Post Mortem on the debunked horse series

In UTEOTW's "Ceaseless pursuit of revisionism" and trying to disguise his own imagination as "historic fact" he has not only left all the statements on this thread unchallenged (with anything of substance) but has also managed to define "dishonest" as being equal to ANY quote of an atheist dawrinist icon that is admitting to the blunders of the past as they actually happened in the religious system we know today as Darwinian Evolutionism!

What a hoot!

He proves the point of this thread with his every post. This ia a "post mortem" on the debunked horse series called "LAMENTABLE" and said to have been "presented AS IF IT WERE FACT" by its own atheist darwinist promoters!!

So what is the "lesson learned" in that post mortem for UTEOTW??!!

ANSWER: He is still too busy RELIVING faith in that debunked sequence to even HAVE a post mortem on it!!

What a surprise brethren!

In Christ,

Bob

 

Notice the presentation was “all wrong”. HOW could an “ALL wrong” presentation be concocted WITHOUT the evidence for it?? Answer: With LESS data and fewer example there is room for “more story telling”!!. Their “Story” was better with less data!! (And so it is with “all stories”!!)

</font>[/QUOTE]

 

Notice that statement above --


"I admit that an awful lot of that [imaginary stories] has gotten into the textbooks as though it were true. For instance, the most famous example still on exhibit downstairs [in the American Museum of Natural History] is the exhibit on horse evolution prepared perhaps 50 years ago. That has been presented as literal truth in textbook after textbook. Now I think that that is lamentable ..."

Niles Eldredge, as quoted in Luther D Sunderland, Darwin's Enigma: Fossils and Other Problems, 4th ed. 1988, pg 78.

How can believers in atheist darwinist evolutinism be satisified with such vaccuous responses to "details" and "inconvenient facts"??

I just know you can do better.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Here UTEOTW seems to be totally befuddled and lost on the stated question of the OP and title of this thread.

Knock! Knock! Hello UTEOTW - this thread is on the POST MORTEM of the debunked horse series that is the SUBSTANCE AND CONTENT of all the atheist darwinist quotes provided here!!

Surely you "get that" by now!!

I have not mentioned the space shuttle or OTHER stories about horseys! Get it? We are talking specifically about the story highlighted in the subject.

What a great thing if you could bring yourself to respond to the "lessons learned" in the course of that debunked storyline from our atheist darwinist friends.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Turning a blind eye to the details here is not serving your argument UTEOTW.

AS ARLEADY STATED your pointless misdirection that takes the form "NO BLUNDER in atheist darwinist evolutionism that is ADMITTED by the atheist darwinists may be quoted IF THAT atheist does not ALSO BECOME A CHRISTIAN creationist after admitting to the blunder!!" - is too silly of a non-response to be taken seriously.

http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/66/131/2.html#000027

Why is this concept so difficult for you? Why do you keep trying it time after time after time AS IF anyone could take that form of response seriously?

In Christ,

Bob

 

Notice the above quote says "Reconstructed IN an evolutionary series"!! That is "a nice way to put it" friends.

He in fact "ARRANGED the fossils" into an "artifact" of science! Did HE KNOW he had contrived an arrangement to FIT the story that atheist darwinian evolutionism 'wants to tell'? Yes!!

Did He KNOW He was ARRANGING? YES!

Did He KNOW He was NOT telling the audience "This is simply a contrived arrangement to fit a story that I would like to tell"? YES!!

He knew this FROM THE START!!

In science we try to DISCOVER that we are wrong and need to make a correction. So what did we DISCOVER to call what he was doing "lamentable"?

Think about it. </font>[/QUOTE]

 

#1. The comment on "Lamentable" was made in the 1980's -- is it your claim that this is "100 years ago"??

If so - you have glossed over "Wayyy too many details".

#2. The whole point of this thread is to take that debunked horse series example and do a "post mortem on it". SHOW the lessons learned. DISCOVER how it came into being.

You have spent so much time defending it - you can not see the forrest for the trees here.

Again - simply bogus misdirection.

I have not addressed the space shuttle or DNA or "other stories about horseys" here.

Try to stay on topic.

The OP and the title has to do with taking the "inconvenient details" posted here and learning from the debunked example.

Do you really think you are 'saying something' when you finally admit that the horse series refrenced here was DEBUNKED??!!

That is "A GIVEN" friend. The point of the thread is to evaluate the LESSONS LEARNED!

To look at the PROCESS and mechanism by which the debunked series CAME INTO BEING!

I can't believe your devotion to vaccuous ad hominem attacks prevents you from "Seeing the details" in post after post after post.

Your every post simply exposes the fact that the subject matter of this thread seems to be beyond what your beliefs will allow you to "read".

I have repeatedly stated that the "POST MORTEM" on the debunked horse series is STAYING ON TOPIC rather than diverting over to some "other topic" though you seem to desperately "NEED it"!

Why is this concept so difficult for you UTEOTW.

This persistence of yours in failing to read the "inconvenient details here" is being exposed in your every post.

I Just know you can do better.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Hint for the true believers in atheist darwinianism -- try to read the post below and pay attention to what it actually says.

See if you don't find some actual "details" to respond to as these atheist darwinist icons discuss the topic of this particular thread.

Try not to "blame me" for what THEY say as you seeking to distance yourself from your ad hominem tactics so far.

Notice the presentation was “all wrong”. HOW could an “ALL wrong” presentation be concocted WITHOUT the evidence for it?? Answer: With LESS data and fewer example there is room for “more story telling”!!. Their “Story” was better with less data!! (And so it is with “all stories”!!)

</font>[/QUOTE]

 

The fact that your own atheist darwinist icons can so freely discuss this blunder of the past should be a great encouragement to the fox-hole defensive-minded evolutionists here who have been circling the wagons and glossing over details so far.

Try to reach out and embrace at least as much truth as these atheists are doing in public!

 

Blah blah blah UTEOTW! More of the same nonsense rather than staying on topic, holding focus, responding cogently to the points made by ATHEIST darwinists as cited here and paying attenion to the task at hand which is to outline "LESSONS LEARNED" from the debunked horse series that even YOU admit the atheist icons are debunking!!

I have an idea - why not join the discussion instead of doing that diatribe thing over and over.

 

Let's try this again.

Please read the thread title and the OP.

Do you see them yet?

Good.

(note my confidence that you followed that)

Now notice that this is a "post mortem" on that debunked horse sequence.

Did you see that "detail"? Yet?

(At this point I have no idea if you are following this or not. This point has been difficult for you so far.)

By "ancient" do you mean the one still in use in 1989 as the quote shows?

(question already asked before where you assert that this is a century ago)

The really "Good news" you seem to "get" that I am "staying on topic".

Please note the focus is "lessons learned" from that debunked horse series!

(Are you still following this?)

Wonderful - we are now down from "Century" to the 1980's! Outstanding!

Now for the "Lessons learned" points raised on page 1 and 2.

IS this where you "get" that a post mortem on the debunked horse series is not "ALSO a review" of the current one?

(maybe you are hoping for a "post mortem" on the current story - feel free to start such a thread)

Ease up off that coolaide UTEOTW and try to return focus on to the "lessons learned" topic of this thread for the debunked horse series.

The atheist darwinians "Debunked" the horse series after the facts brought them to their knees.

the debunked series is NOT MY strawman - it was the product of atheist darwinians themselves.

Now for the "lessons learned"

"About the debunked series that was presented by atheist darwians as IF it were fact".

You are almost engaging in conversation now.

Just try to retain topic focus for this thread and bring yourself to the "lessons learned" subject.

(Not sure if you are still following the main point of the thread - but who knows ... maybe)

In Christ,

Bob

 

Now for that {page one detail being ignored by the believers in Atheist darwinian evolutionism)

Page 1 --
http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/66/131.html#000012

Notice the above quote says "Reconstructed IN an evolutionary series"!! That is "a nice way to put it" friends.

He in fact "ARRANGED the fossils" into an "artifact" of science! Did HE KNOW he had contrived an arrangement to FIT the story that atheist darwinian evolutionism 'wants to tell'? Yes!!

Did He KNOW He was ARRANGING? YES!

Did He KNOW He was NOT telling the audience "This is simply a contrived arrangement to fit a story that I would like to tell"? YES!!

He knew this FROM THE START!!

In science we try to DISCOVER that we are wrong and need to make a correction. So what did we DISCOVER to call what he was doing "lamentable"?

Think about it. </font>[/QUOTE]I realize that this concept is far more complex than simply "What is the topic - now notice that I am STAYING on the topic of the post mortem for the debunked horse series" --

But surely there is an evolutionist here that can go this far and respond to the point.

 

So you are differing with the atheist darwinist summation. hmmm - interesting.

Perhaps you "believe" the "sequence" DID occur just as it was presented no matter how much your own atheist darwinists deny that point.

Yes you did say that before (and of course UTEOTW admits it is a strawman series totally debunked but you seem to think it is valid).

As I asked before (and as you have stalled in responding to the point so far) ARE you really comfortable claiming that the sequence IS CORRECT it is just not 'The most direct one available'??

This question has been asked already - are you ready to respond now?

Why not just read "The first time" and respond to the question that came in response to this "the first time"??

http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/66/131/2.html#000029

http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/66/131/3.html#000030

 

We already have some "new lessons to learn" from the looks of it -

#1. Believers in atheist darwinism "don't like learning lessons from old debunked darwinist stories" they want to talk about "newer stories instead of learning the lessons from the old ones".

#2. SOME of the true believers in atheist darwinism a stuck still reliving and defending the old dubunked series while OTHERs reluctantly confess it was bogus but then want to attack Bible believing Christians for even MENTIONING the debunked series!!

#3. Not only do the true believers in atheist darwinism gloss over the "details" of what their own atheist darwinist icons have said about that horse series and so they also do not read the 'details' in the posts that expose them here -- they ALSO apparently do not read each other's posts. (Judging from the sharp contrast between Paul's DEFENSE of the bogus series and UTEOTW's attack on anyone that might mention it's existence).

However if you paid attention to page 1 and part of 2 - you would know that THIS is not what I wanted to highlight here. The true believers in atheist darwinism were so anxious to fall all over themselves on this topic that they kinda spewed these unpleasant "new" lessons for us all to learn.

I had hoped to go back to the actual history of the debunked series itself.

In Christ,

Bob