Post Reply
Page 1 of 9  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 9 Next
Switch to Forum Live View The case for non-intelligent design
2 years ago  ::  Apr 28, 2012 - 1:44PM #1
rsielin
Posts: 4,166

Read it and weep creationists ....


Inside the Human Genome: A Case for Non-Intelligent Design by John C. Avise, Distinguished Professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, at the University of California, Irvine  www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/L...


Review: "Over millennia we have become experts in theodicy--vindicating the perfections of God despite the world's errors and evils. Having now discovered a great deal about life at and below the cellular level, we know that our genetic machinery is full of waste, mistakes, dead ends, and the molecular equivalent of evil. No intelligent designer would produce such a mess. But it works, and it is exactly what would result from genetic evolution. In this eloquent look at the human genome, distinguished evolutionary geneticist John C. Avise makes it all clear and accessible."--Paul R. Gross, co-author of Creationism's Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design 

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 28, 2012 - 3:03PM #2
57
Posts: 21,991

Signature in the cell. Read it an weep my evobabbling friends.



Go ahead..check it out.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 28, 2012 - 3:41PM #3
rsielin
Posts: 4,166

Apr 28, 2012 -- 3:03PM, 57 wrote:

Signature in the cell.


A book on biology by a non-biologist. Yep, that's how creationists do it. The blind leading the blind. All are possessed by Morton's Demon.


Now, if you could produce some peer reviewed science that would even remotely support creationism... then we can talk. Got any?  ROTFLMAO!


Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 28, 2012 - 3:42PM #4
Ken
Posts: 33,859

Apr 28, 2012 -- 3:03PM, 57 wrote:


Signature in the cell. Read it an weep my evobabbling friends.



Go ahead..check it out.



Don't bother. Stephen Meyer is a whore for the Discovery Institute. The book received terrible reviews.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 28, 2012 - 6:55PM #5
Midutch
Posts: 4,080

Apr 28, 2012 -- 3:03PM, 57 wrote:


Signature in the cell. Read it an weep my evobabbling friends.


Weeping ... with laughter.


About all that "creation science" has been able to produce in the 2000+ years they've been trying is unintentional humor and hilarity.


The ONLY ones who don't seem to see that is the "creationists" themselves.

"creationism" ... 2000+ years worth of ABYSMAL FAILURE ... and proud of it.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 28, 2012 - 8:35PM #6
Blü
Posts: 24,649

57


Stephen Meyer, eh?


I remember him principally because he ran away so fast rather than give evidence at the Dover trial that he soiled himself.  So of course did his buddies Campbell and Dembski.


You can understand their point of view, though.  They wanted to have their creationist views presented at the trial, so at the start they looked forward to using it as a soapbox. 


Then someone told them that if they did that, they'd be liable to cross-examination.


Oh no!! Cross-examination, as you know, is a very special horror for creationists.  They have to stay in the witness box and actually answer questions about their claims.  They can't just disappear, as you do when you don't like the questions, or resort to the usual smart-ass dismissals - like your trademark NEXT! - or resort to the usual put-downs, condescensions and red herrings and so on - I don't have to tell you about those. 


No, they actually have to respond.


Pure nightmare!


So off they ran.  Oh, they ran.  Over the hills and far, far, far away.  So fast, so far, so desperately, it'd down in history as one of the great routs.  And not even one shot was fired!

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 29, 2012 - 7:04AM #7
57
Posts: 21,991

Apr 28, 2012 -- 3:41PM, rsielin wrote:


Apr 28, 2012 -- 3:03PM, 57 wrote:

Signature in the cell.


A book on biology by a non-biologist. Yep, that's how creationists do it. The blind leading the blind. All are possessed by Morton's Demon.


Now, if you could produce some peer reviewed science that would even remotely support creationism... then we can talk. Got any?  ROTFLMAO!





Such a typical evo-babbling response. .....attack the individual rather than the science.


NEXT

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 29, 2012 - 7:06AM #8
57
Posts: 21,991

Apr 28, 2012 -- 6:55PM, Midutch wrote:


Apr 28, 2012 -- 3:03PM, 57 wrote:


Signature in the cell. Read it an weep my evobabbling friends.


Weeping ... with laughter.


About all that "creation science" has been able to produce in the 2000+ years they've been trying is unintentional humor and hilarity.


The ONLY ones who don't seem to see that is the "creationists" themselves.




And yet another rebuttle by an evo-babbler lacking any scientific support.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 29, 2012 - 7:11AM #9
57
Posts: 21,991

Apr 28, 2012 -- 8:35PM, Blü wrote:


57


Stephen Meyer, eh?


I remember him principally because he ran away so fast rather than give evidence at the Dover trial that he soiled himself.  So of course did his buddies Campbell and Dembski.


You can understand their point of view, though.  They wanted to have their creationist views presented at the trial, so at the start they looked forward to using it as a soapbox. 


Then someone told them that if they did that, they'd be liable to cross-examination.


Oh no!! Cross-examination, as you know, is a very special horror for creationists.  They have to stay in the witness box and actually answer questions about their claims.  They can't just disappear, as you do when you don't like the questions, or resort to the usual smart-ass dismissals - like your trademark NEXT! - or resort to the usual put-downs, condescensions and red herrings and so on - I don't have to tell you about those. 


No, they actually have to respond.


Pure nightmare!


So off they ran.  Oh, they ran.  Over the hills and far, far, far away.  So fast, so far, so desperately, it'd down in history as one of the great routs.  And not even one shot was fired!




...and once again, a third post that doesn't address the issue...my, my, my...such evo-babbling.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Apr 29, 2012 - 8:22AM #10
rsielin
Posts: 4,166

Apr 29, 2012 -- 7:04AM, 57 wrote:

Apr 28, 2012 -- 3:41PM, rsielin wrote:

Apr 28, 2012 -- 3:03PM, 57 wrote:

Signature in the cell.


A book on biology by a non-biologist. Yep, that's how creationists do it. The blind leading the blind. All are possessed by Morton's Demon.


Now, if you could produce some peer reviewed science that would even remotely support creationism... then we can talk. Got any?  ROTFLMAO!


Such a typical evo-babbling response. .....attack the individual rather than the science.


NEXT



Okay, so you don't get your science from scientists. You get your science from story tellers. You can run away now. Come back when you have some grown up real empirical evidence.  We're way past kindergarden story time. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 9  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 9 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook