• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Evolution: the Facts.

aggle-rithm said:
I see this was a good time for randman to make his exit...it's an EPIC fail.

Say an airplane malfunctions, and after furious attempts by the pilot to regain control cause it to take a wildly meandering course, it crashes into my house.

If it was out of control, then why the apparent direction?
Click to expand...

An interplay of gravitational and aerodynamic forces with some intelligent intervention. And it's not an just an apparent direction it's a real one.
 
aggle-rithm said:
I see this was a good time for randman to make his exit...it's an EPIC fail.

Say an airplane malfunctions, and after furious attempts by the pilot to regain control cause it to take a wildly meandering course, it crashes into my house.

If it was out of control, then why the apparent direction?
Click to expand...

By the way, Randman has left the forums altogether, so it seems.

I blame patience (lack thereof on his side).
 
sphenisc said:
An interplay of gravitational and aerodynamic forces with some intelligent intervention. And it's not an just an apparent direction it's a real one.
Click to expand...

There's certainly no intelligent intervention in a plane that's lost all control.

But the rest? One natural force that does exist drives a plane that's lost the ability to fly towards the ground. Another makes it turn and twist in certain directions during the fall. It's mere coincidence that these cause the plane to crash on your house instead of someone else's house, or in a lake, or a desert.

The fall is in a direction, but this direction is from natural forces we know to exist and well enough understand. There's no intelligent designer in an uncontrolled fall.
 
ehcks said:
There's certainly no intelligent intervention in a plane that's lost all control.

But the rest? One natural force that does exist drives a plane that's lost the ability to fly towards the ground. Another makes it turn and twist in certain directions during the fall. It's mere coincidence that these cause the plane to crash on your house instead of someone else's house, or in a lake, or a desert.

The fall is in a direction, but this direction is from natural forces we know to exist and well enough understand. There's no intelligent designer in an uncontrolled fall.
Click to expand...

That's not the given hypothetical.

...furious attempts by the pilot to regain control cause it to take a wildly meandering course...
Click to expand...

The statement of causality implies that the outcome would have been different had the pilot not been present. The pilot is an intelligent agent. Therefore excluding the actions of the intelligent agent from consideration is likely to produce a poorer explanation of the outcome in terms of direction than including them.
 
I honestly hope he's out at the Discovery Institute learning more about Baraminology; he seemed unable to explain it before and I remember RandFan being primed to go off against it. I really wanted to see that one...
 
Bram Kaandorp said:
I count absence in days since last post. Maybe that's why I didn't notice when he was here last.
Click to expand...
Even after his last post he seemed to read a lot here. Given his previous habits I'm surprised at his self control.
But I'm sure he'll be back to rehash the same "arguments" again.
 
No fail on my part. You guys for the most part don't even understand evo theory, much less are capable of intelligently discussing it's failings.
 
randman said:
No fail on my part. You guys for the most part don't even understand evo theory, much less are capable of intelligently discussing it's failings.
Click to expand...
Your arguments are very convincing! After this brilliant exposé I will have to stop my support of the theory of evolution and rely on faith in bronze age sages in the future!
 
randman said:
No fail on my part. You guys for the most part don't even understand evo theory, much less are capable of intelligently discussing it's failings.
Click to expand...

You're right there. But then, noone understands evo theory, as that theory is a horrible creationist butchery of the theory of evolution, deliberatly made in such a way as to be even more nonsensical than their fairytale.
 
randman said:
No fail on my part. You guys for the most part don't even understand evo theory, much less are capable of intelligently discussing it's failings.
Click to expand...

And which theory of evolution is it specifically which you dismiss?

The current one, of a previous version which has already been discarded by scientists?

Also:

Why is it that many creationists say stuff like "see, scientists found this piece of fact, and if you read the bible like I do, you'll see that it kind of resembles what was found".

Why can't they actually just make a prediction based on the bible, and then unambiguously show that they are right, in stead of hijacking evolution research and contorting it to fit their interpretation of a book which isn't even a good translation of a translation of a rewrite of a recounting?
 
randman said:
No fail on my part. You guys for the most part don't even understand evo theory, much less are capable of intelligently discussing it's failings.
Click to expand...

To summarize.
NO_U.jpg
 
No fail on my part. You guys for the most part don't even understand evo theory, much less are capable of intelligently discussing it's failings.
Click to expand...
Right, right. You're so much better than us that you can't accept evidence when it's proven beyond any reasonable doubt (the whole Haekle thing) and you know so much more than us that you believe reptiles evolved into whales. Oh, and you believe that all genetic variation was put into organisms at the beginning, and all apparent variation is merely culling of that original front-loading.

Right. It has to be us that's wrong.
 
randman said:
No fail on my part. You guys for the most part don't even understand evo theory, much less are capable of intelligently discussing it's failings.
Click to expand...

Ooh, pithy retort. Let me guess; people here don't understand evolution because if they did, they would know it's false? Perhaps the same could be said about Creationism (which of course you advocate)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom