‘Impossible’ fossils cast doubt on evolution

[StanJ]

I would like to remind members that this is a discussion forum. Which means that members can discuss issues pertaining to christian thought and members should be treated with respect without the "I am ashamed, appalled, dishonest" comments coming from the peanut gallery. I have a right to my opinion and no topic is exempt from being thoroughly investigated.

Sadly this is a common ploy of those that support evolution as part of their world view. Instead of proving that Gen 1 is not literal, they take the route of condescension against those that do.

 

[Angelina]

Sadly this is a common ploy of those that support evolution as part of their world view. Instead of proving that Gen 1 is not literal, they take the route of condescension against those that do.

I actually read something like that in an article ~ fascinating!

 

[StanJ]

I actually read something like that in an article ~ fascinating!

Sadly I have experienced this first hand many many times, which is why I tend to not contribute to these type of threads, especially when the main protagonists are on my ignore list.

 

[Angelina]

Good man! The ignore feature is definitely a must in some situations.

Bless ya!

 

[Barrd]

Barrd no-one is fighting against science. In actual fact I believe that science should compliment scripture.

That is what I believe as well, Angelina.
After all, God invented science in the first place.
And science will never discover anything that God did not put there...

 

[Barrd]

Sadly this is a common ploy of those that support evolution as part of their world view. Instead of proving that Gen 1 is not literal, they take the route of condescension against those that do.

I seem to recall another discussion I had with a member of this board concerning evolution. That person told me right out that she thought that Creationists deserved to be mocked for their beliefs. A little over the top, I thought.

 

[River Jordan]

I am ashamed when I see things like this.

When it comes to things like Christians taking the words of others and selectively editing them to make it look like they're saying something they didn't say, I also am ashamed. I can understand saying things out of ignorance or just making an honest mistake. But it's something else entirely when a person looks up the works of a scientist, reads it, then sits down and cuts parts out with the sole intention of misleading other Christians about what that scientist actually said. We can't chalk that up to ignorance or an honest mistake....that sort of thing can only come about deliberately and intentionally.

It is just plain foolish to fight against science Long ago, the Church, sure that the Earth was the center of the universe...based, of course, on what they understood the Creation story in Genesis said....fought bitterly against Galileo, who said that the Sun was the center of the Solar System, and the Earth was a planet that, along with other planets, revolved around that sun.
Obviously, the Church lost that battle. And guess what? Our blessed faith survived.

Agreed. We are not infallible, and as such neither are our interpretive abilities.

 

[River Jordan]

The link you provided does not open on my computer. Can you send another?

Maybe, but it looks like we may be talking about different things. Let's figure that out first.

The point you made in post #10 was ~ "Well that's kinda weird, since the majority of "evolutionists" believe in God." Do you have data that supports your claim? because based on what you have provided in your comments, you have targeted the public rather than true evolutionists who believe in God.

When I said "evolutionists" I meant "those who accept the reality of evolution", which is why I posted data regarding the public. What were you thinking I meant?

I find his choices interesting that Mr Obama has chosen a Theistic evolutionist Christian to head the DIH. Was that a crime???

I guess I don't understand your point. I mentioned Dr. Collins because he is a prominent scientist who is major figure in evolutionary biology, and is also a Christian. To me that seems to go against your claim that evolution is about "finding alternatives to God".

I would like to remind members that this is a discussion forum. Which means that members can discuss issues pertaining to christian thought and members should be treated with respect without the "I am ashamed, appalled, dishonest" comments coming from the peanut gallery. I have a right to my opinion and no topic is exempt from being thoroughly investigated.

I agree. It's important to distinguish between me noting the obvious dishonesty of whomever you copied that Darwin quote from, and people like you who unknowingly (and understandably) get duped by them. IOW, your source was dishonest, not you.

 

[Angelina]

RJ, my suggestion is that you tread carefully when accusing me of selectively editing something that was quoted. This was not the case and I will not allow you to continue to push this tactic of trying to publicly shame me to gain points for your evolutionist position. Please try to stick to the topic without the personal attacks... :huh:

Thanks and Bless you!

 

[River Jordan]

I seem to recall another discussion I had with a member of this board concerning evolution. That person told me right out that she thought that Creationists deserved to be mocked for their beliefs. A little over the top, I thought.

Who was that?

My dad taught me at an early age about how some folks are very tribal in their thinking. Relevant to this thread, I remember him telling me how some people are so tribal, if they are conned by one of their own tribe and someone from the outside exposes the con, the person who was conned will actually get mad at the person who exposed it rather than the actual con man! Why? Because they made a member of the tribe look bad!

So here a creationist deliberately edits Darwin's words to make it seem like Darwin was saying something he didn't say. A fellow creationist copies it and posts it to an internet forum. Then a non-creationist says "Hey, that's a dishonestly edited quote! Here's what Darwin actually wrote." Yet for some reason, the creationist gets mad at the non-creationist rather than the first creationist who edited the quote in the first place. Why? The only reason I can see is because the creationists are on the same team, and with some folks there is a rule that one always defends those on the team.

 

[Barrd]

opcorn:

 

[River Jordan]

RJ, my suggestion is that you tread carefully when accusing me of selectively editing something that was quoted. This was not the case and I will not allow you to continue to push this tactic of trying to publicly shame me to gain points for your evolutionist position. Please try to stick to the topic without the personal attacks... :huh:

Ok, let me try this again.

I'm not saying, nor have I ever said that you have selectively edited anything. Ok?

After you posted the Darwin quote, this is what I wrote: "my guess is you didn't pull that quote from your personal copy of On the Origin of Species. Instead, my bet is you got this from some creationist source". Then I went on to note that "your source is deceiving you".

Notice that I clearly said that it is whomever you copied that quote from who selectively edited it, not you.

Are we clear?

 

[Barrd]

Who was that?

My dad taught me at an early age about how some folks are very tribal in their thinking. Relevant to this thread, I remember him telling me how some people are so tribal, if they are conned by one of their own tribe and someone from the outside exposes the con, the person who was conned will actually get mad at the person who exposed it rather than the actual con man! Why? Because they made a member of the tribe look bad!

So here a creationist deliberately edits Darwin's words to make it seem like Darwin was saying something he didn't say. A fellow creationist copies it and posts it to an internet forum. Then a non-creationist says "Hey, that's a dishonestly edited quote! Here's what Darwin actually wrote." Yet for some reason, the creationist gets mad at the non-creationist rather than the first creationist who edited the quote in the first place. Why? The only reason I can see is because the creationists are on the same team, and with some folks there is a rule that always defend those on the team.

You mean you do not remember that conversation?

Not only do I not see anything like what you are describing in this thread...
But that has very little to do with the idea that people deserve to be mocked for their beliefs.
There are folks who think our faith in Christ is stupidity that deserves to be mocked. Obviously, I would not agree with them.

 

[River Jordan]

That has very little to do with the idea that people deserve to be mocked for their beliefs.

So who said they do?

There are folks who think our faith in Christ is stupidity that deserves to be mocked. Obviously, I would not agree with them.

Me neither.

 

[River Jordan]

Not only do I not see anything like what you are describing in this thread...

I described exactly what in this thread reminded me of what my dad explained to me.

So here a creationist deliberately edits Darwin's words to make it seem like Darwin was saying something he didn't say. A fellow creationist (Angelina) copies it and posts it here. Then I see it and say "Hey, that's a dishonestly edited quote! Here's what Darwin actually wrote." Yet for some reason, creationists here (Angelina, StanJ, and you a bit) get mad at me rather than the creationist source who edited the quote in the first place.

 

[River Jordan]

I have to run for a bit, but before I do I hope I've made myself clear. I don't think Angelina did anything wrong. She just copied a Darwin quote from a source she thought she could trust.

It's whoever that source is, who dishonestly edited the quote, not Angelina.

I guess you guys can get all mad at me for pointing it out if you want. *shrug* Just in the future, please try and be a bit more discerning when it comes to copying quotes from creationist sources.

 

[StanJ]

After all, God invented science in the first place.
And science will never discover anything that God did not put there...

LOL...well not quite Barrd. Man created the sciences based on his observations. Some of it supports God's word and some contradicts it. Sadly, some science discovers things but misinterprets them for what they really are. Evolution itself is replete with those errors.

 

[Deborah_]

I would like to remind members that this is a discussion forum. Which means that members can discuss issues pertaining to christian thought and members should be treated with respect without the "I am ashamed, appalled, dishonest" comments coming from the peanut gallery. I have a right to my opinion and no topic is exempt from being thoroughly investigated.

Bless y'all

Angelina, if I have misunderstood you, I apologise unreservedly.

For the record, I am really not bothered over whether people believe in non-evolutionary creation or theistic evolution. I was worried by an apparent implication that dishonesty is an inevitable part of the debate and that creationists shouldn't be criticised for it.

 

[StanJ]

Angelina, if I have misunderstood you, I apologise unreservedly.

For the record, I am really not bothered over whether people believe in non-evolutionary creation or theistic evolution. I was worried by an apparent implication that dishonesty is an inevitable part of the debate and that creationists shouldn't be criticised for it.

In most any forum Deborah_, those who have been here a while and post as must as I do, know who the prevaricators are, so it's not hard to distinguish them, nor the prevarications. Nobody can hold Christianity and YEC responsible for how SOME may do it wrongly.

 

[Angelina]

This topic is now closed and will be left here for posterity. It is disappointing to see that members could not discuss this subject without flagrant breaches of forum rules. If another similar discussion comes up I will be monitoring it heavily and members will indeed be issued with the appropriate warning points or time out accordingly.

Bless you!