Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Scientists Vacating Evolution

Expand Messages
  • Skofeld@wmconnect.com
    In a previous post, Kevi claims to have converted some people from evolution to creation. In my experience on these groups, I have seen exactly zero Sir
    Message 1 of 17 , Dec 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      In a previous post, Kevi claims to have "converted" some people from
      evolution to creation. In my experience on these groups, I have seen
      exactly zero >>

      Sir Anthony Flew the atheist coop.

      .




      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • tinroad66
      Tin: Disinterested in reality Scamfeld pretends that evolution is losing support. Creationists have been saying this for 150+ years during which time
      Message 2 of 17 , Dec 1, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        Tin: Disinterested in reality Scamfeld pretends that evolution is
        losing support. Creationists have been saying this for 150+ years
        during which time evolution has triumphed more fully within the
        educated and scientific communities.



        But *THIS* time it's true right Scamfeld ?



        --link--
        http://home.entouch.net/dmd/moreandmore.htm

        --Title--
        The Imminent Demise of Evolution:
        The Longest Running Falsehood in Creationism


        --excerpt--
        "The claim is that the theory of evolution (or major supporting
        concepts for it) is increasingly being abandoned by scientists, or
        is about to fall. This claim has many forms and has been made for
        over 178 years. This is a compilation of the claims over time. The
        purpose of this compilation is two-fold. First, it is to show that
        the claim has been made for a long, long time. Secondly, it is to
        show that entire careers have passed without seeing any of this
        movement away from evolution. Third, it is to show that the
        creationists are merely making these statements for the purpose of
        keeping hope alive that they are making progress towards their
        goal. In point of fact, no such progress is being made as anyone
        who has watched this area for the last 40 years can testify. The
        claim is false as history and present-day events show, yet that
        doesn't stop anyone wanting to sell books from making that claim.
        Now for the claims in chronological order. "







        --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, Skofeld@... wrote:
        >
        > In a previous post, Kevi claims to have "converted" some people
        from
        > evolution to creation.

        Tin: Yea right.






        In my experience on these groups, I have seen
        > exactly zero >>
        >
        > Sir Anthony Flew the atheist coop.


        Tin: Which leaves about 99% of the scientific community supporting
        evoluiton, even more in the relevant fields.

        Are there *ANY* actively publishing Paleoanthropologists who are
        full blown YECs ?


        Creationism is joke.
      • PIASAN@aol.com
        In a message dated 12/1/2006 4:30:29 AM Central Standard Time, Skofeld@wmconnect.com writes: Pi: In a previous post, Kevi claims to have converted some
        Message 3 of 17 , Dec 1, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          In a message dated 12/1/2006 4:30:29 AM Central Standard Time,
          Skofeld@... writes:

          Pi: In a previous post, Kevi claims to have "converted" some people from
          evolution to creation. In my experience on these groups, I have seen
          exactly zero >>
          Morrofeld:
          Sir Anthony Flew the atheist coop.



          ************
          Pi:
          Irrelevant.

          About 80% of those who accept evolution also believe in God. <shrug>


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • David Carper
          Like many creationists, skofeld seems to feel that lying is totally acceptable. I wonder if he realizes that he s lying to himself. David ... supporting ...
          Message 4 of 17 , Dec 1, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Like many creationists, skofeld seems to feel that lying is totally
            acceptable.

            I wonder if he realizes that he's lying to himself.


            David
            >
            >
            >
            > Tin: Disinterested in reality Scamfeld pretends that evolution is
            > losing support. Creationists have been saying this for 150+ years
            > during which time evolution has triumphed more fully within the
            > educated and scientific communities.
            >
            >
            >
            > But *THIS* time it's true right Scamfeld ?
            >
            >
            >
            > --link--
            > http://home.entouch.net/dmd/moreandmore.htm
            >
            > --Title--
            > The Imminent Demise of Evolution:
            > The Longest Running Falsehood in Creationism
            >
            >
            > --excerpt--
            > "The claim is that the theory of evolution (or major supporting
            > concepts for it) is increasingly being abandoned by scientists, or
            > is about to fall. This claim has many forms and has been made for
            > over 178 years. This is a compilation of the claims over time. The
            > purpose of this compilation is two-fold. First, it is to show that
            > the claim has been made for a long, long time. Secondly, it is to
            > show that entire careers have passed without seeing any of this
            > movement away from evolution. Third, it is to show that the
            > creationists are merely making these statements for the purpose of
            > keeping hope alive that they are making progress towards their
            > goal. In point of fact, no such progress is being made as anyone
            > who has watched this area for the last 40 years can testify. The
            > claim is false as history and present-day events show, yet that
            > doesn't stop anyone wanting to sell books from making that claim.
            > Now for the claims in chronological order. "
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, Skofeld@ wrote:
            > >
            > > In a previous post, Kevi claims to have "converted" some people
            > from
            > > evolution to creation.
            >
            > Tin: Yea right.
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > In my experience on these groups, I have seen
            > > exactly zero >>
            > >
            > > Sir Anthony Flew the atheist coop.
            >
            >
            > Tin: Which leaves about 99% of the scientific community
            supporting
            > evoluiton, even more in the relevant fields.
            >
            > Are there *ANY* actively publishing Paleoanthropologists who
            are
            > full blown YECs ?
            >
            >
            > Creationism is joke.
            >
          • Alan Saunders
            ... I wonder if he s an evolutionist agent provocatuer trying to make creationists look stupid. Like Kent Hovind is, for example ...
            Message 5 of 17 , Dec 1, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "David Carper"
              <david@...> wrote:
              >
              > Like many creationists, skofeld seems to feel that lying is totally
              > acceptable.
              >
              > I wonder if he realizes that he's lying to himself.
              >

              I wonder if he's an evolutionist 'agent provocatuer' trying to make
              creationists look stupid. Like Kent Hovind is, for example ...
            • David Carper
              ... If he is, he s quite good at it. In fact, I d say one of the best. Although kevi is pretty good at making creationists look stupid too. It seems like every
              Message 6 of 17 , Dec 1, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "Alan Saunders"
                <alan.catherine@...> wrote:
                >
                > --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "David Carper"
                > <david@> wrote:
                > >
                > > Like many creationists, skofeld seems to feel that lying is totally
                > > acceptable.
                > >
                > > I wonder if he realizes that he's lying to himself.
                > >
                >
                > I wonder if he's an evolutionist 'agent provocatuer' trying to make
                > creationists look stupid. Like Kent Hovind is, for example ...
                >
                If he is, he's quite good at it. In fact, I'd say one of the best.

                Although kevi is pretty good at making creationists look stupid too. It
                seems like every post he makes weakens the stance of creationism. So he
                might also be an 'agent provoatuer', although I suspect he's sincere.

                David
              • Skofeld@wmconnect.com
                Tin: Disinterested in reality Scamfeld pretends that evolution is losing support. Creationists have been saying this for 150+ years during which time
                Message 7 of 17 , Dec 2, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  Tin: Disinterested in reality Scamfeld pretends that evolution is
                  losing support. Creationists have been saying this for 150+ years
                  during which time evolution has triumphed more fully within the
                  educated and scientific communities. >>

                  Anyone who has read Evolution knows that it was initially rejected by the
                  science class but embraced by fake Christian class. By 1890, Evolution was dead.
                  It was somewhat renewed by finding Mendel's genetic research. Then it fell
                  into another long decay, until it was reworked again about 1930 as The New
                  Synthesis. By 1975, Dr.Gould again became candid and pronounced even The New
                  Sythesis of evolution as effectively DEAD. Since then, Intelligent Design and
                  breakthroughs in understanding of genetics, chemistry, and physics point the way to
                  Intelligent Design, with the failed racist theories of Evolution left in the
                  dustbin of history.

                  .






                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Drew Smith
                  Tin: Disinterested in reality Scamfeld pretends that evolution is losing support. Creationists have been saying this for 150+ years during which time evolution
                  Message 8 of 17 , Dec 2, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Tin: Disinterested in reality Scamfeld pretends that evolution is
                    losing support. Creationists have been saying this for 150+ years
                    during which time evolution has triumphed more fully within the
                    educated and scientific communities.

                    Skofeld:
                    Anyone who has read Evolution knows that it was initially rejected
                    by the
                    science class but embraced by fake Christian class. By 1890,
                    Evolution was dead.

                    Drew: And the evidence to support your claim is...? (Or is this going to be
                    yet another in your long string of drive-by, unsupported claims?)

                    ***

                    Skofeld:
                    It was somewhat renewed by finding Mendel's genetic research. Then
                    it fell
                    into another long decay

                    Drew: And the evidence to support your claim is...? (Or is this going to be
                    yet another in your long string of drive-by, unsupported claims?)

                    ***

                    Skofeld: By 1975, Dr.Gould again became candid and pronounced even The New
                    Sythesis of evolution as effectively DEAD.

                    Drew: And will you again evade providing a source for this claim? (Or is
                    this going to be yet another in your long string of drive-by, unsupported
                    claims?)

                    ***

                    Skofeld: Since then, Intelligent Design and breakthroughs in understanding
                    of genetics, chemistry, and physics point the way to Intelligent Design...

                    Drew: Discoveries in science continue to point to additional evidence to
                    support evolution. No "breakthroughs in understanding" point to
                    "Intelligent Design".

                    ***

                    Skofeld: ...with the failed racist theories of Evolution...

                    Drew: Evolution isn't a "racist" theory. However, let's review "the curse
                    of Ham", shall we?
                  • Susan Cogan
                    ... you are a hoot! Don t take a flu shot this year. Those things are developed using evolutionary principles. You should probably avoid antibiotics also for
                    Message 9 of 17 , Dec 2, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      At 02:15 AM 12/2/2006, you wrote:
                      >Tin: Disinterested in reality Scamfeld pretends that evolution is
                      >losing support. Creationists have been saying this for 150+ years
                      >during which time evolution has triumphed more fully within the
                      >educated and scientific communities. >>
                      >
                      >Anyone who has read Evolution knows that it was initially rejected by the
                      >science class but embraced by fake Christian class. By 1890,
                      >Evolution was dead.
                      >It was somewhat renewed by finding Mendel's genetic research. Then it fell
                      >into another long decay, until it was reworked again about 1930 as The New
                      >Synthesis. By 1975, Dr.Gould again became candid and pronounced even The New
                      >Sythesis of evolution as effectively DEAD. Since then, Intelligent Design and
                      >breakthroughs in understanding of genetics, chemistry, and physics
                      >point the way to
                      >Intelligent Design, with the failed racist theories of Evolution left in the
                      >dustbin of history.

                      you are a hoot! Don't take a flu shot this year. Those things are
                      developed using evolutionary principles. You should probably avoid
                      antibiotics also for the same reason.

                      Susan
                    • Randy Raymond
                      ... by the ... Evolution was dead. ... it fell ... The New ... The New ... Design and ... point the way to ... left in the ...
                      Message 10 of 17 , Dec 2, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, Skofeld@... wrote:
                        >
                        > Tin: Disinterested in reality Scamfeld pretends that evolution is
                        > losing support. Creationists have been saying this for 150+ years
                        > during which time evolution has triumphed more fully within the
                        > educated and scientific communities. >>
                        >
                        > Anyone who has read Evolution knows that it was initially rejected
                        by the
                        > science class but embraced by fake Christian class. By 1890,
                        Evolution was dead.
                        > It was somewhat renewed by finding Mendel's genetic research. Then
                        it fell
                        > into another long decay, until it was reworked again about 1930 as
                        The New
                        > Synthesis. By 1975, Dr.Gould again became candid and pronounced even
                        The New
                        > Sythesis of evolution as effectively DEAD. Since then, Intelligent
                        Design and
                        > breakthroughs in understanding of genetics, chemistry, and physics
                        point the way to
                        > Intelligent Design, with the failed racist theories of Evolution
                        left in the
                        > dustbin of history.
                        >
                        > .
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        >

                        ************************************************************************
                        Randy:

                        When someone first suggested that Skofield might be an Agent
                        Provocateur, trying to make evolution-denial look bad, I dismissed it.
                        However, with this post, I'm not so sure. I've seen some ignorant
                        posts before, but this one has to be in the top ten. The post is
                        almost like the game we used to play as kids: "opposite land". Where
                        you make up stuff that's the exact opposite of the way things really are.

                        Just in case you actually aren't aware of it Skofield, EVERY SINGLE
                        ADVANCE in biology (and other sciences like geology) made since 1859
                        has confirmed evolution as the source of biological diversity on this
                        planet. I know you won't do it, but would you care to give just one
                        discovery in biology in the last 150 years that disconfirms evolution
                        and tell us why it does so?
                      • tinroad66
                        ... years ... by the ... Tin: That s a lie, the scientifically community largely embraced evolution. but embraced by fake Christian class. Tin: By fake
                        Message 11 of 17 , Dec 4, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, Skofeld@... wrote:
                          >
                          > Tin: Disinterested in reality Scamfeld pretends that evolution is
                          > losing support. Creationists have been saying this for 150+
                          years
                          > during which time evolution has triumphed more fully within the
                          > educated and scientific communities. >>
                          >
                          > Anyone who has read Evolution knows that it was initially rejected
                          by the
                          > science class


                          Tin: That's a lie, the scientifically community largely embraced
                          evolution.











                          but embraced by fake Christian class.


                          Tin: By "fake" Scamfled means those who could be influenced by the
                          facts.










                          By 1890, Evolution was dead.
                          > It was somewhat renewed by finding Mendel's genetic research. Then
                          it fell
                          > into another long decay, until it was reworked again about 1930 as
                          The New
                          > Synthesis. By 1975, Dr.Gould again became candid and pronounced
                          even The New
                          > Sythesis of evolution as effectively DEAD.



                          Tin: Your history is a fraud. You are a liar.


                          In reality, evolution gained wide acceptance within the scientific
                          community shortly after Darwin's famous publication. From there
                          it's become more widely accepted and the details of evolution more
                          specifically illuminated.










                          Since then, Intelligent Design and
                          > breakthroughs in understanding of genetics, chemistry, and physics
                          point the way to
                          > Intelligent Design,


                          Tin: ID is a joke. There is no research program in ID, it has
                          only one publication, it has no predictions, no mechanisms, and no
                          explanations for the scientific data.



                          Where are all the peer reviewed scientific publications showing
                          that ID is right ?














                          with the failed racist theories of Evolution


                          Tin: Historical lies followed gross slimy smear----yup-----typical
                          scamfled.











                          left in the
                          > dustbin of history.


                          Tin: Have you ever considered looking at reality ?


                          Pick up a textbook or journal in paleontology, biology or
                          geology ---- you'll find evolutionary biology alive and well ---
                          meanwhile ID is nonexistent/irrelevant.



                          The interesting thing about Scamfeld's careless lies is that
                          later on we'll find him contradicting his own lies when he tries to
                          explain why no creationists ideas can get published in the peer
                          reviewed scientific journals. Then he'll claim a pro evolution bias
                          in the scientific community.
                        • tinroad66
                          ... years ... rejected by the ... Then it fell ... as The New ... even The New ... Intelligent Design and ... physics ... left in the ... Tin: Go right back
                          Message 12 of 17 , Dec 4, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, Susan Cogan
                            <sbcogan@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > At 02:15 AM 12/2/2006, you wrote:
                            > >Tin: Disinterested in reality Scamfeld pretends that evolution is
                            > >losing support. Creationists have been saying this for 150+
                            years
                            > >during which time evolution has triumphed more fully within the
                            > >educated and scientific communities. >>
                            > >
                            > >Anyone who has read Evolution knows that it was initially
                            rejected by the
                            > >science class but embraced by fake Christian class. By 1890,
                            > >Evolution was dead.
                            > >It was somewhat renewed by finding Mendel's genetic research.
                            Then it fell
                            > >into another long decay, until it was reworked again about 1930
                            as The New
                            > >Synthesis. By 1975, Dr.Gould again became candid and pronounced
                            even The New
                            > >Sythesis of evolution as effectively DEAD. Since then,
                            Intelligent Design and
                            > >breakthroughs in understanding of genetics, chemistry, and
                            physics
                            > >point the way to
                            > >Intelligent Design, with the failed racist theories of Evolution
                            left in the
                            > >dustbin of history.
                            >
                            > you are a hoot! Don't take a flu shot this year. Those things are
                            > developed using evolutionary principles. You should probably avoid
                            > antibiotics also for the same reason.



                            Tin: Go right back up to my very first sentence about Skorowitz, it
                            says it all.
                          • tinroad66
                            ... evolution is ... years ... the ... rejected ... Tin: Uninterested in reality, Skofled creates his own fantasy world.
                            Message 13 of 17 , Dec 4, 2006
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "Drew Smith"
                              <drewsmithtpa@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Tin: Disinterested in reality Scamfeld pretends that
                              evolution is
                              > losing support. Creationists have been saying this for 150+
                              years
                              > during which time evolution has triumphed more fully within
                              the
                              > educated and scientific communities.
                              >
                              > Skofeld:
                              > Anyone who has read Evolution knows that it was initially
                              rejected
                              > by the
                              > science class


                              Tin: Uninterested in reality, Skofled creates his own fantasy world.
                            • kevi
                              ... totally ... make ... too. It ... So he ... sincere. ... ************************************* hehehe... I just chuckle at the way evos think they are the
                              Message 14 of 17 , Dec 10, 2006
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "David Carper"
                                <david@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "Alan Saunders"
                                > <alan.catherine@> wrote:
                                > >
                                > > --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "David Carper"
                                > > <david@> wrote:
                                > > >
                                > > > Like many creationists, skofeld seems to feel that lying is
                                totally
                                > > > acceptable.
                                > > >
                                > > > I wonder if he realizes that he's lying to himself.
                                > > >
                                > >
                                > > I wonder if he's an evolutionist 'agent provocatuer' trying to
                                make
                                > > creationists look stupid. Like Kent Hovind is, for example ...
                                > >
                                > If he is, he's quite good at it. In fact, I'd say one of the best.
                                >
                                > Although kevi is pretty good at making creationists look stupid
                                too. It
                                > seems like every post he makes weakens the stance of creationism.
                                So he
                                > might also be an 'agent provoatuer', although I suspect he's
                                sincere.
                                >
                                > David
                                >
                                *************************************

                                hehehe... I just chuckle at the way evos think they are the smart
                                ones... just because they think evolution is true --- maybe they
                                also think they are evolving into higher beings, leaving
                                creationists in the dusts. Too bad it will take millions of years
                                to find that out. LOL.
                              • David Carper
                                ... Wow. Kevi actually got something right. Evolution DOES take a long time. Which just points out the stupidity of believing in YEC. Oh, and BTW, it s not so
                                Message 15 of 17 , Dec 10, 2006
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "kevi"
                                  <meru_counsel@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "David Carper"
                                  > <david@> wrote:
                                  > >
                                  > > --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "Alan Saunders"
                                  > > <alan.catherine@> wrote:
                                  > > >
                                  > > > --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "David Carper"
                                  > > > <david@> wrote:
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > Like many creationists, skofeld seems to feel that lying is
                                  > totally
                                  > > > > acceptable.
                                  > > > >
                                  > > > > I wonder if he realizes that he's lying to himself.
                                  > > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > > I wonder if he's an evolutionist 'agent provocatuer' trying to
                                  > make
                                  > > > creationists look stupid. Like Kent Hovind is, for example ...
                                  > > >
                                  > > If he is, he's quite good at it. In fact, I'd say one of the best.
                                  > >
                                  > > Although kevi is pretty good at making creationists look stupid
                                  > too. It
                                  > > seems like every post he makes weakens the stance of creationism.
                                  > So he
                                  > > might also be an 'agent provoatuer', although I suspect he's
                                  > sincere.
                                  > >
                                  > > David
                                  > >
                                  > *************************************
                                  >
                                  > hehehe... I just chuckle at the way evos think they are the smart
                                  > ones... just because they think evolution is true --- maybe they
                                  > also think they are evolving into higher beings, leaving
                                  > creationists in the dusts. Too bad it will take millions of years
                                  > to find that out. LOL.
                                  >

                                  Wow. Kevi actually got something right. Evolution DOES take a long
                                  time.

                                  Which just points out the stupidity of believing in YEC.

                                  Oh, and BTW, it's not so much being smart, it's being open to
                                  accepting the evidence, rather than ignoring literal tons of it and
                                  blindly placing all faith in a book written 20 centuries ago by
                                  superstitious people.


                                  David
                                • kevi
                                  ... Saunders ... Carper ... is ... to ... example ... ... best. ... stupid ... creationism. ... smart ... years ... and ...
                                  Message 16 of 17 , Dec 11, 2006
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "David Carper"
                                    <david@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "kevi"
                                    > <meru_counsel@> wrote:
                                    > >
                                    > > --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "David Carper"
                                    > > <david@> wrote:
                                    > > >
                                    > > > --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "Alan
                                    Saunders"
                                    > > > <alan.catherine@> wrote:
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "David
                                    Carper"
                                    > > > > <david@> wrote:
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > > Like many creationists, skofeld seems to feel that lying
                                    is
                                    > > totally
                                    > > > > > acceptable.
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > > > I wonder if he realizes that he's lying to himself.
                                    > > > > >
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > > I wonder if he's an evolutionist 'agent provocatuer' trying
                                    to
                                    > > make
                                    > > > > creationists look stupid. Like Kent Hovind is, for
                                    example ...
                                    > > > >
                                    > > > If he is, he's quite good at it. In fact, I'd say one of the
                                    best.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > Although kevi is pretty good at making creationists look
                                    stupid
                                    > > too. It
                                    > > > seems like every post he makes weakens the stance of
                                    creationism.
                                    > > So he
                                    > > > might also be an 'agent provoatuer', although I suspect he's
                                    > > sincere.
                                    > > >
                                    > > > David
                                    > > >
                                    > > *************************************
                                    > >
                                    > > hehehe... I just chuckle at the way evos think they are the
                                    smart
                                    > > ones... just because they think evolution is true --- maybe they
                                    > > also think they are evolving into higher beings, leaving
                                    > > creationists in the dusts. Too bad it will take millions of
                                    years
                                    > > to find that out. LOL.
                                    > >
                                    >
                                    > Wow. Kevi actually got something right. Evolution DOES take a long
                                    > time.
                                    >
                                    > Which just points out the stupidity of believing in YEC.
                                    >
                                    > Oh, and BTW, it's not so much being smart, it's being open to
                                    > accepting the evidence, rather than ignoring literal tons of it
                                    and
                                    > blindly placing all faith in a book written 20 centuries ago by
                                    > superstitious people.
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > David
                                    >
                                    *******************************************

                                    To me, to think that a bacteria could evolve into millions of
                                    living species is the real superstition.
                                  • David Carper
                                    ... they ... long ... Why? David
                                    Message 17 of 17 , Dec 11, 2006
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "kevi"
                                      <meru_counsel@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "David Carper"
                                      > <david@> wrote:
                                      > >
                                      > > --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "kevi"
                                      > > <meru_counsel@> wrote:
                                      > > >
                                      > > > --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "David Carper"
                                      > > > <david@> wrote:
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "Alan
                                      > Saunders"
                                      > > > > <alan.catherine@> wrote:
                                      > > > > >
                                      > > > > > --- In creationevolutiondebate@yahoogroups.com, "David
                                      > Carper"
                                      > > > > > <david@> wrote:
                                      > > > > > >
                                      > > > > > > Like many creationists, skofeld seems to feel that lying
                                      > is
                                      > > > totally
                                      > > > > > > acceptable.
                                      > > > > > >
                                      > > > > > > I wonder if he realizes that he's lying to himself.
                                      > > > > > >
                                      > > > > >
                                      > > > > > I wonder if he's an evolutionist 'agent provocatuer' trying
                                      > to
                                      > > > make
                                      > > > > > creationists look stupid. Like Kent Hovind is, for
                                      > example ...
                                      > > > > >
                                      > > > > If he is, he's quite good at it. In fact, I'd say one of the
                                      > best.
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > Although kevi is pretty good at making creationists look
                                      > stupid
                                      > > > too. It
                                      > > > > seems like every post he makes weakens the stance of
                                      > creationism.
                                      > > > So he
                                      > > > > might also be an 'agent provoatuer', although I suspect he's
                                      > > > sincere.
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > > David
                                      > > > >
                                      > > > *************************************
                                      > > >
                                      > > > hehehe... I just chuckle at the way evos think they are the
                                      > smart
                                      > > > ones... just because they think evolution is true --- maybe
                                      they
                                      > > > also think they are evolving into higher beings, leaving
                                      > > > creationists in the dusts. Too bad it will take millions of
                                      > years
                                      > > > to find that out. LOL.
                                      > > >
                                      > >
                                      > > Wow. Kevi actually got something right. Evolution DOES take a
                                      long
                                      > > time.
                                      > >
                                      > > Which just points out the stupidity of believing in YEC.
                                      > >
                                      > > Oh, and BTW, it's not so much being smart, it's being open to
                                      > > accepting the evidence, rather than ignoring literal tons of it
                                      > and
                                      > > blindly placing all faith in a book written 20 centuries ago by
                                      > > superstitious people.
                                      > >
                                      > >
                                      > > David
                                      > >
                                      > *******************************************
                                      >
                                      > To me, to think that a bacteria could evolve into millions of
                                      > living species is the real superstition.
                                      >

                                      Why?

                                      David
                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.