Coffee House Musings on Creationist Topic Proposals

The late science historian and atheist, Dr. William Provine, said,
"Evolution is the greatest engine of atheism ever invented".According to you he was talking complete crap. That is almost certainly bullshit."Nearly 95% of the biologists in the National Academy of Sciences describe themselves as atheists or agnostics, a far higher percentage than in any other scientific discipline."
[Larry Witham,
Where Darwin Meets the Bible (2002), pp. 271-273]"

Please be advised that a theory is not knowledge.We KNOW how an internal combustion engine works ... hence there is no Theory of Internal Combustion Engines.
We KNOW how to build a house ... hence there is no Theory of House-building.
Conversely, we DON'T KNOW what process was responsible for the fossil record ... hence there is a Theory of Evolution.For your psychological well-being, you and your fellow atheists need to delude yourselves that ToE is a fact and is therefore "knowledge" ... which is actually oxymoronic ... if it were a fact it wouldn't be a theory.

188 Yep, you have so much knowledge about evolution that you can't describe how even one evolutionary transition evident in the fossil record happened.

Edited by Dredge, .

I think it's fair to say atheist Darwinists believe that the history of life on earth proceeded according to ToE ... ie, they believe ToE is a fact. Anyone who claims to know how ToE produced the history of life on earth is, in effect, claiming ToE is a fact. Please describe how the "mechanisms behind evolution" produced an amphibian's double-circulation heart from the single-circulation heart of a fish.Please describe how the "mechanisms behind evolution" produced a whale's blowhole and tail from the morphology of a land mammal.Please describe how the "mechanisms behind evolution" produced any evolutionary transition evident in the fossil record.

I have explained it to you numerous times. You just don't like the answer.Regardless, I shall present my argument one more time:1. You don't know how evolutionary mechanisms produced an amphibian's double-circulation heart from a the single-circulation heart of a fish.2. You don't know how evolutionary mechanisms produce a whale's blowhole and tail from a land animal.3. In fact, you don't how evolutionary mechanisms produced any evolutionary transitions evident in the fossil record.1 + 2 + 3 = your claim to know how evolution works is clearly bullsh_t.

You have no way of confirming that a whale's nostrils evolved from the nosrils of a land mammal and you have no way of confirming any process that might be responsible ... therefore you cannot claim to know how that (alleged) transition occurred.​

... yet there are millions of Darwinists out there who believe the theory of evolution is also a fact. The atheist variety are especially devoted to this theory/fact belief system. What "evolution" are you referring to? I hope you're not suggesting that I myself am "illiterate" ... I'm semi-illiterate.
As for being a "dimwit" ... yes, that's true; I am a dimwit (although I prefer the word, "halfwit").
As for being "anti-science" ... not me.​​

What "new body plans" are you referring to? This would be funny if it weren't so sadly pathological ... completely and utterly off-topic, nevertheless you couldn't resist the urge to inject some hate-speech into the conversation.

Edited by Dredge, .

Your refusal to describe how evolution happened means you don't know how evolution happened. ????

Language is interesting, isn't it? In Australia, we don't say "asshole" ... we say "arsehole". If you know how evolution works, please describe how an amphibian's double-circulation heart (allegedly) evolved from the single-circulation heart of a fish. What was the first step?

Dr. Gunter Bechly is one of my heroes! .. and evolutionnews.org has long been my favourite science website. Thanx for the link ... I love to read Bechly's stuff.

Deary, deary me - that's not even close to what I said. I said it's delusional to equate the theory of evolution with knowledge (aka fact). Here you go again ... claiming to know things that no one can possibly know. First you claimed to know how evolution works ... now you claim to know that Catholicism is a fairy tale.
​ In that case, please describe the microevolutionary steps involved in the (alleged) evolution of an amphibian's double-circulation heart from the single-circulation heart of a fish.​​

You can't describe the step-by-step process of even one evolutionary transition evident in the fossil record ... which means you can't claim to know how evolution works. I sincerely thank you for your wonderful words of wisdom, which are ... so profound ... that I don't think I will ever understand them.

Meanwhile, you can't describe the process involved in even one evolutionary transition evident in the fossil record ... yet you claim to know how evolution works.

Yep, no doubt about it ... Dr. Gunter Bechly is definitely stupid ...He worked from 1999-2016 as scientific curator for amber and fossil insects in the paleontological department at the  State Museum of Natural History (SMNS) in Stuttgart (Germany), which is one of the five biggest natural history museums in Germany.He also held a teaching assignment at the University Hohenheim in Germany on insect systematics and phylogeny.He has authored or co-authored more than 160 scientific publications, including a co-edited and co-authored book published by Cambridge University Press and a German popular science book on evolution, as well as several book chapters (including three chapters in the latest and largest monograph on the Solnhofen fossil locality and the chapter on insect evolution and systematics in Grzimek's Animal Life Encyclopedia). He pioneered the phylogenetic re-classification of the insect order Odonata (dragonflies, damselflies, and their fossil relatives), made substantial contributions to the question of the evolutionary origin of insect wings, and ranks among the world leading experts on fossil dragonflies and on fossil insects from the Solnhofen and Crato limestones.He has discovered and described more than 180 new species (incl. three new insect orders), and 11 biological groups have been named as eponyms by other scientists in his honor. He served on the editorial boards of five scientific journals (Petalura, Odonatologica, Archaeopteryx, Palaeodiversity, and BIO-Complexity).What a moron!!

Edited by Dredge, .