Creationists admit "We are losing badly"

[ok doser]

Citation to Darwin please. You might have to read pretty deeply into his writings to come up with it, so take your time and pay attention.

On The Origin Of Species Owing to this struggle for life, any variation, however slight and from whatever cause proceeding, if it be in any degree profitable to an individual of any species, in its infinitely complex relations to other organic beings and to external nature, will tend to the preservation of that individual, and will generally be inherited by its offspring ... I have called this principle, by which each slight variation, if useful, is preserved, by the term of Natural Selection, in order to mark its relation to man's power of selection. And it means that fish will turn into cows.

 

[brewmama]

So you believe "God made it that way" should be an acceptable answer in science?

Well, it isn't really different from "There's no way a God was involved."

 

[Jose Fly]

Well, it isn't really different from "There's no way a God was involved."

I've never seen that phrase, or anything like it, in any scientific paper, textbook, or other material. So I'm not sure why you mention it.

However, you've posted statements from ID creationists who want to include "God made it that way" (and its equivalents) as valid scientific answers. So again, do you believe science should be changed to allow "God made it that way" as an acceptable solution to problems?

 

[Jonahdog]

On The Origin Of Species Owing to this struggle for life, any variation, however slight and from whatever cause proceeding, if it be in any degree profitable to an individual of any species, in its infinitely complex relations to other organic beings and to external nature, will tend to the preservation of that individual, and will generally be inherited by its offspring ... I have called this principle, by which each slight variation, if useful, is preserved, by the term of Natural Selection, in order to mark its relation to man's power of selection. And it means that fish will turn into cows.

Can you cite more specifically, perhaps to a chapter so I can check my copy of Origin

 

[Jonahdog]

okdopey. Your quote is from chapter 3, but it does not really, really include the last sentence about fish turning into cows.

Does your god like it when you lie? Just checking, cause if the answer is "Yes" then that explains a great deal.

In the meantime I expect you will continue to be a moron.

 

[ok doser]

jonah - you and jose are the jokes on this forum

but you're too retarded to realize it

 

[Jonahdog]

jonah - you and jose are the jokes on this forum

but you're too retarded to realize it

You didn't answer my question, does your god like it when you lie? Yes or No?

 

[ok doser]

You didn't answer my question, does your god like it when you lie? Yes or No?

answering you would be pearls before swine

go away troll

 

[jgarden]

Choose whatever you like. Your choice will have no effect what-so-ever on Reality.

Nobody has a monopoly on determining what constitutes "reality."

 

[CherubRam]

I've never seen that phrase, or anything like it, in any scientific paper, textbook, or other material. So I'm not sure why you mention it.

However, you've posted statements from ID creationists who want to include "God made it that way" (and its equivalents) as valid scientific answers. So again, do you believe science should be changed to allow "God made it that way" as an acceptable solution to problems?

The belief in God requires less faith than Atheism. The belief in God would explain why the missing link are missing. Great is the faith of the Atheist!

 

[Jonahdog]

answering you would be pearls before swine

go away troll

Unable or unwilling to answer. Interesting. We all know the answer, your god, as set forth in the X Commandments, does not like you to lie. Yet you do. And you do so in such a blatant ignorant manner, you put forth a quote, from a book that is easy to find and many people have on their shelf and you simply add a sentence that the author never wrote. Fascinating (to channel Spock).

 

[Zeke]

It's humorous to me how a no ID theory can be based on information gleaned from designed instruments.

 

[ok doser]

Unable or unwilling to answer.

why should i waste my time on you jonah?

scripture tells me you're a fool

why should i waste my time on a fool like you who isn't interested in learning?

 

[Hedshaker]

Nobody has a monopoly on determining what constitutes "reality."

Agreed. Therefore "beliefs" without evidence should be viewed with scepticism? Where as sound, unambiguous evidence can at least help to build a working model which can be updated if and when new evidence becomes available.

Although, admittedly, reality is a broad term. Through science we can gather evidence and chip away bit by bit and learn what we can.

Alternatively we can just believe what we want. I like the other method.

 

[Hedshaker]

So why would I separate the two?

Because there is a clear difference. But never mind.....

 

[brewmama]

I've never seen that phrase, or anything like it, in any scientific paper, textbook, or other material. So I'm not sure why you mention it.

However, you've posted statements from ID creationists who want to include "God made it that way" (and its equivalents) as valid scientific answers. So again, do you believe science should be changed to allow "God made it that way" as an acceptable solution to problems?

I think the evidence should be followed, no matter what the outcome, and no matter what the preconceived notions and beliefs. I have already posted one such atheistic belief that influenced outcomes, whether it's in a "scientific paper" is irrelevant and it's interesting that you should raise such a straw man.

I have not posted anything from ID creationists with that specific idea, so you are way off base, as seems to be usual for you.

Meanwhile science is putrid from the pollution of preconceived ideas of truth contaminating results, from nutrition to global warming. Evolution is no different.

 

[Jose Fly]

I think the evidence should be followed, no matter what the outcome, and no matter what the preconceived notions and beliefs.

Ok.

I have already posted one such atheistic belief that influenced outcomes,

No, all he said was that we can't allow "God made it that way" as an acceptable solution to scientific problems. Do you understand why we can't do that?

I have not posted anything from ID creationists with that specific idea, so you are way off base, as seems to be usual for you.

Then what was the point of the Stephen Meyer quote you posted in Post #78?

Meanwhile science is putrid from the pollution of preconceived ideas of truth contaminating results, from nutrition to global warming. Evolution is no different.

Thanks for your opinion.

 

[oatmeal]

That would be "some" creationists.

God knows He created the heaven and the earth

No scientist nor unbeliever is going to talk Him out of it.

 

[User Name]

Meanwhile science is putrid from the pollution of preconceived ideas of truth contaminating results, from nutrition to global warming. Evolution is no different.

Which branch(s) of the sciences have you formally studied? What is your level of expertise?

 

[Yorzhik]

I would agree that the ID movement is losing badly. Then again, Dietrich Bonhoeffer lost pretty badly too, according to atheist measures.