tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post3869187270776952482..comments2024-01-23T02:32:28.567-08:00Comments on Darwin's God: “When Facts Fail”: Oh The IronyUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger34125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-8773299341643431762017-01-11T16:38:30.309-08:002017-01-11T16:38:30.309-08:00Whatever, wee willie. I am comfortable with the fa...Whatever, wee willie. I am comfortable with the fact that there isn't a scientific theory of evolution and that is because no one can say how to test the claims that Darwin and all subsequent versions have made.<br /><br />For example Darwin thought it would be no problem to produce vision systems seeing there existed a variety of vision systems in varying degrees of complexity. Yet here we are in the 21st century and we are still coming to understand how vision systems develop, let alone how they evolved and nevermind how natural selection and drift could have dunit.<br /><br />Your entire position is a lie and a bluff. I am OK with that.Joe Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08305194278121208230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-80879665078616617762017-01-11T14:50:04.644-08:002017-01-11T14:50:04.644-08:00Joke: "And yes, I misquoted Alan- "
You...Joke: "<i>And yes, I misquoted Alan- "</i><br /><br />You didn't quote anyone. You made a claim that Alan admitted something that he never did. But I guess we should be happy that you have finally admitted to an error. Even if it was made intentionally. <br />William Spearshakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09354659259971103985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-43817314283810657872017-01-11T10:12:44.287-08:002017-01-11T10:12:44.287-08:00And yes, I misquoted Alan- he was only talking abo...And yes, I misquoted Alan- he was only talking about Darwin not saying how to test his claims. However no one since has said how to do so either. Not you nor any of your thousands of others can say.<br /><br />And we are OK with that.Joe Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08305194278121208230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-41551390336635079492017-01-10T19:37:48.988-08:002017-01-10T19:37:48.988-08:00So, you are not willing to admit that you lied. So...So, you are not willing to admit that you lied. Something that everyone here can see. You really are a sad individual. All I can say is that I am glad that you are on the ID side of the debate. You really are an embarrassment for them. William Spearshakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09354659259971103985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-27990253945668406192017-01-10T17:19:43.460-08:002017-01-10T17:19:43.460-08:00Nope- no scientific theory of evolution there- tal...Nope- no scientific theory of evolution there- talk about being incapable of admitting a mistake.Joe Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08305194278121208230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-25792960348257523602017-01-10T16:05:10.937-08:002017-01-10T16:05:10.937-08:00So, this ISanother one of those frequency = wavele...So, this <b>IS</b>another one of those frequency = wavelength moments where you are incapable of admitting an error. Thank you for confirming what I already suspected. William Spearshakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09354659259971103985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-28717714041655394412017-01-10T10:37:10.144-08:002017-01-10T10:37:10.144-08:00Wee Willie, I see that you still cannot understand...Wee Willie, I see that you still cannot understand simple explanations.<br /><br />If Darwin didn't posit a way to test his claims, and no one since Darwin has posited such tests, that is the same as admitting Darwin's concept couldn't be tested. <br /><br />Meanwhile you have failed to reference a scientific theory of evolution. You refuse to define what you mean when you use the word "evolution".Joe Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08305194278121208230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-5873822516430529772017-01-10T06:38:01.830-08:002017-01-10T06:38:01.830-08:00Joe, still waiting for your correction that "...Joe, still waiting for your correction that <i>"Alan Fox admitted that Darwin's concept couldn't be tested."</i> Something that he clearly never said. Or is this going to be another one of your frequency = wavelength moments in which you refuse to admit a simple error?William Spearshakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09354659259971103985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-73688764969503779272017-01-09T19:31:00.289-08:002017-01-09T19:31:00.289-08:00Excellent 2017 thread. Really good.
First I say ma...Excellent 2017 thread. Really good.<br />First I say marsupials are just placentals with pouches. No big deal. The marsupialism is the adaption upon migration.<br />probably the two gliders are the same creature. probably.<br />However gliding is a post flood thing.<br />Convergent evolution is more impossible then regular evolutionism.<br />They have to invoke it because they have no other answers for such an unlikely thing.<br />however the answer ios that same shaped animals are the same animals regardless of trivial details. whether man or beast.<br /><br />The stuff about fossil sequence not being what it should be is part of the PE movement.<br />Indeed if creatures didsn't evolve , and deposition of them over the ages is accurate, then it would be that no evolution by small steps be found.<br />BANG. Sure enough. So PE must be invented.<br />However pE is actually a serious blow to evolutionary biology though they fail to see why.<br /><br />In all these things the deposition geology concepts also distort actual biology research.<br />Its like watching the demise of evolutionism and feeling sorry for their shame.<br />Robert Byershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05631863870635096770noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-72593931745894940452017-01-07T16:06:23.178-08:002017-01-07T16:06:23.178-08:00The evolution of vision systems remains untestable...The evolution of vision systems remains untestable so forget about the evolution of vision systems by means of natural selection and drift<br /><br />Andrea Bottaro said the following over at the <a href="http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2005/06/of_form_over_su.html" rel="nofollow"><b>panda’s thumb</b></a>:<br><br /><br /><b><br />Eyes are formed via long and complex developmental genetic networks/cascades, which we are only beginning to understand, and of which <i>Pax6/eyeless</i> (the gene in question, in mammals and Drosophila, respectively) merely constitutes one of the initial elements.</b>Joe Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08305194278121208230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-35376835652020907102017-01-07T15:55:56.955-08:002017-01-07T15:55:56.955-08:00Evolution = Magic.
No plausible mechanism and no e...Evolution = Magic.<br />No plausible mechanism and no empirical evidence.<br />Defies the ubiquitous fact of biological entropy which can be observed by everyone, everywhere, everyday.<br />You have all been brainwashed to believe a delusion. mad dochttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16899828437159828801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-13945265116861596022017-01-07T15:35:53.892-08:002017-01-07T15:35:53.892-08:00And what do you call a claim that doesn't have...And what do you call a claim that doesn't have any proposed tests? Untestable, duh<br /><br />How much of a moron do you have to be to not be able to grasp that simple fact?Joe Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08305194278121208230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-46405380702812062632017-01-07T15:34:20.310-08:002017-01-07T15:34:20.310-08:00Alan never pointed out anything evolutionism claim...Alan never pointed out anything evolutionism claims that can be tested.Joe Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08305194278121208230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-12440085818524865772017-01-07T15:33:34.737-08:002017-01-07T15:33:34.737-08:00Darwin didn't test them. And no one since has....Darwin didn't test them. And no one since has. What does that tell you?<br /><br />No one knows how to test the claim tat vision systems evolved by means of natural selection and drift. That applies to protein machines and all biological systems and subsystems.<br /><br />Alan admitted Darwin's wasn't a scientific theory as he never said how to test his claims.Joe Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08305194278121208230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-56362488267450232862017-01-07T15:15:40.637-08:002017-01-07T15:15:40.637-08:00Joke G
Read Alan's comment- I am sure you won...<i>Joke G<br /><br />Read Alan's comment- I am sure you won't understand what he said</i><br /><br />No surprises, Joke was lying. Alan Fox <b>didn't</b> say Darwin's concept couldn't be tested. He only said Darwin never published any tests. Then Alan pointed out many others since then have tested it and it's passed every test.<br /><br />That Joke needs to lie to support his Creationist claims is very telling.Ghostriderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04686873801972423841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-23574315407697929642017-01-07T15:03:39.111-08:002017-01-07T15:03:39.111-08:00Joke says: "Alan Fox admitted that Darwin'...Joke says: "<i>Alan Fox admitted that Darwin's concept couldn't be tested."</i><br /><br />I asked for a link to the comment where Alan said this. Joke responded with a link to a comment where Alan didn't say any such thing. Not even close. Only a moronic toaster repairman could think that Alan's comment was an admission that Darwin's concepts couldn't be tested. William Spearshakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09354659259971103985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-64546055511050402872017-01-07T13:32:01.750-08:002017-01-07T13:32:01.750-08:00Timmy- only losers pick on typos- thank youTimmy- only losers pick on typos- thank youJoe Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08305194278121208230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-69091321573994186222017-01-07T13:31:18.223-08:002017-01-07T13:31:18.223-08:00Wee Willie, neither yourself nor your alleged thou...Wee Willie, neither yourself nor your alleged thousands of others can reference a scientific theory of evolution. Neither you nor those thousands can tell us how to scientifically test the claim that vision systems evolved by means of natural selection and drift.<br /><br />And that means what you and those alleged thousands of others have to say is meaningless. All you can do is lie, bluff and equivocate. Why is that?<br /><br />Read Alan's comment- I am sure you won't understand what he said:<br /><br />http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/moderation-issues-3/comment-page-35/#comment-156696Joe Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08305194278121208230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-27957124665831402442017-01-07T12:11:46.625-08:002017-01-07T12:11:46.625-08:00LOL! Whenever Joke gets flustered he starts typin...LOL! Whenever Joke gets flustered he starts typing "tat". It's a sure tell his usual fact free IDiot catchphrases aren't impressing anyone.Ghostriderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04686873801972423841noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-43817431705362709302017-01-07T11:34:27.259-08:002017-01-07T11:34:27.259-08:00Joke: "Alan Fox admitted that Darwin's co...Joke: "<i>Alan Fox admitted that Darwin's concept couldn't be tested."</i><br /><br />So what. Myself and thousands of others would disagree with Alan, if in fact he ever said this. Can you link to his comment? I would like to read it in context. William Spearshakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09354659259971103985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-50853677869305739912017-01-07T10:01:35.667-08:002017-01-07T10:01:35.667-08:00Alan Fox admitted that Darwin's concept couldn...Alan Fox admitted that Darwin's concept couldn't be tested. And seeing tat no one knows how to test the claim that vision systems evolved let alone evolved by means of natural selection and drift, there isn't a scientific ToE that covers vision.<br /><br />But then again wee willie has never defined "evolution" so we can reject his claims out-of-hand. And wee willie will never link to the ToE so we can see that he is a rejectJoe Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08305194278121208230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-71040464696060402072017-01-07T07:37:23.058-08:002017-01-07T07:37:23.058-08:00Md: "It is not really a "theory" be...Md: "<i>It is not really a "theory" because it can't be tested."</i><br /><br />You should really open the door of a university library. The shelves are full of publishe research papers on the way that the theory has been tested. <br /><br />Don't just parrot Jokes claims that there is no theory and that it can't be tested. Nobody else takes him seriously. William Spearshakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09354659259971103985noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-66907383541977336422017-01-07T00:09:54.270-08:002017-01-07T00:09:54.270-08:00Evolution is not even a "theory" let al...Evolution is not even a "theory" let alone science<br />It is not really a "theory" because it can't be tested. It is an Eastern Mystery Religion Hindu, Babylonian, Pagan, Gnosticism, Neo-Platonicism, Kabballah, New age Gaia Worship etc. etc. It is linked to pantheism and reincarnation. <br />mad dochttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16899828437159828801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-53121346796082681042017-01-06T17:21:03.208-08:002017-01-06T17:21:03.208-08:00Why are we desperate? We have a testable methodolo...Why are we desperate? We have a testable methodology whereas you do not. All you can do is bluff, lie and insult.Joe Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08305194278121208230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-3353467492679101592017-01-06T14:13:20.068-08:002017-01-06T14:13:20.068-08:00Joke: "Are you really that desperate? Or are ...Joke: "<i>Are you really that desperate? Or are you really that blind?"</i><br /><br />Well, I am legally blind. But desperate is a better description of ID proponents. William Spearshakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09354659259971103985noreply@blogger.com