Banner
Xtra Smileys
[Open]
We Unite Gaming
March 28, 2024, 09:50:25 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to We Unite Gaming!
Formerly Wii Unite/Wii Unite Gaming
 
  Home Help Search Arcade Gallery Youtube Channel Chatbox Staff List Login Register  

I Know Who Has My Vote

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 17   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: I Know Who Has My Vote  (Read 1996 times)
OhioLawyer
Administrator
WU Master
*

Karma: 9003
Offline Offline

Clan: The Fatal Five
Posts: 8205


Romans 5:8


View Profile WWW
« Reply #15 on: January 17, 2012, 02:26:55 pm »

Um, staunch evolutionist scientists will tell you there is no scientific evidence that evolution exists.  So you please explain to me why it is "basic scientific knowledge."  I think that if your position is that it is scientific fact, it is YOUR burden to prove it is so.  And since the basic tenets of science involve such a proof process, the fact that you cannot prove it not only makes you scientifically flawed, but a hypocrite.

I think it is truly sad that you consider something "fact" without ANY proof whatsoever.  That is blind ignorance at its finest.  At least have the academic integrity to require at least some evidence before forming an opinion as to the truth of a matter.

So let me leave you with some statements of major scientists who fully believe and support evolution:


"The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution."
 
Stephen Jay Gould (Professor of Geology and Paleontology, Harvard University), "Is a new and general theory of evolution emerging?" Paleobiology, vol. 6(1), January 1980, p. 127



"Contrary to what most scientists write, the fossil record does not support the Darwinian theory of evolution because it is this theory (there are several) which we use to interpret the fossil record. By doing so we are guilty of circular reasoning if we then say the fossil record supports this theory."
 
Ronald R. West, PhD (paleoecology and geology) (Assistant Professor of Paleobiology at Kansas State University), "Paleoecology and uniformitarianism". Compass, vol. 45, May 1968, p. 216


Darwin himself said--


"Lastly, looking not to any one time, but to all time, if my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking closely together all the species of the same group, must assuredly have existed. But, as by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?"
 
-Charles Darwin



"In fact, the fossil record does not convincingly document a single transition from one species to another."
 
-Evolutionist Stephen M. Stanley, Johns Hopkins University



"The earliest and most primitive members of every order already have the basic ordinal characters, and in no case is an approximately continuous series from one order to another known. In most cases the break is so sharp and the gap so large that the origin of the order is speculative and much disputed"
 
-Paleontologist George Gaylord



A major problem in proving the theory has been the fossil record; the imprints of vanished species preserved in the Earth's geological formations. This record has never revealed traces of Darwin's hypothetical intermediate variants - instead species appear and disappear abruptly, and this anomaly has fueled the creationist argument that each species was created by God.
 
-Paleontologist Mark Czarnecki (an evolutionist)



"It is as though they [fossils] were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists. Both schools of thought (Punctuationists and Gradualists) despise so-called scientific creationists equally, and both agree that the major gaps are real, that they are true imperfections in the fossil record. The only alternative explanation of the sudden appearance of so many complex animal types in the Cambrian era is divine creation and both reject this alternative."

-Richard Dawkins, 'The Blind Watchmaker', W.W. Norton & Company, New York, 1996, pp. 229-230



Evolutionist Stephen J. Gould of Harvard University put it this way during a lecture at Hobart & William Smith College....
 
"Every paleontologist knows that most species don't change. That's bothersome....brings terrible distress. ....They may get a little bigger or bumpier but they remain the same species and that's not due to imperfection and gaps but stasis. And yet this remarkable stasis has generally been ignored as no data. If they don't change, its not evolution so you don't talk about it."


----------

I could go on and on and on.  But these are just a few quotes from leading scientists who actually believe in evolution that freely understand the scientific flaws in attempting to call it a "fact" based on the information that exists.

It is comical that you won't generally find scientists willing to go that far, but so many uneducated laymen like yourself will make such a bold and unscientific conclusion.
Report Spam   Logged

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 17   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
© 2008-2014 We Unite Gaming, Wii Unite Gaming, Wii Unite
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy