Joined: Jan. 2012
|Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 28 2012,03:22)|
|One question I find myself asking is whether there is anyone in the creationist/ID camp who can write an accurate, coherent description of evolution as understood by biologists. I haven't seen one.|
By contrast, Darwin rather consistently put forth the strongest opposition case before beginning his argument. This is simply an indication of confidence and personal character.
The day I see an ID advocate begin his presentation by forcefully presenting the case for evolution is the day I begin to worry.
I wouldn't worry ... if they understand evolution and still offer a convincing case for an alternative, then I would be obliged to put my road-dusty materialist nag out to pasture. I am very interested in what is true (to the extent that my feeble synapses can discern that). Contrary to what those fucking morons who shout 'ideology!' think. If we live in a God-created universe, and the only possible way a universe could exist is by being God-created, then living inside that universe with a conviction that it can't be so would be just embarrassing.
But ... in all honesty and sincerity, I don't think it is so. Not just because I understand evolution.
I am interested in how many here testify to some kind of fundamentalist history. For me, I have simply never bought the God idea, so no emotional struggle was required to understand science. I think I asked him for a hamster once - and got one. But I am perhaps less qualified than most to comment on the notion of 'de-tard', since it is not an experience I have been through.
Evolutionists trust entropy for creation of life but are like men who horse a crocodile to get across a river - niwrad.
The organism could already metabolize citrus. Joe G