Soon creationist are going to say beneficial mutations prove creationism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-03-2014, 01:09 PM
Soon creationist are going to say beneficial mutations prove creationism
From answers in genesis: Arguments Creationist Should Not Use

4.There are no beneficial mutations.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/get-answ...e-dont-use

They have found a way. Soon enough they are going to yell that beneficial mutations prove creationism. So do your self a favor save a creationist website that says there are not beneficial mutations, because when it comes to that point you can show that creationism just takes anything for evidence, even things they said could never happen.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] ♪僕は恐怖の一定した状態に住んで、不幸、逃すもう?僕は、それはもう痛いときも気づかないと
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-03-2014, 03:07 PM
RE: Soon creationist are going to say beneficial mutations prove creationism
Don't worry about it, the way they're going with arguments right now, in about 1,000 years there will be no difference in effective understanding of the world just different language, that' mostly what I see now, creationists can't deny the serious issues with some of the concepts so they try to work around them. That will be their undoing.

Wait it out Wink
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Sceadwian's post
19-03-2014, 03:20 PM
Soon creationist are going to say beneficial mutations prove creationism
I can't wait for the day churches preach evolution as proof of intelligent design.

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.”
― Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-03-2014, 03:21 PM
RE: Soon creationist are going to say beneficial mutations prove creationism
(19-03-2014 03:20 PM)rampant.a.i. Wrote:  I can't wait for the day churches preach evolution as proof of intelligent design.

Neither can I. Soon the only difference between the two will be words.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] ♪僕は恐怖の一定した状態に住んで、不幸、逃すもう?僕は、それはもう痛いときも気づかないと
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Metazoa Zeke's post
19-03-2014, 10:27 PM
RE: Soon creationist are going to say beneficial mutations prove creationism
(19-03-2014 03:21 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  
(19-03-2014 03:20 PM)rampant.a.i. Wrote:  I can't wait for the day churches preach evolution as proof of intelligent design.

Neither can I. Soon the only difference between the two will be words.

For many, it already is. I've seen any number of creationists talk about evolution and how it's a fact, but they simply refuse to call it evolution, they instead refer to it as 'adaptation'; and only ever refer to straw-man argument as 'evolution'. So they're basically arguing in favor of evolution over a straw-man, but they just label evolution as 'adaptation' and the straw-man as 'evolution'.

We've already won, they just don't know it. Smartass

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
19-03-2014, 10:39 PM
RE: Soon creationist are going to say beneficial mutations prove creationism
(19-03-2014 03:20 PM)rampant.a.i. Wrote:  I can't wait for the day churches preach evolution as proof of intelligent design.

That was Blowjob's thesis in his original post. Convergent evolution.
It's already out there.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
20-03-2014, 07:22 AM
RE: Soon creationist are going to say beneficial mutations prove creationism
I know I posted this within the last month here, but I'm posting it again because it's relevant:

[Image: 20100919.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like RobbyPants's post
21-03-2014, 05:46 AM
RE: Soon creationist are going to say beneficial mutations prove creationism
(20-03-2014 07:22 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  I know I posted this within the last month here, but I'm posting it again because it's relevant:

[Image: 20100919.gif]

Nailed it on the fuckin' head Robby. Thumbsup

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
21-03-2014, 06:19 PM
RE: Soon creationist are going to say beneficial mutations prove creationism
(20-03-2014 07:22 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  I know I posted this within the last month here, but I'm posting it again because it's relevant:

[Image: 20100919.gif]

This picture is so accurate that it makes me laugh and cry.

[Image: Guilmon-41189.gif] ♪僕は恐怖の一定した状態に住んで、不幸、逃すもう?僕は、それはもう痛いときも気づかないと
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-03-2014, 01:22 PM
RE: Soon creationist are going to say beneficial mutations prove creationism
There's quite a bit of ignorance in this thread. Allow me to expose it.

First of all, the idea that adaptation is a concept invented by creationists to combat Darwin's idea is, in a word, laughable. Adaptation precedes Darwin by millenia. That lifeforms change (adapt) has been known about as far back in human history as we can go. Plant and animal breeding -- the intentional manipulation of these adaptations -- dates back to at least 2,000 years ago.

Artificial Selection - Wikipedia

Wikipedia Wrote:Selective breeding of both plants and animals has been practiced since early prehistory; key species such as wheat, rice, and dogs have been significantly different from their wild ancestors for millennia, and maize, which required especially large changes from teosinte, its wild form, was selectively bred in Mesoamerica. Selective breeding was practiced by the Romans. Treatises as much as 2,000 years old give advice on selecting animals for different purposes, and these ancient works cite still older authorities, such as Mago the Carthaginian.

Biblical creationists know animals can evolve within certain boundaries, and have known as much for thousands of years. The question is whether or not they can evolve beyond these boundaries. That's something which has never been demonstrated in a laboratory, and the indirect evidence for it is far from convincing to the skeptical mind.

Secondly, convergent evolution does strongly imply design. Anyone who understands biology, intelligence, and who can think logically should know that. When you have identical traits evolving independently several times over, it strongly challenges the idea of randomness* playing a role in these traits' development. Rather, it overwhelming implies direction with a common goal, which is a hallmark of design.

*mutation, which is (allegedly) the creative force behind the engineering of life's traits, is said to be random, thus the end result of evolution is random, even if natural selection is not (although I contest that it is).

Remember: Darwin's idea predicts a tree of life in which traits are linear. This was one of Darwin's major predictions, and the findings of molecular biology have DEMOLISHED it; absolutely DESTROYED it. That this hasn't lead to even a single second of skepticism amongst you people is evidence of your religious-like faith in the idea. It is your creation myth.

Design proponents claim that life's development is an engineered process. Darwinists claim it's not. The evidence points towards design proponents being right, and it grows stronger by the day.

Design wins. Your creation myth fails. Ouch.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: