything other than a referral to <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=000370" target="_blank">this thread</a> until he responds to it properly, to give him less opportunities to avoid it.

randman · 03-08-2002, 03:57 PM

And what is it about this thread that you want responded to.
1. Do you wish to offer an explanation and admit to the fact that evolutionary transitions are not actually seen in the fossil record?
2. Do you care to remark on "stasis" as what species exhibit in the fossil record?
3. Or, are you going to show me an article in one of the peer-reviewed publications that refutes gentry's findings? That was what I asked for, but noone could do that.
Interesting that you could not.

BY the way, I choose what I respond to not you.
If you don't like it, try and get another critic of evolution to post here and keep up with 20 other posters, many of whom dodge the issue with deception and raise new points demanding to be heard.

RufusAtticus · 03-08-2002, 05:22 PM

I'll start responding to your questions, after you explain "kinds" to me in this other thread and the questions contained within?

<a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=000367" target="_blank">http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=000367</a>

It seems to me that you are incapable of defending you notion of biology. Why do you persist in holding it then?

-RvFvS

[ March 08, 2002: Message edited by: RufusAtticus ]

Kevin Dorner · 03-08-2002, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by randman:
BY the way, I choose what I respond to not you.

Oh, we figured that out. Mostly you choose to not respond to <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=000370" target="_blank">anything where you have been backed into a corner.</a>

03-08-2002, 05:22 PM	#59
RufusAtticus Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NCSU Posts: 5,853	I'll start responding to your questions, after you explain "kinds" to me in this other thread and the questions contained within? <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=000367" target="_blank">http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=000367</a> It seems to me that you are incapable of defending you notion of biology. Why do you persist in holding it then? -RvFvS [ March 08, 2002: Message edited by: RufusAtticus ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-07-2002, 07:24 PM	#54
Vorkosigan Contributor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Barrayar Posts: 11,866	randman, it's really time. Put up the best argument for the Flood from AiG. Answer some of the questions. Michael

03-08-2002, 05:28 AM	#55
randman Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 333	Guys, I am not going to waste hours with you over AIG articles. I was taught evolution so I can debate that. I made the comment that ya'll seemed to be avoiding their best arguments, and when I have some time, I will show you some articles that I think are interesting, but personally, until creationism is taught in the schools, you cannot expect people to know much about it. Evolution though has been taught, and it has relied on disinformation and propoganda tactics to maintain a predominance, and I don't see that as good science. If evolution were to turn out to be true, it's proponents would have doen it a great diservice by teaching so many distortions. One such distortion was stating the fossil record proved evolution when in fact, the fossil record showe dthe exact opposite. Most species exhibit stasis. It is only when one assumes species evolved, that species that appear fully-formed can be considered "transitinal."

03-08-2002, 06:25 AM	#57
Kevin Dorner Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada Posts: 762	randman: I notice that you are still posting in other threads, avoiding <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=000370" target="_blank">this thread</a>. You claimed to need until this weekend to research, yet still have enough time to respond here. To other posters here, if possible please avoid responding to randman with anything other than a referral to <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=000370" target="_blank">this thread</a> until he responds to it properly, to give him less opportunities to avoid it.

03-08-2002, 03:57 PM	#58
randman Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 333	And what is it about this thread that you want responded to. 1. Do you wish to offer an explanation and admit to the fact that evolutionary transitions are not actually seen in the fossil record? 2. Do you care to remark on "stasis" as what species exhibit in the fossil record? 3. Or, are you going to show me an article in one of the peer-reviewed publications that refutes gentry's findings? That was what I asked for, but noone could do that. Interesting that you could not. BY the way, I choose what I respond to not you. If you don't like it, try and get another critic of evolution to post here and keep up with 20 other posters, many of whom dodge the issue with deception and raise new points demanding to be heard.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.