Search results

Hi, You're doing an excellent job defending ID and pointing out the flaws in their logic. I figured you knew the bait and switch tactic but I thought Behe's own words were relevant.

Intelligent design theory never was a legal strategy. Sure Philip Johnson, a lawyer, screwed up trying to push it. But the scientists behind the theory had no such ambitions. The subtitle of Behe's book is the biochemical challenge to evolution. He set out to challenge the limit of Darwin's...

The idea a "some 'designer' intentionally inserts necessary mutations to make the system work." is a mischaracterization of intelligent design theory. Do you want to know what ID theory actually states? Again, another mischaracterization. While the Dover court decision was not kind. New...

Hi Tenchi, You make excellent points about ID. Just thought I'd point out the bait and switch happening. The bait: evolution is observed, verified, as sure as gravity, etc. The switch: evolution accounts for all life we see. No ID scientist I know of rejects micro-evolution, the small changes...

So the color of hair, shape of the skull, and proportions of the body are unimportant. And the same remark holds good for the numerous points of mental similarity. Got it, they're unimportant. I'm glad you cleared that up. It seemed as if your comment "those unimportant differences" was...

And what differences are those?

I see what you mean now about survival of the fittest. Our humble Messiah is risen indeed!

Mostly I'm entertained by how anyone can cling to the misinterpretation of one quote, while ignoring several passages telling a different story: "The variability or diversity of the mental faculties in men of the same race, not to mention the greater differences between the men of distinct...

True. Also, Darwin was well aware what he was doing: "Some of those who admit the principle of evolution, but reject natural selection, seem to forget, when criticising my book, that I had the above two objects in view; hence if I have erred in giving to natural selection great power, which I...

This may sound odd but here's some lyrics from a song: "...falling in love with Jesus brought the change in me..." My marriage before and after falling in love with Jesus was night and day. Your husband sounds a lot like me before I truly believed in Jesus. Our marriage had no major issues but...

That's funny considering how much evidence of Darwin's racism has been ignored in this thread.

Darwin's beliefs excluded certain humans from salvation. He believed certain humans couldn't think abstractly or had any self-consciousness. Which would preclude them from understanding the gospel or being given immortal life. We know today what Darwin believed was nonsense. Good points.

Show is that. Regardless what you think, Darwin's title was "Favoured" races." In which Darwin wrote the most racist things I've ever read outside of the session papers.

The majority of what Darwin wrote is about how inferior the other races are compared to the white races. The compassion he felt for animals and lower races doesn't excuse his racism. Saying differences, such as insufficient powers of reasoning, are social is a creative re-telling of the facts...

Darwin was a compassionate person. But that doesn't excuse his comments such as this: "No doubt the difference in this respect is enormous, even if we compare the mind of one of the lowest savages, who has no words to express any number higher than four, and who uses hardly any abstract terms...

On the one hand the majority of what Darwin wrote says white people were superior in mental power and physically to everyone else. On the other hand, there's one mention of mental similarities which Darwin remarked were unimportant. If someone ignores the preponderance of evidence in favor of...

Darwin didn't think so. Darwin dedicated several chapters discussing how inferior other races were compared to white races mental powers. The once mention of mental similarities he remarked were unimportant. I'm sure we'll have a good laugh about this when we meet in heaven and no offense, I...

I agree, people who don't use their powers of reasoning are what's wrong with America. Can we agree since all humans have the same genetics, all humans have the same powers of reasoning? That there's no scientific basis for asserting one race has deficient powers of reasoning while another race...

What's being debunked? Savages don't commit suicide according to Mr Reade? The problem I see is inserting a word that isn't there: all. l assume you inserted that word to make it look like a common logical fallacy. But here's an actual example of the logical fallacy: All dogs are animals...

"With respect to" is not explicit. So it's incredibly flawed to view a tentative phrase as an if then statement. Nowhere in your example or mine should any conclusions be drawn about all animals or all savages because "with respect to" is not absolute. So that's just clutching at straws to avoid...