Evolutionists Dogmatic like WTS?

Gedanken

jrizo in a thread of mine on Kangaroos and that seems to have vanished posted these remarks in response to points made by AlanF:

AlanF: Pomegranate's mind is a fine example of the intellectual desert in which almost all creationists live. Evidence is presented and they discount it with a few inanities and misquotations. They refuse to provide evidence in support of their beliefs. They refuse to acknowledge that their beliefs are entirely based on emotion, not fact. I have rarely seen a better example of this, well, "mentality" (for lack of a better word) at work than in Pomegranate.

AlanF

jrizo:

******************************************************************

Alan I have the highest respect for ya but, what you accuse Pom of you are just as gulity of.

Thats why I don't bother much getting into this Evo.Creation discussion, waste of time in my book.

You think you guys would of learned by now that it all comes down to your faith in it.

If you are happy with your belief system fine, but what happens is everybody has to be right and it ain't going happen!

Sounds like going door to door arguing over Jw nonsense

********************************************************************

My reply:

Actually I find those kind of comments very hard to understand from someone like you. Evolution is not a matter of belief. Anyone who thinks that has not studied the matter objectively - I mean that completely sincerely. Admittedly it is quite a shock to realize that evolution has a solid foundation. Pomegranate quoted Mark Ridley - I'll bet neither you nor he has read his book "Evolution." If you did read it with an open mind you would _at least_ see that evolution is not "religion" but is an honest attempt to explain observations that are otherwise inexplicable.

Another question I have, since you keep likening evolutionists to the WTS is, would it be dogmatic to insist that the earth is round, or would that be "arguing over JW-like nonsense."

Also, how do you feel about fundametalist Christians intentionally misquoting scientists, or quoting them out of context? Is that honest or is that deceptive lying; and which is more like the WTS?

Comparing someone to a JW is a pretty heavy charge on this board - I'd suggest that you look at yourself first, as Jesus recommended, before accusing others.

*************************************************************************

Gedanken

IronGland

I've come to the conclusion that the creation/evolution debates on this board are pointless. JJRizo said in another post that he has not researched the subject because he finds it boring. If he and pomegranite really want to understand the subject, they will research it.

pomegranate

I have THOROUGHLY researched it and it comes up short.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The eye. Let's talk about THAT for a bit eh?

A careful examination of the eye discloses that a majority of the members of the animal kingdom have eyes which, in a number of ways, are very different among the various major types. How could even one eye make itself, much less hundreds or thousands?

The eye is a very complex and remarkable biological structure, yet evolution will teach you that the eye suddenly appeared fully-developed, and fully-functioningnot once, but at least three times: in the squid, the vertebrates (animals with backbones), and the arthropods (insects).

"My last doubt concerns so-called parallel evolution.. Even something as complex as the eye has appeared several times; for example, in the squid, the vertebrates, and the arthropods. It's bad enough accounting for the origin of such things once, but the thought of producing them several times according to the modern synthetic theory makes my head swim." *Frank B. Salisbury, "Doubts about the Modern Synthetic Theory of Evolution, " in American Biology Teacher, September 1971, p. 338.

Gedanken

pomegranate,

That is a very outdated objection and illustrates that you have never read a serious book on evolution - again you merely repeat what you have been told by others of like mind. Try Ridley's book.

But I'm more concerned with your basic level of honesty at this point. Did you actually read Ridley's article before you quoted him out of context? Or did you just post it without reading the article - just like the WTS does? Either way, you are as guility of intellectual dishonesty as is the WTS. Or is misquotation OK when it suits your own ends?

Let's first decide if you are capable of objectivity and honesty.

Or is it not important that Christians tell the truth? I seem to remember that Revelation has some nasty things to say about people who are liars - and Job 13 shows that this includeslying for God.

Gedanken

pomegranate

Explain the eye.

Gedanken

I see you refuse to answer a simple question. So let me ask you another one, did you or did you not read Professor Salisbury's article before you misquoted from it. You see I have his article on my desk right now and will post excerpts from it after you have replied.

Explain the eye, you demand.

First, I say, Explain the lie!

Gedanken

StinkyPantz

This does seem a bit out-dated:

yet evolution will teach you that the eye suddenly appeared fully-developed, and fully-functioningnot once, but at least three times:

because I don't believe that any evolutionist thinks that any major body part came about "suddenly". We believe that everything was extremely gradual. It took millions of years for certain characteristics to develop, nothing was sudden.

Gedanken

jrizo,

My original post was posted in the main forum - now I see what happened to it - it got moved.

You can dissemble as much as you like, but what it boils down to is that you are conveniently describing as "cult mentality" something that either you refuse to try to understand or are simply unable to understand. It's an old WTS trick - as is intentionally misquoting people to make a point as pomegranate is in the habit of doing.

Actually, the main point of the Kangaroo post and this post was the fundamental dishonesty of fundamentalists in these areas. In that sense, it should be here - I like to know who's a liar and who isn't amongst my friends.

Gedanken

rem

There have been more lies and deceptions brought on by Evolutionist that you can shake a stick at.

Would you like me to eleborate?

Elaborate, please, in detail.

rem

terabletera

Why do people keep fighting about this stuff?

Whatever.

Evolutionists Dogmatic like WTS?

Share this