Friday, April 20, 2012

Evolutionists Don’t Take Kindly to Criticism

You can’t criticize evolution because that would be against the law. It’s incredible, but evolutionists legislate the truth of their theory. They’ll sue, lie to judges, falsify histories, oppose academic freedom, control funding, blackball skeptics and create laws that not only enforce evolution but outlaw even criticism of their non scientific ideas. If you think any of this is hyperbole, think again. All of this is true. A good recent example is the unrelenting, and desperate, attacks by evolutionists on the new Academic Freedom law in Tennessee. Evolutionists have warned that exposing scientific theories such as evolution to the evidence is sure to bring doom and gloom to any state that enacts such freedoms. And journalists have consistently lied about the law, calling it creationism in disguise. What these Academic Freedom laws actually do is allow evidential analysis and criticism of theories. That, of course, is what science is all about. Scientific theories are subjected to and evaluated against the evidence—all of the evidence. Not evolution though. Evolution could not withstand such exposure, for evolution is a religious theory that routinely fails on the science. And so evolutionists tenaciously attack and reject any law that exposes their ideas to scientific evaluation. Here, for those who have difficulty understanding the science, it becomes painfully obvious. The evolutionist’s fierce opposition to academic freedom makes it abundantly clear that evolution is not about science. It never was.

33 comments:

  1. Well said. Now what will bonobo face (Thornton) pull out of his asteroid orifice this time? LOL.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why do you always call him bonobo face?

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    3. What gives you that idea,Louis? You could at least change it up and be a little more creative.

      Delete
    4. You're welcome to offer better suggestions. I'm all ears. LOL.

      Delete
    5. I forgot to add that nothing pisses off a gutless coward more than a total lack of respect.

      ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...

      Delete
    6. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    7. Louis the fruit loop

      I forgot to add that nothing pisses off a gutless coward more than a total lack of respect.


      Aah, so that's why you're always such an angry little ant.

      Delete
    8. Well first of all I'm not in third grade, but you could go for the educated insult say " Thorton, your visage reminds me of the Pan Paniscus, old chap". Or the classic " Thorton,you're so ugly,your last name is link and first is missing". Which is extra funny because you don't believe in evolution. Or literary " Thorton ,thou yeasty urchin- snouted,whey-face"
      Or of course there is the non insult,insult but you are not ready for that yet

      Delete
    9. The funny thing is, Louis' arguments seem to distill down to ad-hominem anyway. Apparently, it's inevitable.

      Delete
    10. "Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries!"

      ;)

      Delete
    11. LOL. There is nothing like ad hominems to show all of you gutless evolutionists that we don't give a rat's behind about your worthless opinions.

      What a bunch of gutless swines.

      ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...

      Delete
  2. Who are they gonna call? Darwin Billy Kid???

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually, it would be Darwin and the Clantons. My Darling Clementine, shot in the holy of holies( Monument Valley),is vastly superior to the later Gunfight At The OK Corral pictured above.So you realize that if the Earps are the evolutionists,that makes you guys the murdering,cattle thieving, Clantons,right?

      Delete
  3. The Ukulele Orchestra of Great Britain - The Good, The Bad and The Ugly
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLgJ7pk0X-s

    Courtesy Enézio E. de Almeida Filho

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dr Hunter, maybe Red Dawn might be a better movie analogy, a small,freedom loving group of Americans defeating the might of the Soviets/ evolutionists. Just a thought

      Delete
  4. "You can’t criticize evolution because that would be against the law."

    So I guess that means the cops will be knocking on your door any time now.

    Hang on though, you have been doing this for years yet you still appear to be at liberty despite your years of criminal behavior - how do you get away with it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He is working for the Man, deep undercover

      Delete
  5. A very nice diatribe, Dr Hunter. I'm sure your colleagues at the Discovery Institute will be both impressed and gratified.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So it's all my fault. That's the great thing about evolution. While taking away people's rights and lying, you can blame them for it.

      Delete
    2. Cornelius Hunter

      So it's all my fault.


      It is your fault for taking money from the DI to lie about actual evolutionary science. But we've already determined that you think "thou shalt not bear false witness" doesn't apply if you're lying for Jesus, right?

      Delete
    3. It is your fault for taking money from the DI to lie about actual evolutionary science. But we've already determined that you think "thou shalt not bear false witness" doesn't apply if you're lying for Jesus, right?

      This is a good example of discourse with an evolutionist. This is how they think. In this case, although their theory’s fundamental predictions have been found to be false, they won’t allow their theory to be even so much as questioned, and they fiercely oppose an Academic Freedom law that would allow the scientific evidence to be openly evaluated. They even misrepresent the law as documented here:

      http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2012/04/here-is-response-from-los-angeles-times.html

      http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2012/04/david-zucchino-just-confirmed-la-times.html

      Now when I point all this out they turn on me. “A very nice diatribe, Dr Hunter. I'm sure your colleagues at the Discovery Institute will be both impressed and gratified,” says one evolutionist. “It is your fault for taking money from the DI,” says another evolutionist.

      These are petty lies. But they follow the more important misrepresentations of the law, which followed the more important misrepresentations of science.

      All of these are obvious lies. They are objectively obvious for anyone to see. Anyone can see the failed predictions of evolution. Anyone can read the Academic Freedom law which is crystal clear. But this is all that evolutionists have to respond with. This is what evolution is about.

      I’m the last person to call another a “liar.” I will give people every chance to correct or explain themselves. But there also comes a time to recognize what people are saying. Evolutionists repeatedly, consistently, and without hesitation even when corrected, continue to shout out their lies. It sounds harsh, but it is what it is.

      These comments from the evolutionists simply reinforce what one finds in the open literature. And these comments reveal, on a personal level, where evolutionists are coming from. This is what it is like to discourse with an evolutionist. It’s just one lie after another, which you can’t even keep up with.

      Delete
    4. Cornelius Hunter

      ...they won’t allow their theory to be even so much as questioned, and they fiercely oppose an Academic Freedom law that would allow the scientific evidence to be openly evaluated.


      LOL! Keep earning the DI propaganda paycheck CH. Scientific evidence already can be questioned, and is already openly evaluated. What this law would allow is the introduction of Creationist crap that has not been properly evaluated by knowledgeable experts, or has already been evaluated and rejected.

      "Academic Freedom" doesn't mean you get to push whatever pseudo-scientific Creationist garbage you want at students. Scientific ideas have to earn their place in the classroom. Science doesn't run an affirmative action program for stupid unsupported ideas.

      Delete
    5. LOL! Keep earning the DI propaganda paycheck CH.

      Still more lies? This is what evolutionists have to offer.

      Scientific evidence already can be questioned, and is already openly evaluated.

      If that were true then evolutionists would not dogmatically insist evolution is a fact even though it's prediction are false. The also would not vehemently oppose academic freedom.

      What this law would allow is the introduction of Creationist crap

      There you go again.

      that has not been properly evaluated by knowledgeable expert

      Ah yes, the "knowledgeable expert" filter. Science cannot be allowed free reign, it must be filtered through the priest. Sound familiar? It always seems religion wants to control the truth.

      "Academic Freedom" doesn't mean you get to push whatever pseudo-scientific Creationist garbage you want at students.

      Where does the law say that?

      Delete
  6. Oh, and one more thing:

    They’ll sue, lie to judges, falsify histories, oppose academic freedom,...

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it Creationists Alan Bonsell and William Buckingham who came very close to being charged with perjury in connection with the Dover trial?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it Creationists Alan Bonsell and William Buckingham who came very close to being charged with perjury in connection with the Dover trial?

      So two wrongs make a right?

      Delete
    2. Only one wrong, we have no evidence that anyone on the plaintiffs side came anywhere near to perjuring themselves. If there was any basis to the claim that Ken Miller misled the court about the science I would have expected defense counsel to have exposed his errors during cross-examination. I'm sure that if you were to put your objections to him directly he would be able to provide satisfactory answers.

      Delete
  7. So who lied to a judge, Cornelius? Go ahead, name some names, don't be shy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2010/10/ken-miller-and-chromosome-fusion.html

      http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2010/10/judge-jones-i-was-taken-to-school.html

      http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2010/10/elephant-in-court.html

      Delete
    2. Wow, Cornelius calls Ken Miller a liar! Can you confirm that for us, Cornelius? Can you say it to him face-to-face?

      CH writes in the linked post on chromosome fusion:

      Finally, Miller presented the chromosome fusion evidence as a “beautiful” confirmation of an evolutionary prediction. What he didn’t explain to the court is that science is full of theories known to be false which yet make all kinds of confirmed predictions.

      The Kitzmiller trial was one long series of misrepresentations. Yes judge Jones was schooled, but he didn’t learn the truth.


      You can whine all you want, Cornelius, but Miller is completely right about chromosome fusion. Evolutionary theory predicted that one of the human chromosomes would correspond to two chromosomes in chimpanzees. That is indeed the case. Ken Miller did not lie.

      Delete
    3. oleg you claim that 'Evolutionary theory predicted that one of the human chromosomes would correspond to two chromosomes in chimpanzees.'

      yet the truth is:

      Interstitial telomeric sequences (ITSs) are not located at the exact evolutionary breakpoints in primates.
      Abstract: Although their function has not yet been clearly elucidated, interstitial telomeric sequences (ITSs) have been cytogenetically associated with chromosomal reorganizations, fragile sites, and recombination hotspots. In this paper, we show that ITSs are not located at the exact evolutionary breakpoints of the inversions between human and chimpanzee and between human and rhesus macaque chromosomes. We proved that ITSs are not signs of repair in the breakpoints of the chromosome reorganizations analyzed. We found ITSs in the region (0.7-2.7 Mb) flanking one of the two breakpoints in all the inversions assessed. The presence of ITSs in those locations is not by chance. They are short (up to 7.83 repeats) and almost perfect (82.5-97.1% matches). The ITSs are conserved in the species compared, showing that they were present before the reorganizations occurred.
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19420924?dopt=Abstract

      New Research Undermines Fused Chromosome 2 Argument for Human Evolution - video
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyVVIfRNQOQ

      New Research Undermines Key Argument for Human Evolution by Jeffrey Tomkins, Ph.D. * - February 2012
      http://www.icr.org/article/new-research-undermines-key-argument/

      Delete
  8. ah... "Our research on the human chromosome 2 is tentatively scheduled to be published in the Journal of Creation". So, this is credible? (roll eyes) Why isn't it published for peer review instead of this welcoming, totally biased creation-friendly publication? A discovery like this would earn them a solid reputation and a lot more. Through science's history, it's been the rebutals and new theories that have made the fame of scientists... relativity, quantum theory, universe expanding... Heck, even evolution! They just need to be replicable and testable... So, are they afraid that it won't pass scrutiny? why is that? Oh, I know, a worldwide liberal conspiracy? Same old tactics... And I thought dishonesty was frowned upon in christian dogma (to put it mildly)...

    ReplyDelete