"Dodos" film pecks holes in evolution debate

Check out the "debunked horse series post mortem thread".

http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/66/131.html#000000

There you will see some of the finest examples of evolutionist blunders known to this board.

"The whole point" of that thread is to take what evolutionists (the highest source being atheist evolutionists of course) confessions on the debunked horse series and then to ask that we step back and do a kind of "lessons learned" in analyzing HOW the debunked theory came into being in the first place!

However the evolutionists here were so eager to fall on their own swords that they could not respond beyond pure ad hominem attacks (in UTEOTWs case) until they had posted 6 or 7 or (in fact UTEOTW was never able to free himself of ad hominem instead of substance).

My recent response that includes a snippet from one of his recent diatribes posted here --
http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/66/131/4.html#000051

Beyond that - I suggest you take a look at the ID thread that was designed as a contrast between actual Christian evolutionism contrasted to what "passes for Christian evolutionism" as seen here where true believers in atheistic darwinist evolutionism flee the ID teaching of such basic texts as Romans 1 where God claims that "even PAGANS" clearly see the ID in nature and the invisible attributes of the infinitely intelligent God "in what has been made".

http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/66/125.html#000000

I would love to get your input if you can keep yourself off of the ad hominem train that UTEOTW has all cranked up.

Paul has had "some success" there but his posts directly contradict UTEOTW AND the atheist darwinist sources as well.

In Christ,

Bob

 

I agree, but I can understand the temptation.

 

Are your beliefs the primary tool of Satan? (Fortunately according to your post above - you would not consider that remark to be ad hominem at all. So that is really neat.)

OR "when you read" what UTEOTW says about others on this board do you think "well that is not actually ad hominem as long as it is not said about me"??

You seem to have an "odd idea" of relative scale here.

I may select a "collection" of UTEOTW's ad hominem (since you approve of it so much) and direct it to you as " a test" of your claim to enjoy it and consider it high praise rather than the true ad hominem content that it is.

On the other hand - you might be turned off by it since your views are skewed by the doctrines of evolutionism in an "all for evolutionism" kind of Christian Evolutionism.

I suppose I could have that same mindset if I went down that dark alley.

Who knows?

In Christ,

Bob

 

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would love to get your input if you can keep yourself off of the ad hominem train that UTEOTW has all cranked up.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How "surprising"

How consistent with the group of true believers in Darwinist evolutionism so far.

 

The proof that this "pseudoscience" bogus approach to truth is being practiced here every day is seen in the refusal of so-called Christian evolutionists here to LOOK at the "lessons learned" from past mistakes. Mistakes that BOTH Christian and glorious-atheist sources freely admit to seeing. Mistakes seen in the past as points of common ground agreement and STILL our "wannabe" group here refuses to LOOK and objectively review the blatant facts.

How "instructive" as to their motives when it comes to real science and disconfirming data that needs to be "glossed over".

 

"ad hominem" is not synonymous with "insult"

 

There is a "flexibility" on that point with Evoltuionists that you don't find a lot with Christians.

Typically the focus is "supposed" to be "on the subject at hand" rather than insulting "the person" bringing up "inconvenient facts".

In debates with evolutionists we see that they often can not tell the difference between "the subject" and just plain old "insults" about the person MAKING the arguments.

I realize this is pretty complicated - but I don't want let the point simply be glossed over as is the usual practice with the salient points in each argument made against evolutionism.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Bob

I challenge you to show where I personally attacked! I have expressed strong opinions, no doubt, but ido not think that I have crossed the line into eith personal attacks nor insults.

So why have I been so harsh on you? Well let's see. It takes a little story telling.

I was YEC myself for most of my life. The bad part was that I simply accepted that position as what I was supposed to believe without ever really knowing why. So I started reading YEC material.

At first, it sounded quite convincing but for some reason it also felt incomplete. Something was missing but I could not put my finger on it.

Then I came across something. A favorite false claim of those in the grip of YECism is that somehow the second law of thermodynamics somehow prevents evolution from being possible. (Now they never seem able to put this into concrete terms. They just equivocate meanings between how they are used by laypersons and by science/engineers. It is easy to be fooled if you are not faviliar with thermodynamics and entropy in particular.) Being an engineer and having studied two semesters of thermo plus having it be a core part of other classes, I immediately saw the problem.

Once I did, I started checking out other claims. As I did, I got more and more angry at what I found poeple were doing in the name of God.

Over and over I saw people who had set themselves up as Christian leaders who felt it was OK to lie for Christ. Usually it involved distorting what a scientists had said.

Sometimes this would take the form of changing what the results were in published papers. A classic example of this is Morris's claims about Funkhouser et al dating Hawaiian rocks.

OThe other popular form was quote mining. In this case, you take a quote from a scientists and you remove the context to make him appear to have an opinion different than what he really has. This is quite insiduous because it seems to be a very powerful appeal to a legitimate authority.

Most people do not have the access or the skills to verify whether the quotes are accurate or not. For that matter, most people do not even think they need to check out the quotes. They blindly trust that a fellow Christian would not lead them astray.

Well they are wrong.

And when they find out, the effects can be devestating. There are plenty of anecdotes out there of people who have lost their faith when they made such a revelation. They just cannot handle the realization that people they had trusted to lead them in their faith had been so blatently dishonest with them. How do they know that the pattern was not repeated in other areas.

Worse, is that you can also find anecdotes of those who are not Christian, who see such activitiy, and who use that as an excuse to NEVER come to Christ.

These lies about evolution have real consequences. Here is a snippet from one anecdote. I encourage you to follow the link to read the whole thing.

http://home.entouch.net/dmd/gstory.htm

So now you see why I have such a strong opinion against YEism. And you see why your behavior disturbs me so much that I come after you so hard.

I have no illusions that I cna change the mind of someone like you. But, because of my experiences, I do have the goal of helping you to eliminate some of the most egregious methods.

A lot of people quote mine or otherwise use some of the false arguments from YE leaders. Most have no idea of the problems with them. They have never checked them out because they mistakenly trust them. But when you show them, their better instincts kick in and they at least decide that it is better to present an honest case even though they do not change their minds.

That is the normal response and the expected response. I consider it a step forward.

But not so with oyu Bob. When you are presented with how you arguments are based on a dishonest quotation, instead of accepting that, no you redouble your efforts to make the same claims using the same quotes. No matter how many times the error is pointed out, you continue to use them and do so gleefully.

That I cannot understand.

But now you should see my perspective.

I call YE a tool of the devil. That is not an ad hominem. That is my opinion on the destructive effects of such deceitful quote mining and the wider deceptions of YE.

I call your ramblings full of blather. That is not meant as an ad hominem on you. It is meant to convey my opinion that such repeated out of context quotations without any semblence of supporting facts really is just nonsensical speech.

I really do think that you are making a lot of noise but that you really do not signify anything at all because your quotes have no meaning without the context apllied. And in context, they do not support your assertions.

You complain of the ad hominem when you are the one calling theistic evolutionists names like "atheist wannabe." I believe that fits every definition of ad hominem.

 

I suppose I should accept that challenge. Ok - I will.

In the mean time - I never begrudge the followers of atheist darwinism a "little story telling".

In Christ,

Bob

 

Are you kidding? There is no shortage of YEC folks who brush off anyone who's not YEC with numerous one liners. I don't care it's a YEC or nonYEC doing it, it's rude in either case. Not to mention, it's typically unbecoming of Christians.

And that doesn't even begin to address the numerous times nonYEC's have their faith in scripture questioned, or are called liberals, or even have their salvation questioned.

 

There is no shortage of brushing off YEC posters on this board!

It is not atypical of evolutionists to START out with some vacuous pointless ad hominem as in the case of the quote below where you do not actually answer the OP on page one, post one, sentence one!

After that vacuous ad hominem and totally false section of UTEOTW's post on that thread it goes on to fill the post with false charges – but those falsehoods that follow are not ad hominem, just false. (atrocious revisionism and failed logic actually) So I don’t state that all your falsehoods are ad hominem.

For example in that next post UTEOTW says something like this I cannot for the life of me understand how you think that this is a quote that supports you. I never label some little rabbit trail like that – “Ad hominem”.

 

Notice that in the bogus charges of UTEOTW above the definition of "dishonest" is defined as "paying attention to inconvenient facts that UTEOTW needs to have glossed over".

Facts that UTEOTW will occassionally admit to - but needs to gloss over continuously.