Wednesday, April 2, 2008

Bueller...? Bueller...?!

Sure you can criticize evolutionary theory. That's how knowledge is expanded and the theory becomes more refined. However you are going to have to bring something to the table other than 'God done it' or hackneyed and convoluted refutations of evolution written by men without expertise in biology or organic chemistry and with political axes to grind a la Dembski and Meyers.

And FYI Mr. Stein and Mr. Mathis and all you yahoos at the 'DISCO' institute...

Darwinism => Atheism => Racism => Nazism => Holocaust

Is as STUPID and INANE an argument as can possibly be made!

If that's your best 'Big Science' has NOTHING to worry about.

R.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Firstly, if axes to grind were the problem, then you and I should never say anything again, so leave that out. Your issue is the content of their particular axes, not the fact of them.

Secondly, and I don't know why this is so hard for you to understand, but there isn't anyone who doesn't have an ax to grind. No one is objective, no one has no goal, no one is looking to nothing in particular in this or any other matter. Someday you must abandon this make believe concept of objectivity or reside in your bubble, in which you are anything but objective.

Thirdly, your issue with Dembski or Meyer not having enough Robert-approved acronyms at the end of their names or enough paper of which you happen to approve on their wall only avoids the argument. Perhaps it is a characteristic you have acquired while interacting with Christian, but finding a way to not engage the substance of a debate only suggests that you don't want to.

Lastly, there are plenty of reasons that the most foul dictators of the 20th Century and their 19 Century philosophic progenitors loved Darwin and it wasn't because they were bird watchers. There is a clear-as-day philosophic family tree, and you don’t like it.

You have no moral grounding other than that which you prefer, which is why Nietzsche adored Chuckie D. Your own personal moral foundation is nothing more than that, your own. If you don't like me saying it, that's too bad, because it was clear as day to Nietzsche, and his variety of nihilism is the stem from which the most heinous acts of the 20th Century, perpetrated almost universally by those of an atheist stream of thought, is a historical fact, and blustering about it won't make it go away.

You seem to be pissed off about the reality of a fairly tight family tree, which I have cited before, and you left unexamined.

SirRobert said...

Any science can be used for good or ill, Jason.

Exactly how many people have died horribly over the past 2000 years at the hands of people claiming to be doing God's and/or Jesus' work? Does that negate the message of Christ? I don't think so.

So just because a few wing-nuts found justification for their cruelty by bastardizing a valid scientific theory does not destroy the beauty of Mr. Darwin's insight.

All I see in Dembski work is convoluted arguments from personal incredulity. Mr. Dembski has a PH'D in mathematics, exactly how does that make him qualified to refute the work of thousands credentialed and peer-reviewed scientists whose specialty IS evolutionary theory?

All these IDer's are doing is looking for weak spots (of which I freely admit there are many) in evolutionary biology and attacking them. For some reason that escapes me, ID'ers think this PROVES intelligent design when it does no such thing. There is NO way to test for intelligent design and that is the problem I and every other person of a naturalistic world view has with the whole idea! IT'S NOT SCIENCE! All the posturing and comparisons to of evolutionary theory to Nazism will not make it so. That waste of celluloid dreck that will be released in a couple weeks will do nothing but preach to the already converted.

Keep your untestable unfalsifiable supernatural 'woo' where it belongs in churches or whatever you call the buildings where your fundamentalist cults meet.

As far as my morals who the hell are to judge me? I freely admit that my morals are my own, and I will put them up against the best of any Christ follower. I pay my taxes, I care for and love my children, I give to charity when I am able. I have never had a run in with the law much more serious than a traffic ticket! I have NEVER used an illicit substance other than the alcohol in beer or wine and I can count on ONE hand the number of times I have over-indulged in the same. How many born-again Christ-followers that you know can say the same?

I don't have the moral code I do because of some fear of divine retribution after I die. My moral code is there because I wish to be a member of a society and that code is the best I know to facilitate that goal.

I don't give a damned about Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, or even the Popes that sanctioned the crusades, the inquisition, the burning of people accused of witchcraft etc etc ad nauseum... all those FOOLS are DEAD now and good riddance.

IDEAS DON'T KILL, PEOPLE DO!

You sit there and tout the Bible as all we need yet...

People in the antebellum South used it as justification to hold in bondage a race of human beings and to defend themselves against the abolitionists in North, who were using the same Bible to support their abolitionism!

Who was right?! I like to think the abolitionists got it right. I'm assuming you think so too.

I don't condemn Christ or his message for those that killed or did other evil in his name.

Nor should you condemn Darwin or those who work to understand the intricacy of the natural world because some have found justification for their barbarism in the work of Darwin.

R.