SkipCaptcha
106
edits
Changes
Talk:Debate: 15 questions for evolutionists (view source)
Revision as of 17:46, January 13, 2012
, 17:46, January 13, 2012→Open question to readers of this page
::::::AugustO, Darwinists are struggling to gain wide acceptance in the USA even though Darwinism has been around for 150 years plus anti-Darwinist conservative Christianity is exploding in the world. The situation is not good for Darwinism and the cloud of being disingenuous hangs over Darwinism. For example, Stephen Gould talked about the dearth of supposed transitional fossils being a "trade secret". Does real science have "trade secrets"? I realize that you don't like me pointing out the licentious and fraudulent behavior of Darwinists, but Jesus said that bad fruit does not come from a good tree and it certainly right to point out egregious behavior by shysters. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 12:13, 13 January 2012 (EST)
::::::AugustO, Darwinists are struggling to gain wide acceptance in the USA even though Darwinism has been around for 150 years plus anti-Darwinist conservative Christianity is exploding in the world. The situation is not good for Darwinism and the cloud of being disingenuous hangs over Darwinism. For example, Stephen Gould talked about the dearth of supposed transitional fossils being a "trade secret". Does real science have "trade secrets"? I realize that you don't like me pointing out the licentious and fraudulent behavior of Darwinists, but Jesus said that bad fruit does not come from a good tree and it certainly right to point out egregious behavior by shysters. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 12:13, 13 January 2012 (EST)
CPalmer, the shyster RudrichBoucher did not say he may have overstated his resume. He said he said he was a "bit pretentious".[http://conservapedia.com/Talk:Question_evolution!_campaign/Archive_2] He admitted to engaging in pretentiousness. Please do not unnecessarily cloud the issue. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 12:20, 13 January 2012 (EST)
CPalmer, the shyster RudrichBoucher did not say he may have overstated his resume. He said he said he was a "bit pretentious".[http://conservapedia.com/Talk:Question_evolution!_campaign/Archive_2] He admitted to engaging in pretentiousness. Please do not unnecessarily cloud the issue. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 12:20, 13 January 2012 (EST)
{|
|style="background-color: lightgrey;"|
:Stephen Jay Gould, a well-known evolutionist and professor of geology and paleontology at Harvard University, has stated, "The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of the branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils."
"But paleontologists have discovered several superb examples of intermediary forms and sequences, more than enough to convince any fair-minded skeptic about the reality of life's physical genealogy."
Stephen Jay Gould, Natural History, May 1994
"Transitional forms are generally lacking at the species level, but they are abundant between larger groups."
Stephen Jay Gould, Hen's Teeth and Horse's Toes, p.261
|}
Hmmm, it would appear that you "snipped" a few words from something Gould said, interpreted it in a way that suited you and only you, and then posted it like we're all twelve year olds who will shut up if you quote someone smart. Since apparently you don't understand why quote mining is wrong, or why an appeal to authority is not logical or convincing, I'm going to explain it to you again.
*Just because a famous scientist had an opinion doesn't mean it is true.
*Just because a scientist doesn't subscribe to evolution does not negate the fact that 99% of scientists do.
*Just because you can find a quote in a famous scientist's book that expresses some reservations about some aspect of evolution does not mean that the whole theory is in doubt.
*Just because you found fault in something a poster said does not mean you can ignore everything they say afterwards.
Since apparently [[User: Conservative]] is a group of immature people, and not just one extremely inconsiderate individual, I would appreciate it if whoever is controlling Conservative at the moment could let the rest of the posse know that they actually have to have EVIDENCE to win a debate. Insulting someone so much that they leave in disgust is not a victory.[[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 12:46, 13 January 2012 (EST)