Author Topic: Creationists: Describe The Theory of Evolution, properly (And Why You Disagree)  (Read 6174 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Deus ex Machina

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3029
  • Darwins +23/-3
  • Gender: Male
  • non-cdesign-proponentsist
Deus,

No love for foxes? Dogs hunting dogs.

-Nam

IIRC, foxes are canids, "dog-like", as opposed to "true dogs" (Gen. Canis). ICBW, though.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2013, 02:58:12 AM by Deus ex Machina »
No day in which you learn something is wasted.

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11680
  • Darwins +290/-80
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Deus,

No love for foxes? Dogs hunting dogs.

-Nam

IIRC, foxes are canids, "dog-like", as opposed to "true dogs" (Gen. Canis). ICBW, though.

Don't be a buzzkill.

;)

-Nam
This is my signature "Nam", don't I have nice typing skills?

Offline Illuminatus99

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
  • Darwins +5/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
It's all about common ancestry. bears share a common ancestor with weasels, hyaenas are distant cousins of cats, all rodents share a common ancestor.

You can trace every species alive today through dna and fossils back to older groups. Some mammal carnivore in the past gave rise to both cats and dogs.

Offline Foxy Freedom

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1156
  • Darwins +80/-11
  • Gods become obsolete all the time.
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who
And whales are closely related to hippos. Do they look similar?

Humans are closely related to bonobos and chimps. The fusion of the chromosomes proves this relationship and evolution without a doubt. Humans even have the same inherited unused DNA and the same viral infected implants in the DNA.

There is video on YouTube comparing the chromosome structure of humans and chimps which will prove this.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2013, 08:06:54 AM by Foxy Freedom »
Neither Foxy Freedom nor any associates can be reached via WWGHA. Their official antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V

Online Mrjason

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1141
  • Darwins +82/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member

Offline Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2553
  • Darwins +206/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • I did haz jeezusburger™
I'm not sure. Plenty of people believe that flies and mosquitos were created by Satan via gene splicing. This is certainly one possibility. Nasty creatures. Doesn't seem like something God would create.

QFTS       (quoted for total shit)

They are actually no more horrid than spiders, who hang around in a web, injecting venom into helpless small creatures, so that they dissolve internally.

I found this whole nature documentary channel, for Skeptic


(It's pretty funny.. guy impersonating Morgan Freeman)


« Last Edit: November 05, 2013, 08:59:56 AM by Add Homonym »
I strive for clarity, but aim for confusion.

Offline MadBunny

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3558
  • Darwins +110/-0
  • Fallen Illuminatus
So to make a long story short, you believe that it is certainly possible that God could have created life?

You are conflating evolution with creation.  Completely different.
Give a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a night.  Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4624
  • Darwins +511/-12
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
I see.

So mosquitos and fruit flies have a common ancestor.
Yep.

Quote from: skeptic54768
So how did other forms of life form?
Never get an elephant from mosquitos and fruit flies.
Nobody here is saying that an elephant will 'evolve' from a fly.

The common ancestor of mammals and insects is much further back than the common ancestor of mosquitoes and fruit flies.  Mammals are chordates (internal bones and tails), whereas insects are arthropods (external bones/exoskeletons and segmented legs).  That means the last common ancestor of insects and mammals probably did not have bones at all (and thus were aquatic), and the differences in evolution caused one group to develop internal bones while the other group developed a hard external shell.  Indeed, you can see just this distinction in sea animals - you have bony fish with tails, such as carp, tuna, etc, and you have shellfish with segmented legs, such as lobsters, crabs, etc, which probably remained the closest in form to the original chordates and arthropods, even though they have evolved from the original divergence as well.

This is exactly the sort of divergence that evolution predicts - that very different organisms will still share general traits with each other based on how far back they diverged.  Mammals (including humans) diverged from chordates, so we share traits with other descendants of chordates - for example, even though humans don't have tails, we still possess the genes for tails, and the bone structure needed to support a tail.

Offline skeptic54768

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2391
  • Darwins +38/-404
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1800
  • Darwins +191/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins

So to make a long story short, you believe that it is certainly possible that God could have created life?

There are lots of things that are possible (such as Directed Panspermia) but just b/c something is possible does not mean whatsoever that it is likely to have occurred. You need actual evidence and a testable hypothesis - not just your assumptions and intuition. Thus far, I have seen no definition of the term "God" that is coherent or makes any sense whatsoever. If you think you can meet that challenge go for it (many have tried and many have failed). Is a Spinoza type "God" logically possible (like Unicorns are logically possible)? Sure. But possible does not equal probable or likely. The Lock Ness Monster is possible. Where is the evidence?

Now, if we are talking about the Christian God then the answer is no. That man-made deity (like the others) is logically contradictory (like trying to talk about a square circle) and could not have done anything b/c it's quite clear that deity does not exist. Logically contradictory 'things' (i.e. - all-knowing/all-powerful but cannot change the future or lie) do not and cannot exist (again just like cube spheres do not exist or a whole integer between 5 and 6 does not exist). Things with mutually-exclusive attributes are not real. If you are trying to talk about some other 'God' creating everything we see then prove it. Provide evidence for your "designer" and go for the Nobel Prize. Won't do it? That's b/c you have no evidence of it.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Online Mrjason

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1141
  • Darwins +82/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
pick the human

http://www.exploratorium.edu/exhibits/embryo/embryoflash.html

Or it means there is a common designer.

Or it means that there is a common ancestor. Supporting evolution.

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1800
  • Darwins +191/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
pick the human

http://www.exploratorium.edu/exhibits/embryo/embryoflash.html

Or it means there is a common designer.


Ok Kent Hovind wannabe. Hovind's already been refuted many times over:


Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4624
  • Darwins +511/-12
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Or it means there is a common designer.
Who acted in exactly the way we expect from natural evolution, and who left no signs whatsoever of their 'design'.  Indeed, who did things that make no sense in terms of design, but make perfect sense in terms of evolution.

Honestly, 'God' doesn't explain how life developed on Earth nearly as well as evolution does, and never will.  There is just too much evidence that contradicts assertions of design, and too little (in fact, virtually none) that supports those assertions.

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1800
  • Darwins +191/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Or it means there is a common designer.
Who acted in exactly the way we expect from natural evolution, and who left no signs whatsoever of their 'design'.  Indeed, who did things that make no sense in terms of design, but make perfect sense in terms of evolution.

Honestly, 'God' doesn't explain how life developed on Earth nearly as well as evolution does, and never will.  There is just too much evidence that contradicts assertions of design, and too little (in fact, virtually none) that supports those assertions.

And lots of Christians accept evolution! Stop fighting it and go get educated on the subject. Do some homework, catch up.

CLICK HERE: http://www.youtube.com/user/DonExodus2
« Last Edit: November 05, 2013, 11:45:42 AM by median »
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline skeptic54768

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2391
  • Darwins +38/-404
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Or it means there is a common designer.
Who acted in exactly the way we expect from natural evolution, and who left no signs whatsoever of their 'design'.  Indeed, who did things that make no sense in terms of design, but make perfect sense in terms of evolution.

Honestly, 'God' doesn't explain how life developed on Earth nearly as well as evolution does, and never will.  There is just too much evidence that contradicts assertions of design, and too little (in fact, virtually none) that supports those assertions.

The human body is extraordinarily designed.

Our skin heals itself when you get cut.
We cough when something obstructs our airway so we don't die from it.
Poop comes out instead of staying inside of us until we blow up.
Our eyes water when dust gets into it to wash it out.

Lots of things that couldn't have "just happened" on their own.
These things all indicate purposeful design.
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline skeptic54768

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2391
  • Darwins +38/-404
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Or it means there is a common designer.
Who acted in exactly the way we expect from natural evolution, and who left no signs whatsoever of their 'design'.  Indeed, who did things that make no sense in terms of design, but make perfect sense in terms of evolution.

Honestly, 'God' doesn't explain how life developed on Earth nearly as well as evolution does, and never will.  There is just too much evidence that contradicts assertions of design, and too little (in fact, virtually none) that supports those assertions.

And lots of Christians accept evolution! Stop fighting it and go get educated on the subject. Do some homework, catch up.

CLICK HERE: http://www.youtube.com/user/DonExodus2

It's not my fault that certain false Christians ignore the Bible and try to mold their beliefs to the world around them.
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1800
  • Darwins +191/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins

It's not my fault that certain false Christians ignore the Bible and try to mold their beliefs to the world around them.


And they would say the same thing about you, that YOU are ignoring the bible and trying to makeup YOUR own version of Christian doctrine to suite YOUR wants and personal desires. Just because YOU happen to have a personal interpretation of that book doesn't make you right by default. You haven't studied your Christian history, have you? Early Christians could not agree on doctrine and that is b/c the bible contradicts itself and can be interpreted multiple ways. You are no exception.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4624
  • Darwins +511/-12
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
The human body is extraordinarily designed.
Oh, please.

Quote from: skeptic54768
Our skin heals itself when you get cut.
A process which takes minutes or hours depending on the severity of the cut and in severe cases needs something binding or compressing the wound to keep the injury from bleeding out.  Not to mention the little matter that other injuries, such as lost limbs, don't heal themselves - at best, they seal over.

Quote from: skeptic54768
We cough when something obstructs our airway so we don't die from it.
Which of course explains the thousands of people per year who die from choking.  Not to mention the little matter that air goes through the same passage that food goes through, which is what allows people to die from choking in the first place.

Quote from: skeptic54768
Poop comes out instead of staying inside of us until we blow up.
Which is such a bad example that I don't have to even refute it.  Think it through - if organisms did not have a way to excrete waste, they could not possibly survive long enough to reproduce and thus would have wiped themselves out long ago.

Quote from: skeptic54768
Our eyes water when dust gets into it to wash it out.
Again, an organism that evolved sensory organs would have to have a way to make sure those organs continued working properly, or else they would quickly turn themselves into a disadvantage.

Quote from: skeptic54768
Lots of things that couldn't have "just happened" on their own.
Not only could they have happened on their own, all the evidence points to them being natural adaptations which enhanced the ability to survive.

Quote from: skeptic54768
These things all indicate purposeful design.
Design which takes minor injuries into account but can't cope with major ones very well, if at all; design which provides a way to dislodge objects which would cause someone to choke to death while using the same tube for air and food, making it much more likely for someone to get an object caught in their lungs which causes them to choke in the first place; design which puts the endpoints of the excretion system practically right next to the reproductive system, causing all sorts of problems.

Some design!

Offline skeptic54768

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2391
  • Darwins +38/-404
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched

It's not my fault that certain false Christians ignore the Bible and try to mold their beliefs to the world around them.


And they would say the same thing about you, that YOU are ignoring the bible and trying to makeup YOUR own version of Christian doctrine to suite YOUR wants and personal desires. Just because YOU happen to have a personal interpretation of that book doesn't make you right by default. You haven't studied your Christian history, have you? Early Christians could not agree on doctrine and that is b/c the bible contradicts itself and can be interpreted multiple ways. You are no exception.

No, it's common sense. Think of Genesis. The word "day" does not mean millions of years. That is nonsense. Otherwise when it says in Joshua that God stopped the sun for a day, they would also have to agree that God stopped the sun for millions of years instead of 24 hours.

NONSENSICAL! It's not my fault false Christians exist.
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1800
  • Darwins +191/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins

The human body is extraordinarily designed.

Our skin heals itself when you get cut.
We cough when something obstructs our airway so we don't die from it.
Poop comes out instead of staying inside of us until we blow up.
Our eyes water when dust gets into it to wash it out.

Lots of things that couldn't have "just happened" on their own.
These things all indicate purposeful design.

No, they do not "indicate" design. You do not get to side-step the scientific process just b/c you WANT your theology to win out. Just looking at stuff and saying it looks designed (b/c you can't imagine how it could not be) is a logical fallacy. It is called The Argument From Incredulity. Look it up. Your argument is invalid.

Nature does not tell us how it got here until we investigate. You need observation/data collection, hypothesis, testing (attempts of falsification - numerous), continued study and research, peer review, and more. Sorry, you don't get to bypass the process of science. If you think a designer did it then prove it - b/c all you have right now is a mere assertion based upon a logical fallacy, and that's not science. 
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline Foxy Freedom

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1156
  • Darwins +80/-11
  • Gods become obsolete all the time.
    • Foxy Freedom on Doctor Who

It's not my fault that certain false Christians ignore the Bible and try to mold their beliefs to the world around them.


And they would say the same thing about you, that YOU are ignoring the bible and trying to makeup YOUR own version of Christian doctrine to suite YOUR wants and personal desires. Just because YOU happen to have a personal interpretation of that book doesn't make you right by default. You haven't studied your Christian history, have you? Early Christians could not agree on doctrine and that is b/c the bible contradicts itself and can be interpreted multiple ways. You are no exception.

No, it's common sense. Think of Genesis. The word "day" does not mean millions of years. That is nonsense. Otherwise when it says in Joshua that God stopped the sun for a day, they would also have to agree that God stopped the sun for millions of years instead of 24 hours.

NONSENSICAL! It's not my fault false Christians exist.

Thinking of Genesis, god supposedly created everything from water. Genesis is wrong.
Neither Foxy Freedom nor any associates can be reached via WWGHA. Their official antitheist website is http://the6antitheist6guide6.blogspot.co.uk

The 2nd edition of the free ebook Devil or Delusion ? The danger of Christianity to Democracy Freedom and Science.       http://t.co/2d1KcJ9V

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1800
  • Darwins +191/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins

No, it's common sense. Think of Genesis. The word "day" does not mean millions of years. That is nonsense. Otherwise when it says in Joshua that God stopped the sun for a day, they would also have to agree that God stopped the sun for millions of years instead of 24 hours.

NONSENSICAL! It's not my fault false Christians exist.

"Nonsensical" to you b/c you assumed your theology. This is yet another example of you ASSUMING your interpretation (theology) is the correct one in advance. Sorry, you can't assume your interpretation in advance and you don't' get to be correct by default, especially when observations of the natural world contradict your theology. As others have noted, you are practicing confirmation bias - starting with your conclusion (as you admitted elsewhere) and then trying to work backwards by trying to twist every fact to fit your assumption. That is anti-science. It's dishonest and shows you don't really care about truth (only defending your presupposition).

You also seem to have no problem and no remorse for Bearing False Witness, by deliberately misrepresenting other people's positions. Hypocrisy.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2013, 12:31:14 PM by median »
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline skeptic54768

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2391
  • Darwins +38/-404
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched

No, it's common sense. Think of Genesis. The word "day" does not mean millions of years. That is nonsense. Otherwise when it says in Joshua that God stopped the sun for a day, they would also have to agree that God stopped the sun for millions of years instead of 24 hours.

NONSENSICAL! It's not my fault false Christians exist.

"Nonsensical" to you b/c you assumed your theology. This is yet another example of you ASSUMING your interpretation (theology) is the correct one in advance. Sorry, you can't assume your interpretation in advance and you don't' get to be correct by default, especially when observations of the natural world contradict your theology. As others have noted, you are practicing confirmation bias - starting with your conclusion (as you admitted elsewhere) and then trying to work backwards by trying to twist every fact to fit your assumption. That is anti-science. It's dishonest and shows you don't really care about truth (only defending your presupposition).

You also seem to have no problem and no remorse for Bearing False Witness, by deliberately misrepresenting other people's positions. Hypocrisy.

So then those "Christians" would agree that God stopped the sun for millions of years in Joshua?

You can't use "Millions of years" for Genesis and then "24 hours" for joshua. THAT is called "molding the beliefs." I am not doing that.

To quote someone who I can't remember:

"If God can not be taken literally when He speaks of the rising of the Sun, then how can God be taken literally when He speaks of the rising of the Son?"
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4624
  • Darwins +511/-12
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
A better question is, when 'God' got so much wrong to begin with, how can you trust anything he said at all?

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1800
  • Darwins +191/-15
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins

So then those "Christians" would agree that God stopped the sun for millions of years in Joshua?

You can't use "Millions of years" for Genesis and then "24 hours" for joshua. THAT is called "molding the beliefs." I am not doing that.

To quote someone who I can't remember:

"If God can not be taken literally when He speaks of the rising of the Sun, then how can God be taken literally when He speaks of the rising of the Son?"

Have you studied Hugh Ross? I don't care what your interpretation is b/c there is always another one and there is no agreement or consistency. You do know that the bible was not written in English, don't you? Both the Hebrew and the Greek languages have many uses for terms. Your opponents will say, "Context! Context!" Except the problem is no one can agree on what the actual "context" is and YOU are practicing Confirmation Bias. You are trying to bend, squeeze, squash, and twish every bit of data into a mold that fits what you already assumed (both your theology and belief). It's called "Any which way but loose!" But that is intellectual dishonesty. If the bible shows error, self contradiction or false statements you can't allow that, b/c it would mean you would have to change your view (which is anti-science and anti-honesty btw). So instead you hold that assumption with a tight fist, in spite of all evidence or sound reasoning to the contrary. Dishonesty.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline Aaron123

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2733
  • Darwins +77/-1
  • Gender: Male
So then those "Christians" would agree that God stopped the sun for millions of years in Joshua?

You can't use "Millions of years" for Genesis and then "24 hours" for joshua. THAT is called "molding the beliefs." I am not doing that.

To quote someone who I can't remember:

"If God can not be taken literally when He speaks of the rising of the Sun, then how can God be taken literally when He speaks of the rising of the Son?"

Ah, so you're a literalist.  Yet, I've heard from other christians that certain parts of the bible are metaphorical.  Why should I take your words over theirs?  They're christians, just like you, and they believe they're interpreting the bible correctly, just like you.


Wait, let me guess; demons?
Being a Christian, I've made my decision. That decision offers no compromise; therefore, I'm closed to anything else.

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6207
  • Darwins +783/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Most Christians used to believe some version of this: The world was made just as it said in the bible in 6 literal 24-hour days. God made all the animals and then the first man and the the first woman. All plants and animals were exactly as we see them today. Nothing went extinct, because god made everything perfect.

When I was a JW kid back in the 1960's we were told that there was no such thing as evolution. Period. None of this halfway namby-pamby micro vs macro sh!t. There were no dinosaurs.  None of this humans and dinos hung out together crap. Humans are not related to other primates. None of this intelligent design nonsense.

What about the fossils in museums? Museums are full of lies. Fossils were put there by demons to test our faith. Geology and astronomy have to be interpreted only in the light of bible truth. Anything else is worldly and evil-- made up by demons and inserted into the heads of scientists.

It amuses me (and gives me hope) to see how religious people nowadays adapt and accommodate to scientific discoveries that seem to challenge their theology. Even JW's now say that there were dinosaurs-- see how different this is from what we were taught back in the day...
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_jehovah's_witnesses_attitude_about_dinosaurs

First, when the discovery is new, there is the flat out denial of the evidence--it's a complete and total lie, thought up by evil people in league with the devil, people who want to destroy religion and deny god:

Disease is caused by invisible animals called germs? That is the craziest thing we ever heard. It says quite clearly in the word of god that demons cause illness, so the only way to combat it is to pray to god to take away the demons! Anyone who promotes this so-called germ theory will be banned from polite company and maybe even burned at the stake.....

Second, when the discovery has gathered so much evidence that it is foolish to deny its existence, accept a part that is the least threatening to the faithful. Act as though you have never thought any differently:

Of course there are disease germs-- every sane person knows this. However, germs do not attack you if you are protected by god. Sickness is a sign of a weak, faithless spirit. My grandmother never got sick because she prayed every day and read her bible.

Finally, when the evidence is absolutely undeniable and accepted in all circles, the religious people "discover" that--surprise!-- it was in the bible all along! Science has at last vindicated what people who were reading their bibles correctly knew from the beginning:

Surely you cannot deny the wisdom of god. See right here where it says "things not seen" and then skip to the part where it tells the children of Israel to do a ritual of washing after touching unclean things! How could people have known about germs way back then before the invention of the microscope? Science has proven that the bible is true!
http://whatjwsteach.tumblr.com/

That is what appears to be happening with the theory of evolution with the "okay but-micro-not-macro" compromise. I suggest making some screen captures and printouts of skeptic's posts. In the years to come there will no doubt be some "evolution" in his thinking.

He will say that, not only is evolution the factual explanation accepted by all sane people, but lo and behold, the bible had it right all along!  Homo habilis, opposable thumbs, endemic species, Darwin's finches,  giraffe's laryngeal nerve and chimp DNA, clearly explained in the bible, just waiting for the right interpretation!

I can't wait to see how they manage to keep Noah's Ark-- maybe it will become one of those metaphors, or yet another part of the OT (like all the sex--rape, incest and never-ending begats) that we are not supposed to pay much attention to...
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11680
  • Darwins +290/-80
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Quote from: nogodsforme
When I was a JW kid back in the 1960's we were told that there was no such thing as evolution. Period. None of this halfway namby-pamby…

What I'd do?

;)

-Nam
This is my signature "Nam", don't I have nice typing skills?

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6207
  • Darwins +783/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Quote from: nogodsforme
When I was a JW kid back in the 1960's we were told that there was no such thing as evolution. Period. None of this halfway namby-pamby…

What I'd do?

;)

-Nam

I don't know, but you did it with Pam.... :?
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.