Comments on: Darwin and the denial of his legacy http://scrambled.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/darwin-and-the-denial-of-his-legacy/ stuff and such Wed, 02 Sep 2009 05:11:26 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Stephen http://scrambled.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/darwin-and-the-denial-of-his-legacy/#comment-3903 Stephen Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:39:56 +0000 http://scrambled.wordpress.com/?p=569#comment-3903 With all due respect, you need to do better than that. You have made extraordinary claims that must be supported with rational argument. If you believe in a designer by faith, that's fine. However, faith is a demonstrably terrible way of understanding the world around us. Only by adopting a lens of logic, reason and the scientific method do we study the cosmos. I've said time and time again that I'm willing to have a rational discussion about evidence. My position can be defended in such terms of objectivity. Can yours? With all due respect, you need to do better than that. You have made extraordinary claims that must be supported with rational argument. If you believe in a designer by faith, that’s fine. However, faith is a demonstrably terrible way of understanding the world around us. Only by adopting a lens of logic, reason and the scientific method do we study the cosmos.

I’ve said time and time again that I’m willing to have a rational discussion about evidence. My position can be defended in such terms of objectivity. Can yours?

]]> By: madcap http://scrambled.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/darwin-and-the-denial-of-his-legacy/#comment-3902 madcap Thu, 14 Feb 2008 04:39:14 +0000 http://scrambled.wordpress.com/?p=569#comment-3902 Stephen, Thank you for the response. Look, we could go back and forth on this topic for who knows how long, and never come to a final conclusion. My main point is that it is not so far out to conclude that some sort of intelligence is responsible for the universe. This can not be proved empirically, but it can be a totally rational conclusion. This conclusion can be reached without the Bible or religion, but purely from reason. Science, as wonderful as it is, can not provided the answers as it claims it can. When it says it can, I see far more rhetoric than I see true science. I see a militant atheism that has such hate, and desire to expel any idea of the metaphysical . Crazy Christians who maintain that the Earth was created in six 24 hour days do a great disservice to the rational argument for design. If we are honest, we hold our positions on some degree of faith, on both sides of the isle. Stephen,
Thank you for the response. Look, we could go back and forth on this topic for who knows how long, and never come to a final conclusion. My main point is that it is not so far out to conclude that some sort of intelligence is responsible for the universe. This can not be proved empirically, but it can be a totally rational conclusion. This conclusion can be reached without the Bible or religion, but purely from reason. Science, as wonderful as it is, can not provided the answers as it claims it can. When it says it can, I see far more rhetoric than I see true science. I see a militant atheism that has such hate, and desire to expel any idea of the metaphysical . Crazy Christians who maintain that the Earth was created in six 24 hour days do a great disservice to the rational argument for design. If we are honest, we hold our positions on some degree of faith, on both sides of the isle.

]]> By: Stephen http://scrambled.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/darwin-and-the-denial-of-his-legacy/#comment-3901 Stephen Thu, 14 Feb 2008 04:09:16 +0000 http://scrambled.wordpress.com/?p=569#comment-3901 Well to be fair, I've already seen the DI's Mystery video so I am familiar with most of what you're referencing. Next, I am in school and I don't have the time to respond to hours of video. I could send you links to dozens of movies that explain evolutionary theory, but that would take away any chances of actual discussion. I've learned from experience that these kind of one-way conversations don't go anywhere. So, if you'd like to defend your side and give me a single reason to believe in an intelligent creator, I'd be happy to look into it. Well to be fair, I’ve already seen the DI’s Mystery video so I am familiar with most of what you’re referencing. Next, I am in school and I don’t have the time to respond to hours of video. I could send you links to dozens of movies that explain evolutionary theory, but that would take away any chances of actual discussion. I’ve learned from experience that these kind of one-way conversations don’t go anywhere.

So, if you’d like to defend your side and give me a single reason to believe in an intelligent creator, I’d be happy to look into it.

]]> By: madcap http://scrambled.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/darwin-and-the-denial-of-his-legacy/#comment-3900 madcap Thu, 14 Feb 2008 03:55:41 +0000 http://scrambled.wordpress.com/?p=569#comment-3900 Also, why "deconstruct" the videos? Why not approach things with an open mind? Do you already posses all the answers? Or are there still things you could learn? Also, why “deconstruct” the videos? Why not approach things with an open mind? Do you already posses all the answers? Or are there still things you could learn?

]]> By: madcap http://scrambled.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/darwin-and-the-denial-of-his-legacy/#comment-3899 madcap Thu, 14 Feb 2008 03:44:37 +0000 http://scrambled.wordpress.com/?p=569#comment-3899 Perhaps. Perhaps not. If you are unwilling to investigate information, then how could we have a real discussion? Perhaps. Perhaps not. If you are unwilling to investigate information, then how could we have a real discussion?

]]> By: Stephen http://scrambled.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/darwin-and-the-denial-of-his-legacy/#comment-3898 Stephen Wed, 13 Feb 2008 22:26:46 +0000 http://scrambled.wordpress.com/?p=569#comment-3898 <blockquote>While evolution is indeed a fact, Darwinism grows ever more faint.</blockquote> Explain the difference between the two and you will see why your position crumbles. As someone considerably well read in intelligent design theology, I'd be happy to have a discussion about why you believe in design. However, I'm not going to sit here and deconstruct an entire series of videos. Perhaps you're mistaken when you suggest <em>materialists</em> use rhetoric in the place of reason.

While evolution is indeed a fact, Darwinism grows ever more faint.

Explain the difference between the two and you will see why your position crumbles.

As someone considerably well read in intelligent design theology, I’d be happy to have a discussion about why you believe in design. However, I’m not going to sit here and deconstruct an entire series of videos. Perhaps you’re mistaken when you suggest materialists use rhetoric in the place of reason.

]]> By: madcap http://scrambled.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/darwin-and-the-denial-of-his-legacy/#comment-3897 madcap Wed, 13 Feb 2008 21:06:30 +0000 http://scrambled.wordpress.com/?p=569#comment-3897 What requires more faith? Believing in a Creator, or in the philosophy of Oops? Is “oops” the best that materialism can come up with? Is oops truly a more rational conclusion than design? It would take more faith than I could possibly muster in order for me to accept that the universe is simply a product of oops. Especially in light of modern scientific discoveries that continually point toward a supernatural explanation. While evolution is indeed a fact, Darwinism grows ever more faint. Materialists cling to the corpse of Darwin, using not science or reason to hold their position, but rather sophistry and rhetoric. 1.Unlocking the Mysteries of Life. http://thoughtsongod.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/unlocking-the-mystries-of-life/ 2.From Darwin to Hitler:Ideas Have Consequences http://thoughtsongod.wordpress.com/intelligent-design/ What requires more faith? Believing in a Creator, or in the philosophy of Oops? Is “oops” the best that materialism can come up with? Is oops truly a more rational conclusion than design? It would take more faith than I could possibly muster in order for me to accept that the universe is simply a product of oops. Especially in light of modern scientific discoveries that continually point toward a supernatural explanation. While evolution is indeed a fact, Darwinism grows ever more faint. Materialists cling to the corpse of Darwin, using not science or reason to hold their position, but rather sophistry and rhetoric.
1.Unlocking the Mysteries of Life.
http://thoughtsongod.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/unlocking-the-mystries-of-life/
2.From Darwin to Hitler:Ideas Have Consequences
http://thoughtsongod.wordpress.com/intelligent-design/

]]> By: Stephen http://scrambled.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/darwin-and-the-denial-of-his-legacy/#comment-3896 Stephen Wed, 13 Feb 2008 04:20:20 +0000 http://scrambled.wordpress.com/?p=569#comment-3896 Oh, whoops! Thanks for pointing that out. Oh, whoops! Thanks for pointing that out.

]]> By: Miguel Picanco http://scrambled.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/darwin-and-the-denial-of-his-legacy/#comment-3895 Miguel Picanco Wed, 13 Feb 2008 04:09:03 +0000 http://scrambled.wordpress.com/?p=569#comment-3895 Do you mean: "Nearly 150 years after he first published the famous On the Origins of Species..."? Do you mean: “Nearly 150 years after he first published the famous On the Origins of Species…”?

]]> By: Harrison http://scrambled.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/darwin-and-the-denial-of-his-legacy/#comment-3894 Harrison Wed, 13 Feb 2008 01:42:59 +0000 http://scrambled.wordpress.com/?p=569#comment-3894 There is a place for science and religion to come together. It is called the Truth There is a place for science and religion to come together. It is called the Truth

]]>