Where is the damn solid evidence for Darwinian macroevolution? All I have ever heard and read is marginal evidence and lots of supposition along with a non or atheistic worldview that specifically rules out the possibility of considering the existence of God. Science cannot imply God? Complexity cannot imply God? To you people, it cannot because evolution is true. Since evolution is true, complexity is due to evolution a priori. Tautological, completely.
Whenever a theory such as irreducible complexity is brought forth that might lend credence to the argument that you all so despise–the very NOTION of the existence of God–then research is done with the goal in mind (implicit or explicit) of finding an explanation that fits within evolutionary theory. Peer review rules out the possibility of even considering any outside-the-box thinking. Toe the pseudoscientific philosophical line or be ridiculed and marginalized.
I look at you blind believers in “science” as members of a political party. If I were to go into the Democratic National Convention and tell them that Republican ideas are correct, even if my ideas hold value they will be shunned. You Darwinists are essentially sore afraid that one day someone might posit something scientific that is unexplainable by any scientific means. And you might have to entertain the notion of God! *gasp* “But that isn’t science…we can’t consider it! God doesn’t exist, only infinitely finely-tuned physical laws that don’t vary and an essentially infinitely complex universe!” Chaotic haphazard happenstance. Yep, you guys have it all figured out.
Certainly you FSMers are among the most cynical and, yes, terrified of the notion that someday you might have to draw a conclusion that will force you to consider something that is not purely scientific (i.e. to you, that means something supporting Darwinian macroevolution) in your eyes.
I know, since I don’t agree with you guys’ philosophy I have a “poor understanding” of all things science, I’m ignorant of the plethora of evidence, blah blah blah. I’ve heard it. Save the glib condescension for the next generation of potential converts to either of your–dare I say–pathetic religions.
Nothing personal to any of you guys. I suppose you all have good intentions. I do wish you well and sincerely hope you find Truth.
-A Darwinian macroevolution-denying Physician
[this message was left as a comment on another thread]
the evidence lies in the fact that a flying spaghetti monster is as likely to exist as your god. We think that a large amount of tasty pasta is more interesting than a bearded giant man in the sky who, out of all the other spices, created us to look like him.
How’s about this, prove your ID theory and I will become a christian. I am sure that god will forgive me, after all, all I have to do is ask right? Until then keep your ignorance to yourself. It is pompous overly sanctimonious asses such as yourself that apply theirt own brand of meta-science to these arguments and serve to only confuse the poor marginally educated homeschoolers that seem to be making up the front ranks of christian soldierdom these days.
Certainly you FSMers are among the most cynical and, yes, terrified of the notion that someday you might have to draw a conclusion that will force you to consider something that is not purely scientific
OMG LOL were worshipping a FREAKIN’ SPAGHETTI MONSTER lol.
charles darwin studied and observed and tried to draw the most logical conclusions from the available evidence. no one risks eternal unpleasantness if they disagree with one of his points. try questioning a sunday school teacher about how noah could have swam to australia and then came back bringing, kangaroos,tasmanian devils, the funnel web spider,and the countless other creatures native only to that continent. how many trips would he have to make? and two of each no less, carrying 2 kicking kangaroos would have been a huge challenge in itself, the funnel web spiders are highly venemous and would have to be handled very gently. the duckbill platypus, and tasmanian devils dont get along either so that would have made that swim a 2 tripper right? theories can be changed if proof is staring you right in the face. you are required to believe what the pastor tells you without question and face eternal torture if you disagree. thats why native americans were called indians, the church said the earth was flat and the mere suggestion of a round world meant the loss of your standing in the community, your job and probably your life as it was heresy to attempt to use common sense. these people are trying to hold on to their wealth by any means possible. if god spoke to you in a dream and told you to sacrifice your child would you do it? he has asked that before of abraham. or has that part been altered out? you cant let someones interpretation of a 3500+ year old book cloud common sense.
If it isn’t explainable, we ain’t interested. That’s kind of the point about the whole FSM phenomena – why can’t the FSM lie at the limit of science, instead of a Christian (or other god)? The saddest thing about your viewpoint is that it leads us nowhere – I guess that is the reason you are a physician. The reason you will never publish anything in a peer-reviewed journal is not that you think outside the box, but that your box is empty. You can’t publish a paper that just attacks someone else’s research for being incomplete – you have to come up with alternate explanations based on the same evidence. And there are only so many papers you can publish claiming “god did it” “irreduceable complexity” “god works in mysterious ways,” etc. The bible is finite as well. So twenty years from now, even your “Journal of Bible-based non-macroevolutionary biology” is going to be pretty boring and repetitive.
What an ignorant piece of shit- Go fuck yourself Mr. Physician. None of what you are saying makes any sense at all. “Macroevolution” is well illustrated in nature, the fossil record and the genes of all the animals in the world. It has nothing to do with “outside the box thinking” Go look up endogenous retroviruses in humans and chimps. That’s pretty much all the “proof” you need for “macroevolution”
The embryos of mammals go through changes early in their development where – in order – they resemble those of fish, amphibians, then reptiles. Mammals came along later, and thus built on earlier stages. Oh – and reptiles go through the fish and amphibian stages, and amphibians the fish phase.
Or how about the fact that whales and dolphins have vestigal hip and leg bones, unconnected to their spines and thus useless? Also, about one in 500 whales is born with one or 2 rear legs. (Then again, humans are sometimes born with tails). Doubt that whales evolved from land animals? It’s closest DNA relative is the hippo, a 4 legged mammal more at home in the water. Given a few more million years, and they could have fins, too.
There are also many fossils of feathered dinosaurs, on their macro-way to being birds.
There is a sci