Brief History of Evolutionary Theory

[Tiberius]

So, like they did in the book and on the website, I cited the original sources that they got the information from. No rule-breakage here, sorry.

Wrong. You broke our forum rules by copy/pasting large chunks of non-original text that could have easily been linked to. http://atheistforums.org/rules.php

It's the same thing as copy/pasting. Get over it.

No. Being able to write your own explanations is one of many ways in which you can show true understanding of a subject.

One thing, though: You're right. I'm going to create individual threads for individual topics. One thread for the Second Law, another thread asking people what they think about some of today's mainstream evolutionary beliefs based on the disproven and outdated beliefs of the fathers of evolution 100-150 years ago, some of whom said that "spirits" told them the theories.

I can't wait. Everything you've said so far has been rebutted by serious scientists and philosophers; many of them Christian.

[Rayaan]

Okay, dismiss everything I said based on the the location of the webmaster of the website. You're not doing much to display your "open-mindedness" and willingness to listen. Not very scientific of you, if you ask me. Or if you ask anybody, really. If you don't like a fact, you just claim it's lunacy, and that makes life easy for you. Which is fine, I don't blame you for not wanting to examine the substance of what the theory is made of. Even though I haven't even begun getting into the scientific impossibility of evolution, and how it contradicts science itself. You can't even handle the history of evolution...and all I did was go through part of it.

You can leave now. The close-minded are a hindrance.

There's no way that you can refute evolution.
Although, you might have a little more breathing room if you argue for intelligent design instead of creationism.

... Just my two cents for now.

[Zen Badger]

This is the opening paragraph of the article you posted....

Life evolution is founded on the twin theories of spontaneous generation and Lamarckism (the inheritance of acquired characteristics);—yet, although they remain the basis of biological evolution, both were debunked by scientists over a century ago.

See the mistake/bald faced lie? I'm guessing not.

Spontaneous generation and Lamarkism ARE NOT PARTS of modern evolutionary theory, and certainly not the basis of it.

TCS, you are only the latest in a long line of misinformed individuals who have absolutely no understanding of evolutionary theory whatsoever. Yet come on here and display their ignorance like a badge of honor.

I would guess( with a high degree of certainty ) that your only (mis)understanding of Evolution comes from your church and cretinist websites like answersingenesis.

My suggestion is that you go and read some real books by real scientists on the subject and obtain a true comphrehension of the issue.

Until then anything you have to say on the matter is utterly worthless.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

And Padraic--

I agree: It probably is best if you stay silent and just observe quietly from the back row.

Go away,actually read Darwin, his evidence and his inferences ,not what ANYONE else says.Make up your own mind, then come back and tell us what you think,in your own words. That's what I did around 1975 and why I can't be bothered with you right now.Willful ignorance is really tedious.

[Shinylight]

His discoveries, along with the fact that circumcision of Jewish males for 4,000 years had not affected the foreskin, doomed the theory (*Jean Rostand, Orion Book of Evolution, 1960, p. 64). Yet Lamarckism continues today as the disguised basis of evolutionary biology. For example, evolutionists still teach that giraffes kept stretching their necks to reach higher branches, so their necks became longer!

Oh wow...

[tackattack]

If you want open-mindedness and conversation feel free to share YOUR thoughts on a subject and use evidence to back up your claims. The responses you've gotten come from the many who have done things in a similar way to what you have and ended up preaching someone else's material instead of talking about their beliefs. I encourage you to try again with more intellectual honesty.

[HeyItsZeus]

And Padraic--

I agree: It probably is best if you stay silent and just observe quietly from the back row.

http://moviedanshow.com/wp-content/uploa...063167.jpg

That's not cool. Are you an ass-hole?

[Zen Badger]

The stupidity keeps building,

(1812). This is a well-authenticated discovery which has been in the British Museum for over a century. A fully modern human skeleton was found in the French Caribbean island of Guadeloupe inside an immense slab of limestone, dated by modern geologists at 28 million years old. (More examples could be cited.) Human beings, just like those living today (but sometimes larger), have been found in very deep levels of strata.

Aside from it not being well authenticated(the only references I could find were on websites hosted by cretinists and the lunatic fringe)

You are using an example dated at 28 millionyears old to support the ludicrous notion of the earth only being six thousand years old.

Oh the sweet sweet irony

If you are going to post these links at least have the wit to read them thoroughly beforehand so you can save yourself major embarrassment.

There's a good lad[/u]

[Shinylight]

The more you read, the funnier it gets.

It is of interest that, after engaging in spiritism, certain men in history have been seized with a deep hatred of God and have then been guided to devise evil teachings, that have destroyed large numbers of people, while others have engaged in warfare which have annihilated millions. In connection with this, we think of such known spiritists as *Sigmund Freud and *Adolf Hitler. It is not commonly known that *Charles Darwin, while a naturalist aboard the Beagle, was initiated into witchcraft in South America by nationals. During horseback travels into the interior, he took part in their ceremonies and, as a result, something happened to him. Upon his return to England, although his health was strangely weakened, he spent the rest of his life working on theories to destroy faith in the Creator.

Some people seem too stupid to live.

[Minimalist]

Okay, dismiss everything I said based on the the location of the webmaster of the website. You're not doing much to display your "open-mindedness"

Sonny, You said nothing. All you did was post a load of shit from a bunch of creationist assholes which has already been dismissed for the utter garbage it is. Do you really think you are the first to show up here spouting this stupidity?

Here's a little academic challenge for you. I'm sure it will send you to another web site looking for answers.


For the sake of argument let us assume that evolution is false. Now let us have all the evidence which shows that life began 6,000 years ago in the middle east to support your own belief system.

As you said, you work under the assumption that all you have to do is "refute" evolution and then your childish superstitions will be true by default. No. Doesn't work that way. There are not two equal choices here. It is not evolution OR childish fairy tales. There is nothing that can save bible idiocy from the fate it so richly deserves. If evolution is false...and it is not...all it means is that there is another mechanism which science has overlooked.

But that will have nothing to do with your fucking god, either.