No announcement yet.

Real Science Friday: Flat Earth Society & PZ Myers Believe in Evolution

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Real Science Friday: Flat Earth Society & PZ Myers Believe in Evolution

    Flat Earth Society & PZ Myers Believe in Evolution

    This is the show from Friday September 30th, 2011.


    * PZ Myers Attacks Real Science Friday & Flat Earth President Believes in Darwinism: As reported by Live Science and in Creation magazine's Fall 2011 issue, the Flat Earth Society's president Daniel Shenton not only believes that the earth is flat, but he also believes in Darwinian evolution. Ha! The irony of course is that evolutionists mock creationists by asking if we believe in a flat earth, whereas the Flat Earth Society aligns itself not with creationists but with evolutionists. Meanwhile PZ Myers blogged this week against our PZ Myers Trochlea Challenge, mocking Bob Enyart and RSF friend Will Duffy in the title of his blog. Warning: PZ's blog is filled with vulgarity and constant references to defecation and sex acts, and the site is filled with hatred toward and intolerance of those who disagree with its atheistic evolutionists. Three of Bob's comments at PZ's blog are also pasted below.

    * Adult Stem Cells (Not Embryonic) in Sickle Cell Research: Real Science Friday co-hosts Fred Williams and Bob Enyart discuss a report from today's Science Daily of the hopeful results of initial research.

    * Perhaps Men Are Closer to Fish, Crows, Bees, or Sponges: Also in today's Science Daily is a report that a species of fish transport clams long distances to find rocks to break them apart on, suggesting a tool-use link between fish and humans. Coincidentally, in the current Creation magazine, a Boulder, Colorado evolutionist suggests, because of its ability to gather and share complex information (let alone their solving of the least distance problem faster than supercomputers), that the honeybee mind might be closer to humans than the ape mind. Then Bob and Fred reminisce about similar evolutionary observations from crows and octopi, and they remember that sponges have been found genetically to be 70% similar to... people!

    * New Atheists Dawkins and Myers vs. Eugenie Scott
    : As reported in Creation, atheists in the Richard Dawkins and PZ Myers camp are openly fighting with those in Eugenie Scott's camp! Real Science Friday is involved in exposing all of them, as shown at the above links.

    * Major Description of New Dinosaur Created from 1/4-inch Bone: Do you remember when leading evolutionists discovered Nebraska Man, and described his height, abilities, social structure, tool use, amount of hair on his body, etc., when all they had actually discovered was a single tooth, and that later, after excavating more of the skeleton, the evolutionists (including from New York City's Museum of Natural History) realized it was the tooth of a pig. Well, so do Bob and Fred!

    * Bob's Three Posts to PZ Myers: among the hundreds of comments, most by atheists, below PZ's blog, Bob posted these:

    PZ (1 of 3), You’re just too kind. I’ll reply to three things you’ve criticized me over: soft-tissue T. rex; C-14 EVERYWHERE; & you missing the point of the Trochlea challenge (of course there could have been other uses for that muscle; but claiming that I say there was not shows that you didn’t understand the question). But to start with, the soft-tissue:

    I think that your claim bio-film claim is a couple years out of date. There’s too much data coming in to sustain that. Now there’s soft-tissue (original biological material) that’s been recovered not only from a T. Rex, but also from an Hadrosaur (though allegedly 80MYA, Harvard has partially sequenced its protein), a Mosasaur (alleged 70MYA), and Archaeopteryx (many different tissue types, alleged 150MYA). See sources at (of not so old things). And this is all just the beginning now that it’s no longer taboo to even look for the original tissue. Studies decades ago on Egyptian mummies indicated proteins, etc., wouldn’t last more than 10,000 years. Now studies of biological material are becoming more common, and color in bug wings, and (alleged 150MYA) squid ink, etc., etc., and even living bacteria, and eventually, DNA no doubt. Too cool! -Bob Enyart RealScienceFriday

    PZ (2 of 3), regarding C-14 EVERYWHERE and me being ridiculous for offering Jack Horner $23,000 to C-14 that soft-tissue T. rex.

    You’re correct that Carbon-14 is gone in only thousands of years. So evolutionists are shocked when modern labs find C-14 EVERYWHERE it shouldn’t be if the earth were old. C-14 is found in petrified wood, coal, oil, limestone, graphite, amber, marble, dinosaur fossils, and even in diamonds (w/o decay chain evidence, awfully hard to contaminate, and 10k times too much to result from neutron capture). See .

    And the researchers carbon-14 dated that Mosasaur I mentioned, the one for which they rigidly showed that the biological material did not come from contamination, and it has plenty of C-14, with that (allegedly 70MYA) tissue in that tiny, uncontaminated Mosasaur bone. Radiocarbon exists even in supposedly million-year-old two-mile deep natural gas wells, etc., etc. Horner should have collected the $23,000, because as for the results, most people who follow all the C-14 dating know that that T. rex would have had about the same amount of C-14 as coal does, for coal has about the same amount of radiocarbon, regardless of whether it’s strata-dated anywhere from 30M to 300M years old. Too cool! -Bob Enyart RealScienceFriday

    PZ (3 of 3), regarding you missing the point of my PZ Myers Trochlea Challenge, talking about whether the muscle could have attached w/o the trochlea is an obfuscation; Yes, even I can imagine such a configuration. That’s not the challenge. Repeated here for your readers:

    PZ MYERS TROCHLEA CHALLENGE: An eye muscle narrows to a cord and then threads through a sling, called the Trochlea. This simple design enables the muscle to pull in the direction needed and helps it function in the space available. The other eye has a trochlea too, and that one is inverted of course. Darwin’s natural selection *could not choose THIS SLING CONFIGURATION until* it functioned minimally, routing the muscle through the sling. Any evolutionary stages that would have led to this configuration, prior to any muscle-through-the-sling functionality, would have had to progress by purely random mutations which would have had to modify all the tissue types needed to achieve such functionality, including bone, nerve, muscle, and cartilage, and do so in a way that led to that function, and without conferring any benefit from this configuration until the sling began to function (so that it could eventually give an actual advantage, which the sling could not give until it functioned with the muscle narrowing and routing appropriately). And of course those mutations do not occur in these tissues themselves but in thousands of rungs out of billions in the DNA ladder. PZ, can you roughly describe (not exactly of course, but just a rough algorithm) how this might happen? -Bob Enyart

    Today's Resource: If you enjoy the science you hear about on our fast-paced RSF radio shows, you'll really love the books, audio, and DVD science materials in our online store's Science Department! The KGOV September Telethon is 52% toward it's goal of $20,000 in donations, purchases from our store, and monthly pledges! So, please help keep RSF airing and online for another year by shopping in the KGOV Store, getting a BEL monthly subscription, making a one-time donation or a monthly pledge to RSF and Bob Enyart Live!
    WARNING: Graphic video here.

  • #2
    The Eye itself is an enigma to Darwinists. It is irreducibly complex. I have read articles on the evolution of the eye and haven't found any that are convincing. None of them covered the Trochlea.

    June is Gay Pride Month.Tolerance and diversity? ☞ More like tolerate perversity.☠


    • #3
      Ummmm, am I missing something or did Enyart actually take the Flat Earthers somewhat seriously?


      • #4
        Originally posted by Inzl Kett View Post
        The Eye itself is an enigma to Darwinists. It is irreducibly complex. I have read articles on the evolution of the eye and haven't found any that are convincing. None of them covered the Trochlea.
        Got a cite to those articles? thanks
        "Against stupidity, the gods themselves fight in vain", G. Smiley

        "Send money, guns and lawyers..." W. Zevon

        "If it is possible for something to happen, that is evidence that it did happen." Stripe on TOL

        "There but for fortune...", P. Ochs


        • #5
          Originally posted by Granite View Post
          Ummmm, am I missing something or did Enyart actually take the Flat Earthers somewhat seriously?
          Yes you are missing something. He implied the Flat Earth-Darwinists are a joke.
          "I believe in Christianity, as I believe the sun has risen, not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else." C.S. Lewis

          "Don't believe that there's nothing that's true, don't believe in this modern machine." Switchfoot


          • #6
            Originally posted by GuySmiley View Post
            Yes you are missing something. He implied the Flat Earth-Darwinists are a joke.
            Gee. Umm, I think we can go beyond implication there, Guy. Maybe that's just me. So I suppose this means that anyone who calls themselves a Christian is a complete lunatic because some people who call themselves such think they can predict the end of the world. Makes perfect sense.


            • #7
              Try listening to the show, Granite.

              The reason the flat-Earthers were brought up is made perfectly clear.
              Where is the evidence for a global flood?
              "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

              "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
              -Bob B.