Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, Moderators, move, protect, rollback, Administrators
27,336
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 10:
Line 10: +
no edit summary
:::::Yes, they are in evo books, but in the books they say that they are not really part of human evolution. If we want to show the problems with the theory, we should at least get it right so the Darwinists will accept the arguments, and not just give them a straw man to take down easily. The best way to debate someone is to learn as much as possible about their position in order to knock down what the believe, and not what we think they believe. For instance, while listening to lectures by fairly high ranking people in the field of [[Creation Science]], many of them have mentioned the Piltdown and Nebraska men, the Archaeoraptor, Haeckel's Embryos, and many other well known frauds. When those people bring those examples up, most evolutionists (including me, in the past) would just shut off and not listen, as even they had accepted those long ago as frauds that are not part of the modern theory. We, as creationists, must stop using straw men and start using valid arguments against the true beliefs of the [[Darwinists]] if we want to crush their theory.
:::::Yes, they are in evo books, but in the books they say that they are not really part of human evolution. If we want to show the problems with the theory, we should at least get it right so the Darwinists will accept the arguments, and not just give them a straw man to take down easily. The best way to debate someone is to learn as much as possible about their position in order to knock down what the believe, and not what we think they believe. For instance, while listening to lectures by fairly high ranking people in the field of [[Creation Science]], many of them have mentioned the Piltdown and Nebraska men, the Archaeoraptor, Haeckel's Embryos, and many other well known frauds. When those people bring those examples up, most evolutionists (including me, in the past) would just shut off and not listen, as even they had accepted those long ago as frauds that are not part of the modern theory. We, as creationists, must stop using straw men and start using valid arguments against the true beliefs of the [[Darwinists]] if we want to crush their theory.
:::::--[[User:BrandonB|BrandonB]] 15:44, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::--[[User:BrandonB|BrandonB]] 15:44, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
::::::I agree. I also did some thinking about your attempt at removing Neanderthal, and I think you are correct. The table should be restricted to just what evolutionists claim is the direct lineage in human evolution; an additional table could be added if needed to list the "dead ends". As to the frauds - Piltdown, Nebraska, etc - I don't want them in this article at all. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 23:48, 5 June 2009 (EDT)