In Response To: ‘Darwin got it wrong’

Bobxxxx said:

In any case you shouldn’t be talking about things you know nothing about, and it’s pretty darn obvious you know nothing about evolutionary biology.

In what way? What are you basing that off of? That statement is about as vague as evolution itself. I probably don’t know a lot about evolutionary biology when considering the vastness of the theory, but I bet I can guess what you know. So, let me try and take a crack at this so I can impress you, Bobxxxx. By the way, I won’t bother to use a lousy Youtube video. I’ll call it my “Ode to Bobxxxx”.

First, we have to get to the source of the question. Your position, like all Darwinist, is very problematic when you can’t even offer an explanation for the first source of non-living matters/chemicals – and far more than that — an explanation for life itself. If there is no God/creator/life-giver, why is there something rather than nothing at all, Bobxxxx? But, let us move on because that can turn into a new thread of its own. In fact, it probably will now.

You are not talking about evolutionary biology, Bobxxxx. You are conjecturing. You can not present or point to any evidence in order to be scientific. It is obvious you do not know where the universe came from. So, you and your Atheist brethren create the myth that there is a war against religion and science, the Bible and science, or faith and reason when a debate such as this arises. When in fact it is really a fight between bad science vs. good science. It is about reasonable faith confronting unreasonable faith.

As humans we know there are two types of creations: intelligent and non-intelligent. We encounter the proof everyday. Think here of the Grand Canyon and Mount Rushmore. It would be absurd to compare the two and rule out intelligence design on the part of Mount Rushmore but by using your formula and “science” that is exactly what is done. Your conclusions are preloaded into your assumptions. If you lived on a different planet, and had a giant telescope in which to view earth, you would assume Spontaneous Generation (SG) by natural laws created Mount Rushmore because you consider no other options. Of course, SG is not supported by empirical observation or forensic science principles. You just know that life exist and things happen solely from time and chance, and since intelligence design is ruled out before hand, there are no other options left. Is that progress, Bobxxxx?

A notable scientist and Darwinist, Chandra Wickramasinghe admits that Darwinist adheres to a strong faith in SG. “The emergence of life from a primordial soup on the Earth, is merely an article of faith that scientist are finding difficult to shed. There is no experimental evidence to support this at the present time. Indeed all attempts to create life from non-life, starting with Pasteur, have been unsuccessful” (on line: here)

Here is another damning admission from Darwin/atheist, Michael Denton: “The complexity of the simplest known type of cell is so great that it is impossible to accept the such an object could have been thrown together suddenly by some kind of freakish, vastly improbable event. Such an occurrence would be indistinguishable from a miracle” (Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, p. 264).

So to sum up your first point, your idea of evolutionary biology is based solely on faith. Without any proof, you dogmatically believe in non-living matter and material as an explanation for life. The belief that earth and life arose from non-living matter is the strong acknowledgement of reductionism and solely based off  prepositions from Darwinist ideology.

Ironically, you have proven that by charging me with the crime.

Bobxxxx said: 

As more discoveries are made, especially in molecular biology, the tree of life is going to be modified. That’s called progress. Are you against progress?

The basic facts of evolutionary biology are the strongest facts of science. For example the idea that people and chimps share ape-like ancestors who lived more than six million years ago has been repeatedly proven beyond any doubt. Your wish for “the entire theory of evolution” to be thrown out is a cowardly wish. You’re obviously terrified of reality.

The ape-man theory is old and boring. Beside any amateur can debate it. Let’s go a little further without discussing ape-man progression in particular and instead take a look at the theory itself. Just you and I, Bobxxxx.

I’m assuming by us evolving from ape-like ancestors, which according to you has been proven beyond any doubt, we must have first evolved from the same common cell? And of course this happened by natural selection. Great. But, since this process is of evolution, meaning without intelligence being involved, than there is no “selection” taking place. It is a blind random process. We now have a circular argument, Bobxxxx. The creature survives so what? Bacteria sometimes survive an attack from antibiotics and mutate (though they are rarely beneficial but sometimes are) the surviving bacteria multiplies and dominates. All logically sound to me.

But, this is where things get hokey. You say that that bacteria then grows, evolves, and becomes a different life form. Presumably, a human life form sometime later. According to an important principle of the scientific method: Observation tells us that the surviving bacteria will always remain bacteria. This is where Darwinist like to combine macro-evolution and micro-evolution. Of course, it is worth pointing out that macro-evolution has never been observed much less proven. Darwinist have to use observable cases of micro-evolution to justify using unobservable theories about macro-evolution. Thus, Darwinist invented the theory that any observable changes in any organism can prove that all life forms evolved from a common single cell organism. And you say I’m the one who believes in magic, Bobxxxx!

Your ape-like ancestor theory runs face first into a concept called Genetic Limits. Darwinist used fruit flies because of their short life spans which allowed them the opportunity to test hundreds of generations over a short time. This was their big break to prove macro-evolution. Except, it only resulted in crippled fruit flies.

Charles Darwin said this, “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.” Of course, Darwin was a caveman when we compare what we know now to what was available to him then.

We do not have to look any further than the “simple” cell. In his day it was known as the “black box” a blur in his microscope with no way to see into it. Obviously we can see into this cell and have discovered that activity and life on the molecular level is far more complex Darwin could have ever known. The cell is composed of several highly developed interacting parts that all work together towards a basic function. As any system comprised of moving parts, damage or removal of any of these parts would cause it to stop functioning. This is called irreducible complexity. (paraphrase of Michael Behe’s definition) Darwin did not have the technology of today or he would have never published his theory. The basic cellular level destroys its basic precept.

Then you have that other problem of the pesky fossil record that shows no sign of Gradualism. Darwin knew it didn’t exist even in his own time and stood ready that that fact may derail his theory also. We’ve seen the cell theory crushed and we are about to see this part of his theory crushed too.

Darwin assumed (he started that legacy you might say) that future fossil discoveries would prove his theory true. It hasn’t and to put it flatly, it has been a big embarrassment and a source for PR setbacks to the Darwinist religion. We have found not one single transitional fossil. In fact, science shows us that almost all species exhibit no changes on earth. They appear in the fossil record exactly as they were when they lived until they went extinct. And they usually suddenly appear, not rise gradually or from a steady transition. They are fully formed and recognizable as they are or were.

Don’t sweat it. You are a firm believer in progression as you stated. So are the other Darwinist. This is where Punctuated Equilibria (PE) comes in to save the day. Again, this isn’t observable but since ID is out of the equation it will have to do.

There is no proof in the fossil record and certainly nothing offered that could “prove beyond any doubt” that we are a result of past ape-like ancestors. The fossil record that is proven, observable, and tangible, hardly supports macro-evolution. There are no missing links…instead the entire chain is missing. Indeed, nonexistent would be a more suitable term.

Do I believe in evolution? Yes. Do I believe in natural selection? Yes. But not to the degree that Darwinist do. Absoultely not. I believe in them insofar as they work inside of the natural laws we know to exist. I believe that ID formed the universe and the life forms in it to function by certain parameters. I’ve pointed out genetic limits, irreducible complexity, and the fossil record that crush a lot of Darwinist theories. In fact, there is positive evidence that many Darwin theories have never occurred. Yet, you want to insult and ramrod others that this is science and those who do not agree are barbarians and should “grow-up.” I happen to think I am the grown up. I am open-minded on this issue. That is why I can believe that something created our universe. You appear to be empty headed. There is no half-way point between intelligence and non-intelligence. Either some form of intelligence was involved in the process or it wasn’t.

There must be an intelligent explanation that created all of the countless intricacies that scientist are observing. We have to assume that ID is responsible for the world and the complex life forms that exist.

 

**To be fair, Bob, I will post any rebuttal on your part should you choose to respond. You can email it to me and I will post it unedited.

About these ads

About Jason Bradley

Is a former military member with experience in Iraq and time in Europe. He lives in the Washington DC area with his wife and two young children. His background is in national security and has remained in the field since separating from the military. He is a political science major with strong interests in American politics, history, economics, and foreign policy. This blog is a way to express his interests. He also contributes at Breitbart.com -- Big Peace and Big Government. Email him at twe.jason@gmail.com
This entry was posted in Religion and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

35 Responses to In Response To: ‘Darwin got it wrong’

  1. mcoville says:

    very well said sir.

  2. Red Spy says:

    Hey Bob, why don’t you put that in your pipe and smoke it!

    I can’t wait to see your next youtube video!

  3. Jason says:

    Thanks, mcoville. I like your site by the way and added you.

    Thanks for reading Red Spy. Glad you enjoyed it. I’m sure he regrets the youtube video already…

  4. sanityinjection says:

    I have no interest in defending Mr. Bobxxxx. However, I think you overstate your case. The fossil record *does* indicate the development of the genus Homo over the course of millions of years. Scientists have been able to extract DNA samples from early proto-humans that are unquestionably different from our own. I agree that evolution has not been incontrovertably proven, but it is without question the best theory that has been advanced to explain the origin and development of species. It is pointless to try to invalidate the theory of evolution unless you’ve got an alternative explanation that is just as plausible. And sorry, but I have yet to see an “intelligent design” theory that can make that claim.

    That having been said, I find absolutely no contradiction between evolution and the deliberate creation of the universe by a Supreme Being. I think you are quite right to point to the inability of scientists to explain the origin of life itself.

  5. Red Spy says:

    Anyone seen Bobxxxx?

  6. Rebecca says:

    You Jason did a great service to creationist and people of faith every where. I can’t tell you how refreshing it was to read that without you ever pointing to one bible scripture. That was a very intelligent, classy and well thought out rebuttal to an obviously arrogant and all the sudden quiet ranter.

    I consider myself a sceptic on both fronts. I’m just a plain old boring agnostic. but that may be my fault because after reading your response maybe there is more to learn and think about. Creationism does not sound as kooky as people make it out to be.

    I just wanted to tell you that you did a good job and even agnostics like myself respect such a well informed and thought provoking response.

    ~Rebecca~

  7. Jason says:

    “Scientists have been able to extract DNA samples from early proto-humans that are unquestionably different from our own.”

    SI, that doesn’t prove much. Aborigines and certian African peoples have a slightly different DNA than our own. They are still human. And if it is totally different signifying a different species than they were probably not human. That is where they attempt to force them into the missing link theory. None have stuck.

    “The fossil record *does* indicate the development of the genus Homo over the course of millions of years.”

    The fossil record does no such thing. If need be I can come back and give you a list of absurdities when they have tried.

    I’ll provide more sources to back that up when you can do the same. I assure it is not as cut and dry as you made it out to be. However, I fully admit I’m no authority on any of this. It is just unfortunate for Bob that his is one of my favorite reading subjects outside of history and politics.

    I always appreciate your comments and insight but this will soon turn into a circular argument. As for creation, there is purpose and design from cells to humans. That can’t be denied. To me that burns bright with intelligent design. Naturalism, chance and time can not produce what science is observing. Time and chance just doesn’t cut it. A layperson, to me, can make that conclusion just by observing the world around him.

    Though I don’t expect my POV to be cut and dry to others either.

  8. Jason says:

    Rebecca,

    Thanks for the comment. I’m glad you got something from it. Email me and I’ll share a few authors with you.

    In the meantime you can check out Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution by Michael Behe.

  9. tisak says:

    Nice response; I have much the same view of evolution as you, but I must disagree with the intelligent design opinion. I have written several posts on my blog about it, but two might be of interest to you:

    http://logicalscience.wordpress.com/2009/02/28/the-tenant-that-destroys-intelligent-design/

    and

    http://logicalscience.wordpress.com/2008/12/02/probability-and-design/

    Excellent blog btw.

  10. Mike says:

    Great post, Jason.

  11. Rebecca says:

    Thanks Jason!

    I Amazoned (is that a word?) the book and ordered it. I can’t wait to read it though I am abit lazy and rarely finish those kind of books. I hope its not to class roomy.

    ~Rebbecca~

  12. bobxxxx says:

    This video explains just one of countless proofs for the idea that people and chimps share an ancestor. Our common ancestry with the other ape species is a scientific fact, as strong as the fact the earth orbits the sun.

    Not only did people evolve from the same ancient apelike creatures that modern chimps evolved from, people are still an ape species. Even Jeebus was an ape, which means Christians worship a dead ape.

    “We have to assume that ID is responsible for the world and the complex life forms that exist.”

    Translation: “We have to assume that MAGIC is responsible for the world and the complex life forms that exist.”

    ID = MAGIC.

    Magic is an extremely childish idea. Grownups prefer scientific explanations, especially when those explanations have tons of evidence.

  13. bobxxxx says:

    “So, you and your Atheist brethren create the myth that there is a war against religion and science, the Bible and science, or faith and reason when a debate such as this arises.”

    Even some moderate pro-science Christians would agree there’s a Christian war against science education, and they don’t like this war at all because it makes all Christians look hopelessly stupid.

  14. mcoville says:

    bobxxx, there is no war between Christianity and science. There is only a debate about how it is being taught. It is said that atheists, such as yourself, are the ones that make science seam so irrational and narrow minded.

  15. bobxxxx says:

    sanityinjection wrote “I think you are quite right to point to the inability of scientists to explain the origin of life itself.”

    Scientists have many explanations for the development of the first very simple living cells. Watch this to learn about one example:

    What bugs me is when scientifically illiterate Christians say scientists will never solve some problem, therefore a magic god fairy did it. That’s lazy and just plain stupid.

    “Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science.” — Charles Darwin

  16. bobxxxx says:

    “There is only a debate about how it is being taught.”

    Biologists and biology teachers agree evolution should be part of every biology lesson. Christians, who are terrified of reality, want to dumb down biology every chance they get.

    One of my comments disappeared I think. Perhaps it was my fault. I might try it again.

  17. bobxxxx says:

    “Of course, it is worth pointing out that macro-evolution has never been observed much less proven.”

    Then how do you explain ERVs in identical locations in the DNA of chimps and people? ERVs are inherited, and they are inserted into DNA randomly, so when ERVs are found in the exact same location in the DNA of both people and chimps, it means those ERVs were inherited from the ancestor these two ape species share. There’s plenty more powerful evidence from molecular biology that you don’t know about.

    What you call macro-evolution (biologists call it “evolution”) has been proven beyond any doubt countless times.

    Hey, how about you trying to educate yourself first, and then get back to me. If you don’t do your homework, and if you continue to spread lies about science as if you knew what you were talking about, then you’re just a waste of time.

    Some more advice for you: Stop being a coward. You don’t have to be afraid of science. You don’t have to be afraid of being part of nature, instead of being magically created to be separate from nature.

  18. Special K says:

    It disheartens me that I share the same OPINION about evolution as you Bobxxxx.

  19. bobxxxx says:

    I could be wrong and maybe it was my fault, but I think it’s possible one of my comments, which I spent quite a bit of time writing, was deleted. That’s very annoying because of the time I wasted, and because censorship belongs in theocracies like Iran.

    But I will give this blog a benefit of a doubt and assume it was a mistake on my part. I didn’t save my comments and I don’t remember everything I said, but I will repeat some of the most important points I made.

    It’s a scientific fact that we share ancestors with the chimpanzee apes, and more distant ancestors with gorillas and orangutans. This is not an opinion. It’s as much a fact as our planet’s orbit around the sun. Biologists have proven this fact in countless many ways, including the evidence from ERVs. Please click my name for more information or click this:

    What many evolution deniers (and many people who accept evolution but don’t really understand it) don’t know is not only did people develop from apelike creatures, the same apelike creatures that modern chimpanzees developed from, people are still an ape species. We are one of the modern ape species and we are related to the other ape species in this order: chimps, bonobos, gorillas, orangutans. We are so closely related to chimps that chimps are more closely related to us than they are to gorillas and orangutans. Our common ancestors with chimpanzee apes lived only 5 or 6 million years ago.

    So people are definitely an ape species. Everyone is an ape, including Jeebus, so Christians worship a dead ape. Isn’t that interesting?

    So it’s fair to say evolution has major religious implications. It’s also fair to say many people deny evolution because the idea they’re just apes is very repulsive to them. They think it’s a joke and they can’t imagine it being true. They have been brainwashed to believe humans are special, and completely separate from the rest of nature.

    These people shouldn’t be so afraid of reality because reality is a wonderful thing.

    I never heard a more perfect explanation for why the reality of evolution is so wonderful than what Ken Miller said recently and you can listen to it here:

    http://www.wrni.org/content/evolution

    I think Ken Miller is a bit nuts because he’s the rare biologist who still believes in a god fairy, but I have to strongly agree with everything he said in the above website, and I could never have said it as perfectly as he did. Please take the time to listen to him.

  20. bobxxxx says:

    It’s a scientific fact that we share ancestors with the chimpanzee apes, and more distant ancestors with gorillas and orangutans. This is not an opinion. It’s as much a fact as our planet’s orbit around the sun. Biologists have proven this fact in countless many ways, including the evidence from ERVs. Please click my name for more information or click this:

  21. bobxxxx says:

    Why is it so difficult to comment here? I posted something, it didn’t appear, I posted it again, and I get a message that it was a duplicate, even though it was never published.

    I’m going to keep trying to post it because the information was important and I don’t want to throw it out because of the time I spent writing it.

  22. bobxxxx says:

    It’s a scientific fact that we share ancestors with the chimpanzee apes, and more distant ancestors with gorillas and orangutans. This is not an opinion. It’s as much a fact as our planet’s orbit around the sun. Biologists have proven this fact in countless many ways, including the evidence from ERVs. Please click my name for more information.

  23. bobxxxx says:

    What many evolution deniers (and many people who accept evolution but don’t really understand it) don’t know is not only did people develop from apelike creatures, the same ancient apes that modern chimpanzees developed from, people are still an ape species. We are one of the modern ape species and we are related to the other ape species in this order: chimps, bonobos, gorillas, orangutans. We are so closely related to chimps that chimps are more closely related to us than they are to gorillas and orangutans. Our common ancestors with chimpanzee apes lived only 5 or 6 million years ago.

    So people are definitely an ape species. Everyone is an ape, including Jeebus, so Christians worship a dead ape. Isn’t that interesting?

    So it’s fair to say evolution has major religious implications. It’s also fair to say many people deny evolution because the idea they’re just apes is very repulsive to them. They think it’s a joke and they can’t imagine it being true. They have been brainwashed to believe humans are special, and completely separate from the rest of nature.

    These people shouldn’t be so afraid of reality because reality is a beautiful thing.

    I never heard a more perfect explanation for why the reality of evolution is so wonderful than what Ken Miller said recently. Please click my name to listen to him.

    I think Ken Miller is a bit nuts because he’s the rare biologist who still believes in a god fairy, but I have to strongly agree with everything he said recently (click my name), and I could never have said it as perfectly as he did. Please take the time to listen to him.

  24. mcoville says:

    bobxxx, you say your related to a monkey and we’re the crazy ones? It is irrational to look at similarities in two different kinds of creatures and then assume they are from the same ancestor.

    My favorite is the Berkeley evolution department that says that “humans and oak trees” are from the same ancestor. And these people get paid to come up with this stuff.

  25. Jason says:

    Bobxxx, no one deleted your comments. So chill. You left links within your article and their is a program in place that holds comments for me to check. It is a guard against spam. I’ll see if I can modify it some because people like to leave links and it is annoying to them when they can’t.

    As for your comments. I’m sure you believe everything you said is true. You delivered the same old talking points and elevated your insults and hostility. That’s what happens when you force a Darwinist/Atheist to explain. But, this is the interesting point. You didn’t explain or expound on anything. Check my post and your comments and compare. One is lazy attempt at parroting a bunch of garbage. The other is a critical look and a systematic debunking of your “something out of nothing” theory.

    The only thing you mentioned that I remembered out of all of that was the ERV comment. Believe me, I’m not overwhelmed by your charge. I can handle that one too.

    And by the way, the only person who looked stupid during this whole exchange was you. I really don’t think you read my post or you really are unable to think critically.

    And that hurts, Bob, because I wrote it all for you…

  26. bobxxxx says:

    Jason wrote “I’m sure you believe everything you said is true.”

    No, you got that very wrong. I don’t BELIEVE everything I said is true. I KNOW everything I said is true.

    I know these things because I have massive evidence backing me up. Evidence you refuse to understand.

    For example, did you bother to understand the ERV evidence? I doubt it. If you did understand it you couldn’t possibly still be a creationist.

    Are you sure you want to call the hard work of thousands of scientists “a bunch of garbage”?

    mcoville wrote “bobxxx, you say your related to a monkey and we’re the crazy ones? It is irrational to look at similarities in two different kinds of creatures and then assume they are from the same ancestor.”

    Why is that irrational? It may seem irrational to you but that’s because you have a childish belief in a god fairy who said abracadabra to magically create every species out of nothing.

    Did you bother to understand the evidence from ERVs? I didn’t think so.

    Is asking you people to study science too much to ask? How hard is it to watch a video?

    Please click my name to watch an explanation for why ERVs in the same location in the genome of more than one species can only be explained by the fact these species share an ancestor. It’s an extremely simple concept and that’s why I urge you to at least try to understand it.

    If you have questions about the video, you could try doing your own research like I have. I’ve been studying evolutionary biology for several years and I continue to be amazed at how powerful the evidence is. And this evidence from molecular biology and genetics is growing rapidly. Meanwhile you evolution deniers complain about fossils. Fossil evidence is important, but the evidence from molecular biology is many thousands of times more powerful. DNA doesn’t lie. DNA evidence for paternity testing is accepted by the courts as fact. The same method used for paternity testing is used to test for evolutionary relationships, including the relationship of the modern ape species (chimps, humans, bonobos, gorillas, chimpanzees).

    mcoville wrote: “My favorite is the Berkeley evolution department that says that ‘humans and oak trees’ are from the same ancestor.”

    Go back far enough in time, up to almost four billion years, and you will find a common ancestor you share with every living thing on earth. This is easy for a biologist to understand, but not so easy for people who refuse to educate themselves.

  27. bobxxxx says:

    “Then you have that other problem of the pesky fossil record that shows no sign of Gradualism.”

    Jason, you continue to prove you don’t know what you’re talking about.

    Please study the fossil record that describes the transition from land animals to whales. That fossil record is complete, and most of those priceless fossils have been found in the past 15 years.

    The science of evolutionary biology is advancing rapidly. If you want to talk about science intelligently you have to try to keep up with new discoveries.

    By the way, do you have any evidence for supernatural magic? I didn’t think so.

    You can’t say “there’s not enough fossils therefore everything is magic.” Evidence against something is not evidence for anything else. Your belief in magic has not one shred of evidence but you believe in god’s magic tricks anyway because of your religious indoctrination, also known as brainwashing.

    By the way, while I sometimes sound a bit rude, I am really trying to help you people. You’re wasting your life because you don’t understand extremely important scientific explanations for why you are here.

    Anyone listen to the link I provided for what Ken Miller said? What he said was a beautiful description of reality and why understanding reality is so rewarding. Click my name to listen to him. Thanks.

  28. mcoville says:

    bobxxx: lets ignore all the rabbit trails and lets look at just one line of your last post, I would like some clarity on this one.

    “You’re wasting your life because you don’t understand extremely important scientific explanations for why you are here.” How does your science explain WHY we are here?

    I am genuinely interested in how you answer this question. I really don’t like to redirect people to other blogs but I had a post recently about this that you may find interesting, check it out here.

    I appreciate your comments and take none of it personally, I hope you understand that I am not attacking you personally. I find these type of discussions fun and educational. Let me ask that you keep the name calling to a minimum as it lowers your perceived IQ when you have to resort to that to get attention. I look forward to your response to the above question.

  29. bobxxxx says:

    mcoville, your website thinks science can’t answer ‘why’ questions but they are wrong. Scientists can explain why we are here. It’s called the science of evolutionary biology. We are here because of natural processes over a vast amount of time, combined with quite a bit of luck.

    By luck I mean events that could not have been predicted, like for example the huge asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago, making it possible for our small mammal ancestors to evolve into primates, including a small branch on the tree of life that developed into modern human apes.

    It was not all luck. People who understand natural selection know that there’s nothing random about it. The mutations are random, but the natural selection of favorable changes are not random at all. Small advantages accumulate and eventually spread throughout a population. What doesn’t work goes extinct. Wait a few million years and new species will extremely gradually develop from ancient species. It works and molecular biologists know it works because they can see the history of life with their own eyes when they compare DNA sequences of different living species.

    Religion thinks it can answer ‘why’ questions, but all religions can only make wild guesses, and they always guess wrong.

    “I find these type of discussions fun and educational.”

    If you’re interested in educating yourself, you’re going to have to do your own research, and you’re going to have stop listening to professional liars who are only interested in defending their belief in supernatural magic.

    The problem many religious people have is they’re lazy. God is easy and requires virtually no thinking. Science is hard and studying it can hurt the brain. But scientific knowledge is many thousands of times more rewarding than hocus pocus magic tricks, also known as religious beliefs. The poor creationists have no idea what they’re missing.

  30. bobxxxx says:

    “This is called irreducible complexity. (paraphrase of Michael Behe’s definition)”

    Jason, you will never learn anything from professional liars. Behe, who is a laughing stock of the scientific community, is a world-class liar and he knows it.

    At the 2005 Dover trial scientists showed beyond any doubt that Behe was wrong about everything. Behe continues to preach the same nonsense anyway because that’s his job. He’s a professional liar and he’s knows he’s a liar.

    Irreducible complexity means “Behe is too stupid to understand how something evolved, therefore a magic fairy created it out of nothing.”

    Magic is not a scientific idea for obvious reasons. Behe knows he’s full of it but he laughs at his creationist customers all the way to the bank.

  31. Jason says:

    Bob, I think I got it now. Everyone is stupid and a coward who does not believe in your theories — well there not yours you just consider them better than the alternative — and you are not much for actually writing anything intelligent. You would rather put forth the “just so” crap and that is the extent of the debate. That is exactly the problem with Darwinism/Creationism. All the while, you use demeaning tones and insults as your authority. You don’t challenge me and you don’t offend me. You have to be threatening for that to happen and you have only shown your ignorance and bigotry.

    Considering everything you have said in the comment thread, and my offer to post your rebuttal to mine, you have clearly shown that you lack any fundamental understanding of what you are talking about, you are lazy, or you are afraid of a challenge from a layperson given to fables, myths, and superstitions.

    Please, follow along the lines of what I did or simply shut-up. Because you are doing yourself a big disservice and you are starting to look like an empty headed ranter who likes to read summaries and then regurgitate them for argument.

  32. bobxxxx says:

    “Everyone is stupid and a coward who does not believe in your theories — well there not yours you just consider them better than the alternative — and you are not much for actually writing anything intelligent.”

    I got virtually every biologist in the world on my side. All you got is a handful of liars.

    I also got tons of evidence. You don’t have one shred of evidence for your childish belief in magic.

    I’ve been studying evolutionary biology for several years. How long have you been studying it?

    Sorry, Jason, but I have a very low opinion of willfully ignorant people. Do your homework. Learn about ERVs. Learn about human chromosome number two. Learn about whale fossils and learn about how the fossil called Tiktaalik roseae was found, and what scientists learned from this fossil.

    Try to find out what natural selection and genetic drift mean. Learn about how molecular biologists can see the history of life when they compare DNA sequences of different living species.

    Or you could just say god did it, and be laughed at for the rest of your life. I could care less what you do. It’s your life you’re wasting, not mine. Live in the Dark Ages if you want. Your kind will be obsolete some day. We just have to wait for you knuckle draggers to die off.

  33. Red Spy says:

    Bob, it is hard to get past your rotten attitude and prickish comments to even take you serious. For a man that claims to know so much and have an absolute lock on the truth you sure are defensive and hostile. Shouldn’t you be more at peace and calm with your vast knowledge? How about showing some pitty and longsuffering for those of us who are still primates. Wait those are the tenents of Christianity, not atheism…

    You would be the guy that would pound a podium in debate and lose your place eventually turning into an incoherent rant laced with profanities and insults. Everyone would laugh at you.

  34. mcoville says:

    I wounder what bobxxx would do without Richard Dawkins or PZ Myers writing all his responses for him?

    bobxxx, I may be be able to take you more seriously if you didn’t act like such a child. Are you ready for a piece of human common sense?

    Just because you disagree with someone does not make them stupid.

    I know this may be hard for a Darwinist such as yourself to understand but people have different ideas. Some of us have climbed above the government school indoctrination to understand that there is more to life than what is presented in those text books. Some of us, such are Darwinists, hold to their text books and refuse to listen to reason.

    I have been and will continue to pray for you. I bet your not as hostile a person as you come across as and I would also bet that you care for people. I hope you find peace with your beliefs in Darwinism and that someday you are open to honest debate on the subject.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s