Dumb Things Theists Say

[Esquilax]

I might just add that all these "higher brains" did was set up the conditions necessary for the foxes to be able to do the hard part by themselves, essentially recreating the natural environment - which is the whole point of these experiments. If living organisms didn't have the capacity to breed and evolve built in already, it's hardly likely that scientists would be able to get them to do it. And what purpose would that serve, if they were presenting findings that weren't there? How's that evolutionary conspiracy thing coming along there, G-C?

I forget who said this and can't be arsed to look it up, but no matter how sophisticated the science the easiest way to make babies (for the most part ) is through unskilled labour.

You and I know that, Stimbo, because we actually care to moderate our discourse in accordance with the truth. GC, on the other hand, decided the experiments yielded incorrect results before he had even begun learning about them, if he actually learned anything at all.

That's why it's the same old stuff his ilk use whenever we try to bring up dog breeds too: "they're all still dogs! An intelligence made it happen! Change within da species!" But here's the thing: short of artificial insemination or some complex series of harnesses, the breeding part of the equation is all down to the animals, and even if it wasn't... what exactly are we testing here? The experiment isn't somehow rendered invalid because people were involved; it's not like we were testing to see if foxes would breed by themselves or anything.

The experiment was about changes in gene frequencies. Which happened. Very clearly.

[LostLocke]

What I'm wondering now is if creationists have ever given a clear and concise definition of what they mean by 'kind'.
Is it a species? Is it above or below species?
At what point does one type of animal stop being the same 'kind' as another animal?

[downbeatplumb]

What I'm wondering now is if creationists have ever given a clear and concise definition of what they mean by 'kind'.
Is it a species? Is it above or below species?
At what point does one type of animal stop being the same 'kind' as another animal?

It never will coz that would mean they were wrong.

[Bad Writer]

I think I see GC's train of thought here, and if I'm right, he's beginning to acknowledge evolution as a fact, if only in a round-about way.

He's astute in pointing out that a "higher intelligence" produced the results of changed species, which is akin to him giving a nod to the idea that only a god could have induced such a thing as evolution in the first place, in God's own little lab called "Earth".

If he can acknowledge the possibility of evolution though backed by his belief in God as it is, whether he's right about the process or not, it's still a win in my eyes.

[Silver]

he's beginning to acknowledge evolution as a fact

You have not seen his response to another thread.

http://atheistforums.org/thread-19631-page-13.html

[Faith No More]

Here's an example of the invoking the Holy Spirit that I was talking about.

Yes I allow the Holy Spirit to guide me in the scriptures, if I didn't I would be as ignorant about them as you are.

http://atheistforums.org/thread-19485-po...#pid472782

In other words, I can't prove nor demonstrate why my interpretation is correct, but I will claim that there is a magic ghost navigating me to the truth as the reason I am right and you are wrong.

[Bad Writer]

he's beginning to acknowledge evolution as a fact

You have not seen his response to another thread.

http://atheistforums.org/thread-19631-page-13.html

So...

[Ryantology]

We have too many theists here who seem to be racing each other to the bottom.

[Godscreated]

We have too many theists here who seem to be racing each other to the bottom.

And you're looking up and waiting.

[Rahul]

Ah, the delightful ambiance of kindergarten.