Is Michael Shermer a Disciple of Satan?


by Moridin
Tags: creationism, evolution, keny hovind, michael shermer, transitional fossils
moe darklight
moe darklight is offline
#19
Jun12-08, 04:06 PM
P: 411
Quote Quote by tourettes View Post
also,look up the latest on petrified trees and you will see that even respected geologist admit now that petrified trees HAVE to be fossilised extremely quickly or they will simply rot away..moreover,there are so many excamples of petrified tress going through different rock strata that the chances of all of them being caused by earthquakes tossing them into rock that is "billions of years old" is really tiny..
Do you have a link to articles about either of these claims? — If this is true then it is definitely interesting, but I haven't been able to find a source for this.

oh,one more thing..if you follow evolution back to just after the earth was formed and the surface started to cool and harden and became rock...then it supposidly rained down on the rock which made the "soup" which gave rise to single cell organisms and on to DOGS...so evolutionists do kind of believe dogs and all life came from a rock..
The reason no biologist will answer this question, is because this is beyond the realm of a biologist, and beyond the realm of evolution. This is where chemistry comes in, and organic chemistry is a relatively new science (especially when we are talking about studying the chemical processes related to living organisms), so you can't possibly expect us to have all the answers right now (i.e: The God Of The Gaps).

Organic compounds have been shown to form from inorganic compounds under various conditions (is it a coincidence that these conditions are very much like the conditions we expect the earth to have had during its youth?).

It doesn't mean a cell just formed from a rock. It would've been enough for a replicating RNA-like (though much much more rudimentary) molecule to have formed to start the process, which is not at all inconceivable, considering the billions of billions of chemical reactions that were going on at the moment throughout the earth.

I don't know much about the subject, and even those who do are far from really working out the details, but if you do some research or ask others here who might know more about this, I'm sure you'll understand why saying that evolution means a dog came from a rock (or even that a cell came from a rock) is beyond hyperbole.

and remember that at the end of his life Darwin renounced his theory and said he was wrong!!..bet your science teacher never told you that one,right??
Yes. Most of us are aware of that myth, which arose from a fiction story published for a religious magazine (look up "The Lady Hope Story"). Darwin and his family have clearly stated that he was an agnostic to his death.
Gokul43201
Gokul43201 is offline
#20
Jun12-08, 04:26 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Gokul43201's Avatar
P: 11,154
tourettes, your post is so filled with blatant nonfacts, it's hard to decide how far to go with a debunking. I'll pick one rather unimportant but oft repeated piece of untruth. It's unimportant to anyone that has half a clue about how science works, but seems to be a big deal to the YEC crowd.
Quote Quote by tourettes View Post
...and remember that at the end of his life Darwin renounced his theory and said he was wrong!!..bet your science teacher never told you that one,right??
Right, and rightfully so. Because, for one thing, science does not concern itself with deathbed conversions, as you imagine it does. And secondly, this story is nothing more than a rumor spread by christians following Lady Hope's original speech through her hat.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_cul4.htm
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CG/CG001.html
http://www.answersingenesis.org/crea...win_recant.asp

From the last link:
Darwin's biographer, Dr James Moore, lecturer in the history of science and technology at The Open University in the UK, has spent 20 years researching the data over three continents. He produced a 218-page book examining what he calls the 'Darwin legend'.7 He says there was a Lady Hope. Born Elizabeth Reid Cotton in 1842, she married a widower, retired Admiral Sir James Hope, in 1877. She engaged in tent evangelism and in visiting the elderly and sick in Kent in the 1880s, and died of cancer in Sydney, Australia, in 1922, where her tomb may be seen to this day.

Moore concludes that Lady Hope probably did visit Charles between Wednesday, 28 September and Sunday, 2 October 1881, almost certainly when Francis and Henrietta were absent, but his wife, Emma, probably was present. He describes Lady Hope as 'a skilled raconteur, able to summon up poignant scenes and conversations, and embroider them with sentimental spirituality'. He points out that her published story contained some authentic details as to time and place, but also factual inaccuracies—Charles was not bedridden six months before he died, and the summer house was far too small to accommodate 30 people. The most important aspect of the story, however, is that it does not say that Charles either renounced evolution or embraced Christianity. He merely is said to have expressed concern over the fate of his youthful speculations and to have spoken in favour of a few people's attending a religious meeting. The alleged recantation/conversion are embellishments that others have either read into the story or made up for themselves. Moore calls such doings 'holy fabrication'!

It should be noted that for most of her married life Emma was deeply pained by the irreligious nature of Charles's views, and would have been strongly motivated to have corroborated any story of a genuine conversion, if such had occurred. She never did.

It therefore appears that Darwin did not recant, and it is a pity that to this day the Lady Hope story occasionally appears in tracts published and given out by well-meaning people.
Cyrus
Cyrus is offline
#21
Jun12-08, 04:28 PM
Cyrus's Avatar
P: 4,780
Quote Quote by tourettes View Post
the peppered moth is simply showing signs of micro-evolution(variation)..it already had the genes to change colour..these genes are not new,therefore it cannot really be called evolution..now,if this moth has really changed at a dna level,and the change is permanent then that could be evidence for evolution..
Wow, thanks Dr. Tourettes. PhD in biology and nonsense! aaamazing.

Please, enlighten us some more with your high school diploma of science.

Come one, win that Darwin award, I know you can do it!
Cyrus
Cyrus is offline
#22
Jun12-08, 04:30 PM
Cyrus's Avatar
P: 4,780
Im watching the Q&A part of the video now, and WOW. Is this guy STUPID. He is babbling on, and on, and on about this animal and that animal and how its not evolution. I'd love for some evolutionary biologists to debate him and show him how he should shut his mouth and stop pretending to know science. Its BEYOND pathetic.
Cyrus
Cyrus is offline
#23
Jun12-08, 04:31 PM
Cyrus's Avatar
P: 4,780
Quote Quote by tourettes View Post
let`s have some more...
Oh come on, I'm sure you have a lot more nonsense you can share with us. Please dont stop. I really do enjoy watching you make a fool of yourself.
Cyrus
Cyrus is offline
#24
Jun12-08, 04:34 PM
Cyrus's Avatar
P: 4,780
Quote Quote by tourettes View Post
Do a search on google on "observed instances of speciation".
Also look at this;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth_evolution
Report Post Reply With Quote

well,i looked at the experiments to creat hydrid nettles and it`s stretching it a bit to say that`s proof of evolution i think
Oh, so you, Dr. Tourettes, world expert in evolution, have just given your expert opinion on other peoples research. I cant wait to read your publications. You opinion really means a lot on a subject you dont even understand.

(The more nonsense you post, the more nasty I will be with you). Its really in bad taste for you to come to a science forum, know NOTHING about science, and then bla bla bla to us about how we dont know anything about science.
Santa1
Santa1 is offline
#25
Jun12-08, 04:53 PM
P: 104
Quote Quote by tourettes View Post
i did not see one direct quote from the scientists doing that plant hybrid research claim their work to be evidence of evolution.
Your point being? If i publish proof about something, and then say nothing about it being proof, does that make it false?
And you watched a fraction of 1 page out of 536000 results on google, now of course I'm not going to claim they all show evidence or are even positive to evolution, but let's say 1% of them are evidence, thats 5359 pages left for you to watch before claiming it is "all the evidence I can come up with".
And you say we have not given you any evidence but rather have only insulted you?
I'm glad science is largely independent of the public.
Cyrus
Cyrus is offline
#26
Jun12-08, 04:54 PM
Cyrus's Avatar
P: 4,780
Quote Quote by tourettes View Post
i hoped you guys could shut me up with real evidence...al i have got from you is insults...very scientific
That's because your a troll and didnt post to learn anything. You just posted your smug little comment igonrantly and think you know something about everything. I strongly urge you to get an education and wise up.

You dont even have any 'points', you just have a bunch of moronic, blatantly wrong facts.

Could you name, oh, I dont know, even ONE book on science you have ever read in your life above the high school level?
Santa1
Santa1 is offline
#27
Jun12-08, 04:56 PM
P: 104
Quote Quote by tourettes View Post
well, what about all my other points then?..show your peers how stupid i am and blow all my points out the water right here and now...
No I'll use the same counter as you. "Where is your proof?"
Santa1
Santa1 is offline
#28
Jun12-08, 04:58 PM
P: 104
It's not up to him to give examples, the burden is on you to show that any of your propositions are true.
Cyrus
Cyrus is offline
#29
Jun12-08, 04:58 PM
Cyrus's Avatar
P: 4,780
Quote Quote by *-<|:-D=<-< View Post
It's not up to him to give examples, the burden is on you to show that any of your propositions are true.
What part of read a book cant you comprehend, Mr. Big boy? You do know there are libraries full of these things. There filled with this thing called paper, and a cover. They are usually located on shelves.
Cyrus
Cyrus is offline
#30
Jun12-08, 05:00 PM
Cyrus's Avatar
P: 4,780
Quote Quote by tourettes View Post
what do i have to prove...i am not religious,i simply can`t see the evidence you talk about
Thats becuase you dont know a damn thing about biology. So you dont even know what evidence is, or how to look for it.

BUT what you DO know how to do, is give your opinion, quite ignorantly, on the matter and lectures others.
Cyrus
Cyrus is offline
#31
Jun12-08, 05:01 PM
Cyrus's Avatar
P: 4,780
Quote Quote by tourettes View Post
it`s funny how inteligent poeple have lowered this to insults,why not try to win your agument instead?
Because your not here to learn. So, im going to have fun with you. Trust me, I can go all night toe-to-toe if you want to.
Cyrus
Cyrus is offline
#32
Jun12-08, 05:05 PM
Cyrus's Avatar
P: 4,780
Quote Quote by tourettes View Post
teach me...i am here because this is an interesting subject and there are holes in the evidence for evolution as you all know...does not mean evolution did not happen,just seems there is not much in the way of proof..
Yeah, right. And I have a bridge to sell you in NY. Ask moridin, hes a nicer guy than me. He can recommend you some books. Im not going to waste my time helping you though.

Isnt that lovely, you already know there "isnt much in way of proof". Pulling stuff out of our *** again are we?

So you, who knows nothing about biology, know there "isnt much in way of proof" hmmmmmmmmm.........

You should know, I hate people like you. And I do take pleasure in publicly insulting you. Its going to go on. Are you sure you want to keep going with me? -I'm not going to stop.
Cyrus
Cyrus is offline
#33
Jun12-08, 05:10 PM
Cyrus's Avatar
P: 4,780
Quote Quote by tourettes View Post
thanks for a great debate i go home with my tail firmly between my legs...put in my place..dazzled with your solid evidence and extremely cutious manner...you really destroyed me cyrus....
What are you talking about, there isnt much in the way of proof of what you just said. I dont believe you. I believe what I want to believe.

Now if you will excuse me, im going to put my finger in my ears.

Dude, just quietly go away. Dont get a migraine doing hard stuff, like thinking.
binzing
binzing is offline
#34
Jun12-08, 05:11 PM
P: 248
How the hell did petrified trees make it into here?

As for a book recommendation, how about a copy of my Biology book:
Biology Fifth Edition
Campbell, Reece, and Mitchell
Benjamin Cummings

It's a college level Bio book, and what I will be using for AP Bio next year.
Cyrus
Cyrus is offline
#35
Jun12-08, 05:15 PM
Cyrus's Avatar
P: 4,780
Quote Quote by binzing View Post
How the hell did petrified trees make it into here?

As for a book recommendation, how about a copy of my Biology book:
Biology Fifth Edition
Campbell, Reece, and Mitchell
Benjamin Cummings

It's a college level Bio book, and what I will be using for AP Bio next year.
Binzing, you need to learn not to waste your time with people that are not willing to learn. He's not going to read your book. Hes just here to post his grand wisdom on how evolution is wrong based on nothing more than his opinion.

Spare your energy for people that are worth it.
Cyrus
Cyrus is offline
#36
Jun12-08, 05:19 PM
Cyrus's Avatar
P: 4,780
Anyways, back to the video at hand. This bozo, Hovind, said "evolution is not part of science".

Wow, does this guy even TALK to any scientists? And then quotes the bible.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Michael Shermer: Often wrong General Discussion 45
God releases Satan ? Why God allow Evil to exist? General Discussion 134
Satan is an idiot. General Discussion 9