Over the past year, I've been active on C-D, and I've had many of my innocent, logical arguments denounced by information that is easily traced directly back to the various Christian apologist websites. such as:
Answers in Genesis - Creation, Evolution, Christian Apologetics
www.creationresearch,org (a pseudo-scientific group)
The Institute for Creation Research (the Institute for Creation Research),
etc. etc.
They all disseminate
modified dis-information, they gloss over little errors or inconsistencies, or they outright lie when cornered.
Examples: (from:
New Finch Species Shows Conservation, Not Macroevolution)
"Their descendants have carried on the family traits. The Grants reported in a study on the birds published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that “our observations provide new insight into speciation and hence, into the origin of a new species.”2 But the details show that this new “species” is just a variation within the finch kind, and is therefore irrelevant to big-picture evolution."
There's that last simple little assumptive statement slipped in there, which is demonstrably incorrect.
Editorial Hack Trick # 1: add in errors or lies as
factual. But then who's watching, huh?
Or, regarding the benchmark 2008 Lenski study,
this from Tom Wolff's blog:
Tom Wolff's Blog: Lenski’s E. Coli Experiments, his conversational attempt to minimize this spectacular research result:
..."when the "evolved" E. coli developed the ability to metabolize citrate, it was a beneficial new trait that allowed this group an advantage over the other 11 groups because of its growth in population size.
(rflmn™: a true statement... so far. But then... a bit of editorial license)
So was this really a "major" evolutionary shift? Was it the development of a new leg, or a proto-eye? What was the "complex new trait" that the E. coli bacteria developed after 40,000 generations? Yes, this "profound change" meant that it could "metabolize" citrate. The article makes it sound like it is a big deal."
So... what's with that tail-end little opinion sentence?
Answer:
Editorial Hack Trick # 2: minimize major findings. Compare a proven instance of genetic mutation & adaptation
[which is categorically denied by Creationists] to the development of a complete proto-eye. The old
"I want to see a cat give birth to a dog!" non-argument.
Well yes, frankly, it
is a big deal, because it showed exactly how genetic differences do occur, and accumulate. Does this guy want to say that individual genetic variants via mutation mean nothing? Apparently. Because later, his Royal Knowledge-Highness further adds....
"So there you have it – The E. coli's major evolutionary shift is to allow citrate to be transported inside the cell membrane so that it can be used. All of the machinery to use citrate was already inside the cell. Yawn, excuse me while I go to sleep…"
Well, let's all applaud Tom's in-depth knowledge and understanding of the implications of this study,m shall we? We humans genetically maintain
many of the species-specific traits of monkeys & lemurs that are, at this point, unused but still fully functional if turned back on. Cellular genetics is capable of turning traits on and off according to need. We used to label them "junk DNA". No more.
Perhaps we should just deny the existence of "species" at all? We're all just the same: a bacterium, a human, a sea-gull, a polar bear: All-same?
Well, I'm sure you guys can come up with lots more. For examples, just go to these sites, or others like them, and check out their arguments
against any problematic science. But....isn't it odd that they refute
all knowledge that argues against a strict Christian interpretation. No matter how well-done that science is, it's
all automatically bogus according to these sites.
Sound a bit fishy to anyone else?
[Hey; maybe that's what the fish sign on the backs of Volvos really means?] 
The links and quotes above reflects about 5 minutes worth of googling, and the errors were immediately obvious.
That's hardly a viable debating technique, is it? I suppose though, it's all that's left now.
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.
