Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: November 30, 2024, 11:27 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Why did Communists promote Evolution?
RE: Why did Communists promote Evolution?
Lol, look at Evolutionists try to run away from the fact that the lack of a sufficient number of intermediate forms in the Fossil Record absolutely is a problem for evolution. Why, Charles Darwin himself recognized this:

1. "Charles Darwin raised a lack of transitional fossils as a possible objection to his own theory: “Why, if species have descended from other species by fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms?”2 Later in this chapter of his landmark book, he expressed hope that future discoveries would be made of transitional forms, or of creatures that showed some transitional structure—perhaps a half-scale/half-feather ...

The first supposed transitional form offered in the report is Sahelanthropus. This 2001 discovery was first hailed as a transitional form in the ape-to-human line, but controversy over its transitional status immediately ensued. Brigitte Senut of the Natural History Museum in Paris was skeptical, saying that its skull features, “especially the [canine teeth],”3 were characteristic of female gorillas, not human-like gorillas. Senut and her colleagues also disputed that Sahelanthropus was even in the ancestry of humans at all: “To represent a valid clade, hominids must share unique defining features, and Sahelanthropus does not appear to have been an obligate biped [creature that walked on two feet].”4 In other words, Sahelanthropus is at best a highly disputed fossil of an extinct ape, having no clear transitional features." https://www.icr.org/article/a-150-years-...lp-darwin/

2. Angrboda, you either don't understand Rev. Williams argument - which btw turned to be prescient and absolutely accurate 25 years in advance; and it's preposterous for Evolutionists to claim all Evolutionists accepted it was a fake at that time, otherwise why was he even controverting it? A small minority did, yes, but 250 publications treated it as a fact, as documented earlier, over 40 years. It was claimed to be the Missing Link. It was used as evidence against Christianity in a Legal Trial. It was universally accepted as a hoax only in 1953 - or are deliberately strawmaning it.

Here, let me break it down for you in a series of logical steps: (1) if apes and humans descended from an alleged missing link common ancestor, these presumed ape-men would have existed for millions of years. (2) we have plenty of fossils of apes who were apes and plenty of fossils of humans who were humans (3) If any intermediate ape-men ever existed for millions of years, they would leave fossil remains in numbers comparable to that of fossil remains of actual humans and actual apes (4) if therefore we do not have a comparably sufficient number of the alleged intermediate ape-men species, whether that that was so-called Lucy, or the Piltdown Man Hoax, or Sahelanthropus, that then is Solid Mathematic/Scientific Reason to be extremely cautious/skeptical of AHE, at the least. 

Again, if Evolutionists were True Lovers of Science for Science's sake, they would be saying things like: "We have to acknowledge Rev. Williams got this one RIGHT, while many of his contemporaries were totally WRONG. His reasoning was solid and his conclusion was right". Instead, Liberal Evolutionists don't do that, and continue to play their word games and liberal sophisms.

3. There's no point beating around the bush: if these presumed ape-men were apes in some sense, and they are ultimately the ancestors of modern humans, as your theory claims, then it's absolutely true that apes ultimately gave birth to us - per your theory - absurd as that sounds. And if they did, then, in principle, we could give birth to apes or ape-like creatures one day, perhaps with some slight variations from the alleged ape-like ancestors we allegedly have; as our ancestors were, so can our descendants be. But if the latter is not true, the former is not true either. 

Actually, human beings only came from other human beings. The first human beings - Y Chromosomal Adam and Mitochondrial Eve - came not from any apes but by the Special Creation of Almighty God. Evolutionists were saying some time ago such sophisms as this Adam never met Eve. Well, a few decades later, they changed that sophism of theirs, and admitted Adam and Eve may indeed have lived together after all.

Here is the Nature Journal: "The Book of Genesis puts Adam and Eve together in the Garden of Eden, but geneticists’ version of the duo — the ancestors to whom the Y chromosomes and mitochondrial DNA of today’s humans can be traced — were thought to have lived tens of thousands of years apart. Now, two major studies of modern humans’ Y chromosomes suggest that ‘Y-chromosome Adam’ and ‘mitochondrial Eve’ may have lived around the same time after all1,2." https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2013.13478

Evolutionists still deny these were the First Couple of course, but at least they admitted they lived around the same time. Maybe in 25 more years they'll get it right, who knows. In the meanwhile, Rev. Williams was right on Piltdown Man 25 years before most Evolutionists, and we are right today.
Reply
RE: Why did Communists promote Evolution?
I recommend Evolution: Still a Theory in Crisis by ID Scientist Michael Denton.

https://www.amazon.in/Evolution-Theory-C...1936599325

Excellent Material including on the Fossil Record and developing his earlier work.

"More than thirty years after his landmark book Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (1985), biologist Michael Denton revisits his earlier thesis about the inability of Darwinian evolution to explain the history of life. He argues that there remains "an irresistible consilience of evidence for rejecting Darwinian cumulative selection as the major driving force of evolution." From the origin of life to the origin of human language, the great divisions in the natural order are still as profound as ever, and they are still unsupported by the series of adaptive transitional forms predicted by Darwin. In addition, Denton makes a provocative new argument about the pervasiveness of nonadaptive order throughout biology, order that cannot be explained by the Darwinian mechanism."
Reply
RE: Why did Communists promote Evolution?
ID =/= Science, hence micheal Denton isn’t a scientist

ID = religion = dishonesty = malice = intention social exploitation and propagation of ignorance and superstition.   hence Michael Denton is your kind of trash.
Reply
RE: Why did Communists promote Evolution?
(July 27, 2023 at 7:52 pm)Nishant Xavier Wrote: I recommend Evolution: Still a Theory in Crisis by ID Scientist Michael Denton.

https://www.amazon.in/Evolution-Theory-C...1936599325

Excellent Material including on the Fossil Record and developing his earlier work.

"More than thirty years after his landmark book Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (1985), biologist Michael Denton revisits his earlier thesis about the inability of Darwinian evolution to explain the history of life. He argues that there remains "an irresistible consilience of evidence for rejecting Darwinian cumulative selection as the major driving force of evolution." From the origin of life to the origin of human language, the great divisions in the natural order are still as profound as ever, and they are still unsupported by the series of adaptive transitional forms predicted by Darwin. In addition, Denton makes a provocative new argument about the pervasiveness of nonadaptive order throughout biology, order that cannot be explained by the Darwinian mechanism."

Michael Denton is PAID to promote the crap he does. He would be fired if he said anything else.
Classic conflict of interest.
Every religion is true one way or another. It is true when understood metaphorically. But when it gets stuck in its own metaphors, interpreting them as facts, then you are in trouble. - Joseph Campbell  Popcorn

Militant Atheist Commie Evolutionist 
Reply
RE: Why did Communists promote Evolution?
Unofficial PSA - there is NOT an award for the most posts/threads.

Nor does word count gain you anything.

You are here for our amusement.
[Image: MmQV79M.png]  
                                      
Reply
RE: Why did Communists promote Evolution?
Since he's probably never getting banned.  I will now bribe offer the mods these great gifts and if Xaviers name suddenly changes to Pissant then that would be  happy coincidence

Pocket change, New pack of playdoh, and a Dennys coupon.



[Image: il_fullxfull.2203677576_m1ru.jpg]

[Image: s-l500.jpg]


[Image: s-l1200.webp]
"For the only way to eternal glory is a life lived in service of our Lord, FSM; Verily it is FSM who is the perfect being the name higher than all names, king of all kings and will bestow upon us all, one day, The great reclaiming"  -The Prophet Boiardi-

      Conservative trigger warning.
[Image: s-l640.jpg]
                                                                                         
Reply
RE: Why did Communists promote Evolution?
We are not easily amused. We need much better clowns.
Reply
RE: Why did Communists promote Evolution?
(July 27, 2023 at 7:53 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: ID =/= Science, hence micheal Denton isn’t a scientist

ID = religion = dishonesty = malice = intention social exploitation and propagation of ignorance and superstition.   hence Michael Denton is your kind of trash.

Actually, Denton IS a scientist (biochemistry), just a really bad one.

Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
Reply
RE: Why did Communists promote Evolution?
(July 27, 2023 at 8:36 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:
(July 27, 2023 at 7:53 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: ID =/= Science, hence micheal Denton isn’t a scientist

ID = religion = dishonesty = malice = intention social exploitation and propagation of ignorance and superstition.   hence Michael Denton is your kind of trash.

Actually, Denton IS a scientist (biochemistry), just a really bad one.

Boru

Denton debunked. 
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/denton.html
Every religion is true one way or another. It is true when understood metaphorically. But when it gets stuck in its own metaphors, interpreting them as facts, then you are in trouble. - Joseph Campbell  Popcorn

Militant Atheist Commie Evolutionist 
Reply
RE: Why did Communists promote Evolution?
(July 27, 2023 at 8:36 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:
(July 27, 2023 at 7:53 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: ID =/= Science, hence micheal Denton isn’t a scientist

ID = religion = dishonesty = malice = intention social exploitation and propagation of ignorance and superstition.   hence Michael Denton is your kind of trash.

Actually, Denton IS a scientist (biochemistry), just a really bad one.

Boru

No, that he does biochemistry does not make him a scientist.    Merely practicing certain craft which are also used by scientists doesn’t make one scientist, only a technician.   Scientists understand how and why science works and doesn’t try to parlay the ability to practice certain craft specific one area of science into a fraudulent claim of authority in other area of science.   He does exactly that.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Abiogenesis ("Chemical Evolution"): Did Life come from Non-Life by Pure Chance. Nishant Xavier 55 4860 August 6, 2023 at 5:19 pm
Last Post: Thumpalumpacus
  Why did God get such a makeover in the New Testament? Hi600 10 1953 April 1, 2023 at 4:48 am
Last Post: Goosebump
  Atheists: Why did female with fat butts and short legs exist? Lambe7 14 2438 July 30, 2020 at 7:17 am
Last Post: Gwaithmir
  Why did I (an atheist) legally change my name to "God"? GodBennett 33 4267 July 17, 2020 at 5:49 am
Last Post: Porcupine
  Why did I (an atheist) change my name legally to "God"? GodBennett 0 3315 July 4, 2020 at 10:13 am
Last Post: GodBennett
  Theist ➤ Why ☠ Evolution is not Scientific ✔ The Joker 348 55546 November 26, 2016 at 11:47 pm
Last Post: Amarok
  Why and How Did you Kill God? ScienceAf 67 13476 August 28, 2016 at 11:19 pm
Last Post: Arkilogue
  When, Where, How and Why did you become Atheist? bambi_swag 122 33243 October 18, 2015 at 6:26 pm
Last Post: robvalue
  Why did you come to this board? Kingpin 131 24640 August 18, 2015 at 8:38 am
Last Post: ignoramus
  What can we do to promote Atheism? How can we unite? shadowninjax 93 38721 November 20, 2013 at 11:08 am
Last Post: thesummerqueen



Users browsing this thread: 6 Guest(s)