Real Science Friday Takes On Nature's 15 Gems

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jefferson

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
RSF Takes On Nature's 15 Gems

This is the show from Friday December 3rd, 2010.

BEST QUOTE OF THE SHOW:
If you take fruit flies and you put them under stress as they're developing, you get all kinds of variation. And they're all harmful and in the end a fruit fly is a fruit fly is a fruit fly. And most of the time when they're doing this they can't fly anymore because of all the mutations. And there are millions of experiments and their still fruit flies. Because they have such a short reproductive life it's a great way to try to test your theory of evolution and they keep coming up with nothing.
Click to expand...

SUMMARY:

* Real Science Friday Takes On Nature Magazine's 15 Gems of Evolution: Co-hosts Fred Williams with Creation Research Society, and Bob Enyart, on this episode of Real Science Friday talk through all fifteen of Nature magazine's list of their claimed strong evidences for evolution. And thanks to Casey Luskin for his podcasts at ID The Future with his great rebuttal of the 15 gems!

* See the Evolution of Whales: at Fred William's website, EvolutionFairytale.com!

* Special Editions of Real Science Friday:
- BEL's famous List of Not-So-Old Things
- Bob's debate with Christian Darwinist British author James Hannam
- PZ Myers blogs against Real Science Friday so Bob hits back with the Trochlea Challenge
- Waiting for Darwin's Other Shoe: Evolution mag's cover story Darwin Was Wrong on the Tree of Life
- Microbiologist in Studio: Bob talks with the Creation Research Society Quarterly editor about new genetic findings
- Caterpillar Kills Atheism: describe how a bug could evolve to liquefy itself and then build itself into a flying creature
- And see RSF Offer of $2,000 to get 16 letters of the alphabet in their correct places; $500 pd in 1998; $1,500 in 2010!

For our RSF Friends: in case you miss other BEL programs, here are some of the atheists Bob Enyart has debated:
- ABC's Reginald Finley, called The Infidel Guy, from ABC's Wife Swap program; 3-26-07;
- TheologyOnline's psychologist Zakath in a 10-round moderated written online debate, also available in soft cover;
- TOL's member who calls himself Fool; 3-28-06;
- John Henderson who wrote the book God.com 6-15-2006;
- Carlos Morales, Fox News, Huffington Post, etc. reports on U of Texas atheists Bible-turn in program, president of Atheist Agenda 7-14-10
- Freedom from Religion Foundation's Dan Barker (put the atheist sign near the Nativity at the capitol in Seattle) who was involved with the ministry of Kathryn Kuhlman, one of a group of so-called faith healers. (See a BEL listener who initially compared Bob to Benny Hinn until...) The BEL show was on 12-11-08;
- Michael Shermer, an editor with Scientific American and the Skeptic Society who in in this famous 73-second excerpt on BEL denied that the sun is a light, illustrating that it's tough debating atheists when they're hesitant to admit to even the most obvious common ground. 8-28-03

* Today's Resource: Give a science Christimas Gift and get free shipping!
Have you browsed through our Science Department in the KGOV Store? Check out especially Walt Brown's
In the Beginning and Bob's interviews with this great scientist in Walt Brown Week! You'll also love Dr. Guillermo Gonzalez' Privileged Planet (clip), and Illustra Media's Unlocking the Mystery of Life You can consider our BEL Science Pack; Bob Enyart's Age of the Earth Debate; Bob's debate about Junk DNA with famous evolutionist Dr. Eugenie Scott; And the superb kids' radio programming, Jonathan Park: The Adventure Begins! And Bob strongly recommends that you subscribe to CMI's tremendous Creation magazine!
 
Alate_One

Alate_One

Well-known member
Oh the hilarity of *wrong* "science" Friday.


If you take fruit flies and you put them under stress as they're developing, you get all kinds of variation. And they're all harmful and in the end a fruit fly is a fruit fly is a fruit fly. And most of the time when they're doing this they can't fly anymore because of all the mutations. And there are millions of experiments and their still fruit flies. Because they have such a short reproductive life it's a great way to try to test your theory of evolution and they keep coming up with nothing.



The amount of ignorance in this quote is quite impressive. No organism in evolution suddenly stops being one thing and "becomes" another.

Fruit flies are in the order of Diptera or flies. I can only presume creationists such as Bob would only be interested at changes above that level. The funny thing is though, Humans are in the primate order, yet I'm sure changes within the order (apes to man) are too big for Bob to accept. Yet he and others complain that "fruit flies are still flies". :nono:

Humans are still vertebrates, still mammals, still primates.

* See the Evolution of Whales: at Fred William's website, EvolutionFairytale.com!
Click to expand...
These sites are laughably bad, an embarrassment to Christians everywhere.
 
Granite

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Yeah. It's hard for me to believe this stuff is said and taken seriously. I swear some days the excerpts from Enyart's show strike me as stealth parody.
 
Sherman

Sherman

I identify as a Christian
Staff member
Administrator
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
This is just a feast of information! Thanks Bob!:up:

I enjoyed this one
Manganese Nodules: which allegedly form only over "geologic time periods" have formed "around beer cans" according to a World Almanac documentary, of course disproving the million-year requirement! There are also reports of manganese nodules forming on old World War II ships.
Click to expand...

The article on Canaan was especially good. It makes a lot of sense in clarifying the terminology used in Genesis.

The stuff is really good. My husband and I enjoy Creation Science article. :)
 
J

Jukia

New member
Inzl Kett said:
This is just a feast of information! Thanks Bob!:up:

I enjoyed this one


The article on Canaan was especially good. It makes a lot of sense in clarifying the terminology used in Genesis.

The stuff is really good. My husband and I enjoy Creation Science article. :)
Click to expand...

My recollection is that Pastor Bob was shown to be incorrect in his interpretation of the evidence in the beer can thread. He stopped responding after that.
Standard.
 
J

Jukia

New member
Oh, and make sure you look at Williams' Evolution of Whales site, if you wish to keep the thought processes of Kent Hovind going until he returns from his IRS exile in the pokey.
 
Alate_One

Alate_One

Well-known member
One Eyed Jack said:
So you're still a fish?
Click to expand...

The problem is the terms like "fish", "monkey" and "reptile" are not scientific terms, they are defined by exception making them highly paraphyletic.


The term "fish" most precisely describes any non-tetrapod craniate (i.e. an animal with a skull and in most cases a backbone) that has gills throughout life and whose limbs, if any, are in the shape of fins. Unlike groupings such as birds or mammals, fish are not a single clade but a paraphyletic collection of taxa, including hagfishes, lampreys, sharks and rays, ray-finned fishes, coelacanths, and lungfishes. Indeed, lungfishes and coelacanths are closer relatives of tetrapods (such as mammals, birds, amphibianss...) than of other fishes such as ray-finned fishes or sharks, so the last common ancestor of all fishes is also an ancestor to tetrapods. As paraphyletic groups are no longer recognized in modern systematic biology, the use of the term "fish" as a biological group must be avoided.



We, and all other tetrapods(four limbed animals), diverged from the early vertebrates/craniates which originally we might have classified them all with the catchall term "fish" but yet we still are clearly vertebrates with a skull structure highly modified from theirs. Our limbs still use the same genetic instructions used to make fins, our vascular and nervous system arrangement reflects a very different ancestry than we have today. Even the connection of the lungs to the esophagus fits perfectly with their origin as pockets of the gastrointestinal tract modified to absorb oxygen. Everything is just a modification of what came before.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top