EvC Forum: Why Evolution is a Fraud

Email This Thread

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Author

Topic: Why Evolution is a Fraud

RAZD

Member (Idle past 1436 days)

Posts: 20714

From: the other end of the sidewalk

Joined: 03-14-2004

Normal Thread Display

Message 2 of 72 (401904)
05-22-2007 6:31 PM

Reply to: Message 1 by Evolution Crusher
05-22-2007 6:11 PM

Gullibles unite

Anyone who says evolution is mathematically impossible is a fraud.

Thank you for proving that "there is a sucker born every minute" is still true.

Enjoy.

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 1 by Evolution Crusher, posted 05-22-2007 6:11 PM		Evolution Crusher has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 9 by Evolution Crusher, posted 05-22-2007 6:54 PM		RAZD has replied

RAZD

Member (Idle past 1436 days)

Posts: 20714

From: the other end of the sidewalk

Joined: 03-14-2004

Normal Thread Display

Message 26 of 72 (401931)
05-22-2007 8:17 PM

Reply to: Message 9 by Evolution Crusher
05-22-2007 6:54 PM

Re: Gullibles unite you have nothing to lose but your cash

A closed mind gathers no knowledge.

Then open yours.

Math cannot prove or disprove a single thing in reality. At best all it can do is model reality. At worst it models fantasy with no relation to reality.

Evolution is an observed fact, thus any mathematical "proof" that it can't happen is de facto a fraud: You've been conned.

Message 6
There are a lot of strong points, so it is hard to narrow it down to just one.

Sutcliff cites a recent BBC article where students at a UK university tried to put the famous typing monkey theory into practice. Needless to say, the monkeys did not type anything that even remotely resembled Shakespear as Hardison predicted. They did not even type a legible word in English. However, the monkeys did succeed in using the computers as toilets.

This refutes evolution how? This is the strongest point you can mention and it is a vacuous statement based on something totally unrelated to science to say nothing of evolution?

(ibid)
The chapter titled Agendascience really nails the 'why' behind why so many folks buy evolution, even though evolution is scientifically deficient and based more on philosophy than science.

Perhaps you can glean something from this chapter that is less nonsense than your monkey example and post it for our enjoyment.

(ibid)
The best point is the whole focus of the book; the author makes the unique point of breaking the tired old 'science versus religion' stalemate by forcing evolution to stand (or fall) on its own.

A point that you assert and yet there has been not one iota of evidence that there is any validity to such a claim. Assertion alone is insufficient evidence.

What I see is someone cashing in on the gullibility of ignorant people that will be foolish enough to pay money to be told what they want to hear rather than what is true: so far the evidence is that you've been conned.

But really you should start another thread on what the book says or ask that this be moved out of "book nook" to another forum ("is it science" would be appropriate for discussing the contents of the book eh?). Admin could copy this there and close this thread (thus leaving the book nook entry while allowing continued discussion of the merits of the book, and the link would allow the curious to follow).

Message 8
The best point is the whole focus of the book; the author makes the unique point of breaking the tired old 'science versus religion' stalemate by forcing evolution to stand (or fall) on its own.

It doesn't have to be to be full of the same PRATTS that creationists use: they pretend they have a scientific basis as well.

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : msg quote ref

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 9 by Evolution Crusher, posted 05-22-2007 6:54 PM		Evolution Crusher has not replied

RAZD

Member (Idle past 1436 days)

Posts: 20714

From: the other end of the sidewalk

Joined: 03-14-2004

Normal Thread Display

Message 32 of 72 (401938)
05-22-2007 8:31 PM

Reply to: Message 17 by subbie
05-22-2007 7:09 PM

Or the real "Source"?

theonion.com.

Okay, that explains it.

Nuff said.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 17 by subbie, posted 05-22-2007 7:09 PM		subbie has not replied

RAZD

Member (Idle past 1436 days)

Posts: 20714

From: the other end of the sidewalk

Joined: 03-14-2004

Normal Thread Display

Message 34 of 72 (401941)
05-22-2007 8:40 PM

Reply to: Message 33 by Zhimbo
05-22-2007 8:34 PM

Re: evo crusher = evo fraud

I liked this one from the primary source:

Study: 38 Percent Of People Not Actually Entitled To Their Opinion

quote:
CHICAGO”In a surprising refutation of the conventional wisdom on opinion entitlement, a study conducted by the University of Chicago's School for Behavioral Science concluded that more than one-third of the U.S. population is neither entitled nor qualified to have opinions.

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : fix quote

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 33 by Zhimbo, posted 05-22-2007 8:34 PM		Zhimbo has not replied

RAZD

Member (Idle past 1436 days)

Posts: 20714

From: the other end of the sidewalk

Joined: 03-14-2004

Normal Thread Display

Message 46 of 72 (401987)
05-23-2007 9:09 AM

Reply to: Message 33 by Zhimbo
05-22-2007 8:34 PM

Re: evo crusher = evo fraud

Check out Amazon.com - Reviews Written by Evofraud: it looks like the same "review" on each book ...

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 33 by Zhimbo, posted 05-22-2007 8:34 PM		Zhimbo has not replied

RAZD

Member (Idle past 1436 days)

Posts: 20714

From: the other end of the sidewalk

Joined: 03-14-2004

Normal Thread Display

Message 47 of 72 (401988)
05-23-2007 9:12 AM

Reply to: Message 45 by PaulK
05-23-2007 9:01 AM

Re: The Challenge Before Us

And the reference to theonion.com is a clue. I wonder what happens if you order the book... is it real?

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 45 by PaulK, posted 05-23-2007 9:01 AM		PaulK has not replied

RAZD

Member (Idle past 1436 days)

Posts: 20714

From: the other end of the sidewalk

Joined: 03-14-2004

Normal Thread Display

Message 48 of 72 (401989)
05-23-2007 9:29 AM

Reply to: Message 44 by Percy
05-23-2007 7:28 AM

Re: The Challenge Before Us

The problem ... but that a creationist who reads such books thinks they contains good arguments ... If a creationist reads that the argument about monkeys and typewriters is evidence against evolution, they'll buy it ... By this time Evolution Crusher realizes that the monkeys/typewriters example is not the strong point he thought it was, but he very likely has no idea why.

The problem is a lack of critical thinking and the ability to review a position for its real merits instead of its claims. Reading "EvoFrauds" reviews on Amazon I see no review of the critical points in any of the books: they are not reviews.

Lawrence Krauss (well known professor of astronomy and author of The Physics of Star Trek) believes that the problem with religion is one of education. Sam Harris (The End of Faith) counters that it is clearly not an issue of education when we have engineers and architects flying planes into buildings in the name of religion. I tend to side with Krauss. For those who are just normal religionists, I think a little education can go a long way. The terrorists in the over-used 911 example of Sam Harris are not normal religionists, but are more cultists, and we now know that cults are a rather complex psychological issue.

So how do we tell when we are dealing with cult mentality? Should education include a generic de-culting? Is there a hard line between cult beliefs and rational thinking?

I tend to believe that no amount of education can cut through the delusions that have been cultivated by (pick any) religious dogma unless the person involved already has questions. The problem is to reach those that are delusional and think they have the answers. We see a LOT of those here. Anything they find that in any way claims to support their views will be hailed as convincing proof no matter how full of falsehoods and misrepresentations it is.

Whether this book is a fraud or not, the problem remains: how to reach those behind the veil of cult beliefs.

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 44 by Percy, posted 05-23-2007 7:28 AM		Percy has not replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 50 by Taz, posted 05-23-2007 1:04 PM		RAZD has not replied

RAZD

Member (Idle past 1436 days)

Posts: 20714

From: the other end of the sidewalk

Joined: 03-14-2004

Normal Thread Display

Message 58 of 72 (402024)
05-23-2007 4:49 PM

Reply to: Message 53 by dwise1
05-23-2007 3:01 PM

Ridiculous position

Sutcliff, in fact, says that evolution should not be banned.

Really? He opposes evolution as a fraud (judging from your presentation of it) and yet, you say, he says it should not be banned.

Judging also from the title of the book ...

This is an example of extreme cognitive dissonance in action: fraud should not be banned.

This is not logical: either it should be banned because it is fraud or it should not be banned because it is not fraud. Of course if we start banning actual frauds from being taught that would rule out all the creatortionista nonsense ...

Enjoy.

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 53 by dwise1, posted 05-23-2007 3:01 PM		dwise1 has not replied

RAZD

Member (Idle past 1436 days)

Posts: 20714

From: the other end of the sidewalk

Joined: 03-14-2004

Normal Thread Display

Message 71 of 72 (402216)
05-25-2007 6:26 AM

Reply to: Message 70 by Archer Opteryx
05-25-2007 3:37 AM

Re: Speaking of the OP . . .

Stone Soup by Jan Eliot for May 20, 2007 - GoComics

This message is a reply to:
	Message 70 by Archer Opteryx, posted 05-25-2007 3:37 AM		Archer Opteryx has not replied

Date format: mm-dd-yyyy

Timezone: ET (US)

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Do Nothing Button

3 online now:	DrJones*, nwr, Omnivorous
Newest Member:	ChatGPT
Post Volume:	Total: 916,929 Year: 4,186/9,624 Month: 1,057/974 Week: 16/368 Day: 16/11 Hour: 0/0