U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-15-2007, 02:07 AM
 
Location: Mississippi
6,715 posts, read 12,276,993 times
Reputation: 4279

Advertisements

Wow, this is a long one. I started this earlier tonight and I'm only a quarter of the way through it. I suggest anyone who really wants to argue about evolution, the validity of "macroevolution", and how scientists come to conclusions really needs to read this. As I said, I have not finished all of it. From the looks of it, it may take me a week to read it and digest it.

29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: the Scientific Case for Common Descent
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-15-2007, 03:00 AM
 
Location: The Silver State (from the UK)
4,663 posts, read 7,334,989 times
Reputation: 2862
Good post. I especially like this bit:

This hypothesis has been verified and corroborated so extensively that it is currently accepted as fact by the overwhelming majority of professional researchers in the biological and geological sciences (AAAS 1990; NAS 2003; NCSE 2003; Working Group 2001).

I will have to read slower to digest, although I need no convincing
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2007, 03:11 AM
 
Location: Mississippi
6,715 posts, read 12,276,993 times
Reputation: 4279
Yeah it's a heck of a read. I read a big chunk of it then realized that I wasn't comprehending it. So I went back and re-read about a quarter of it again. It comes a lot faster the second time around
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2007, 04:46 AM
 
Location: Dallas
57 posts, read 125,084 times
Reputation: 46
Great. When you finish reading it, try this one.
- A Critique of ''29 Evidences for Macroevolution'' - Intro -
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2007, 05:06 AM
 
Location: Mississippi
6,715 posts, read 12,276,993 times
Reputation: 4279
Quote:
Originally Posted by malcolan View Post
Great. When you finish reading it, try this one.
- A Critique of ''29 Evidences for Macroevolution'' - Intro -
I'll be honest, it's very hard for me to read or take seriously anything that is written in type 16 or 18 bright magenta font. Regardless, when I have a moment I will sit down and read it.

Edit: When we get done reading that, we can read the original author's response to the response

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/camp.htm (broken link)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2007, 05:14 AM
 
Location: among the chaos
2,136 posts, read 4,388,287 times
Reputation: 981
Quote:
Originally Posted by GCSTroop View Post
I'll be honest, it's very hard for me to read or take seriously anything that is written in type 16 or 18 bright magenta font.

I have no interest in reading either of them, but this made me laugh.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2007, 05:50 AM
 
Location: The Silver State (from the UK)
4,663 posts, read 7,334,989 times
Reputation: 2862
Quote:
Originally Posted by malcolan View Post
Great. When you finish reading it, try this one.
- A Critique of ''29 Evidences for Macroevolution'' - Intro -
I would exept Ashby Camp has a reputation for being disected and disproved the second he "rebutts" any scientific information.

A response to Ashby Camp's "Critique"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2007, 07:53 PM
 
Location: Dallas
57 posts, read 125,084 times
Reputation: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by GCSTroop View Post
I'll be honest, it's very hard for me to read or take seriously anything that is written in type 16 or 18 bright magenta font. Regardless, when I have a moment I will sit down and read it.

Edit: When we get done reading that, we can read the original author's response to the response

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/camp.htm (broken link)
Cool. And then when you get done with that, you read Mr. Camp's response to the original author's response.

- Camp answers Theobald -
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2007, 05:09 AM
 
1,897 posts, read 3,095,004 times
Reputation: 284
Quote:
Originally Posted by ian6479 View Post
Good post. I especially like this bit:

This hypothesis has been verified and corroborated so extensively that it is currently accepted as fact by the overwhelming majority of professional researchers in the biological and geological sciences (AAAS 1990; NAS 2003; NCSE 2003; Working Group 2001).

I will have to read slower to digest, although I need no convincing
Why don't you quote the hypothesis which fits very well with the creation model as well--

Quote:
The worldwide scientific research community from over the past 140 years has discovered that no known hypothesis other than universal common descent can account scientifically for the unity, diversity, and patterns of terrestrial life.
You are inferring the necessity of evoultion here. Creationists would have no problem with this hypothesis if it were meant by "universal" common descent that everything began separately and reproduces AFTER ITS OWN KIND. That is observation.

The "universal common descent" is that universally all life was created as individual species and kinds and then reproduced accordingly.

Preterist

Last edited by Preterist; 11-16-2007 at 05:21 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2007, 05:16 AM
 
1,897 posts, read 3,095,004 times
Reputation: 284
Quote:
Originally Posted by malcolan View Post
Great. When you finish reading it, try this one.
- A Critique of ''29 Evidences for Macroevolution'' - Intro -
Good suggestion, malcolan, but evolutionists will not read with an open mind any objections to their precious views. They don't want to be confused by the facts.

Furthermore, I seriously wonder how intensively GCSTroop will read the "29 Evidences for Macroevolution". He will aproach it with the same bias that he approaches everything written by evolutionists. Why would he take the time to read as intensively the other. A good ploy for someone trying to pawn off a controversial belief is to couch it in technicalities so that people become impressed and enamored by the technicality and not by the so-called "facts" behind it.

Preterist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top