GW's views on Evolution

[Ronin]

dave:

Evolution is so confirmed by scientific evidence that debating it is almost pointless. It is like debating whether the Earth is round (it is), or whether the Earth goes around the Sun instead of the reverse (it does).

We assume that most people who know how to use a computer believe in evolution.

You've gotta be really hard-core (or dumb) to believe that God created the universe in six days, 6000 years ago.

Only if those "six days" lasted for about 1.5 billion years each.

[nhb_wanabe]

however...

the modern medical establishment is very much like a fundamentalist religion.

they viscously attack those who don't subscribe to the accepted wisdom.

Look into alternative AIDS therapies and the establishment's reaction to them for evidence of this.

Accepted wisdom is often determined by which drugs are the most profitable.

Look into the establishments ignoring cancer prevention and focussing entirely on treatment even while cancer rates continue to climb.

[Ronin]

nhb:

I like how you turn every thread into an endorsement for the Green party! The election's OVER man!

Also, how do you "prevent" cancer? It's genetic. Diet and exercise don't help much, or my mom wouldn't have gotten sick.

Now heart disease, that's another story.

[nhb_wanabe]

you prevent it by avoiding carcinogens in diet and
environment.

They are well known and completely ignored by American Cancer Institue and other corporate fronts.

do you think rates are going up because we are more genetically predisposed then before?

think man!!

[Ronin]

nhb:

As usual, you're on to something (ON something?), but that has yet to be proven scientifically.

As I'm constantly reminding our resident conspiracy-theory buffs, suspicion isn't PROOF. There is still more about cancer that we don't know, than what we know.

[nhb_wanabe]

hold on...

let me re-examine my premises.

[Tony10]

FYI, Ronin, I am not a "conspiracy theory buff," but rather a messenger. You can listen to it, or I can give it to somebody else.

Doesn't matter to me...

[nhb_wanabe]

maybe "completely" is a little strong?

this:

http://www2.cancer.org/prevention/NutritionandPrevention.cfm

compared to this:

http://realityzone.viamall.com/realityzone/danfertigtest.html

http://oneworld.org/ni/issue198/fault.htm

The Politics of Cancer Revisited:

http://www.lightparty.com/Health/WinningCancerWar.html

[Edited by nhb_wanabe on 11-08-2000 at 04:39 PM]

[Ronin]

Tony:

I'm just trying to irritate you. Succesfully.

[Tony10]

j/k Ronin. Not irritated.

[Ronin]

Damn!

[david a]

Ronin:

____________________________________________________________
quote- Evolution is so confirmed by scientific evidence that debating it is almost pointless. ?!?!?!?!
____________________________________________________________

Might I quote some high calibre evolutionist's to point out how absurd your statement is.

1. Colin Patterson: evolutionist and senior palentologist at
the prestigious British Museum of Natural History(which houses the worlds largest collection of fossils(60 million))
confess'
"For over 20 years I thought I was working on evolution,but
there was not one thing I knew about it..so I asked a simple question to many: 'Can you tell me anything you know about evolution,any one thing that is true?I tried the question on geology staff @ the field Museum of Natural History, I tried it at the University of Chicago in front of a prestigeous body of evolutionists- both places answered in silence until one person said "Yes, I do know one thing-that it ought not to be taught in our schools."
(American Mus. of Nat. Hist.NY city/Darwin on trial)
2. He also stated:"If I new of ANY evolutionary transition, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them in my new book."
(Luther Sunderland's Darwin's Enigma 1989)
3. David Raup, evolutionist and curator of Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago stated: "We are now about 120 years after Darwin + the knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter million fossil species, but the situation hasn't changed much...We have even fewer examples of transition than we had in Darwin's time."(Illustrated Origins answer book-4th edition 1993)
4. Evolutionist and Philosopher Sir Julian Huxley, when asked why people embrace the theory of evolution retorted:
"It is because the concept of a Creator-God interferes with our sexual mores.Thus, we have rationalized God out of existence. To us, He has become nothing more than the faint and disappearing smile of the cosmic Chesshire cat in Alice in Wonderland.("Darwin Cennten. Convocation Chicago 11/59)
5.Even Darwin, stretching credulity to the limit stated:
"To suppose that the eye, with all it's inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and cromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree possible."

6.Steven Jay Gould, evolutionist and professor at Harvard University said: " Recapitulation(idea that embryo's repeat
evoutionary history of it's species) provided a convenient focus for the pervasive racism of white scientists:they looked to the activities of their own children for comparison with normal,adult behaviour in lower races."
____________________________________________________________
quote: "You've gotta be either hard core(or dumb to believe
that God created......"
____________________________________________________________
These men listed below, are neither hard core nor "dumb" which have used science to "prove" evolution to be a myth:
Isaac Newton(developed calculus + discovered law of gravity
Louis Pasteur(known for developing process of pasturization)
Johannes Kepler(scientific astronomer), Blaise Pascal(top mathematician), Carolus Linnaeus(biological taxonomist),
Gregor Mendel(master of genetics), and Albert Enstein, one of the greatest intellects of all time and the list goes on.

[Eazy-E]

david a

Your responce really isnt worth replying to, as your appear to be a true believer.

You are basically grasping onto straws to justify your beliefs. The sources you quote arent serious scholars in the field and not worth replying to.

I would find it rather humorous if you could please state the scientific case for 'Creationism', as I bet you have similar evidence on hand.

E

[Tony10]

Oh, Jesus. The Flat Earth Society now...

No evolution, eh? What other gassers do you wish to foist upon us?

When you're setting up your manger next week why don't you do yourself a favor and just get in the crib?

[Atomic]

david a--

You did a nice job of selective quoting and leaving out a lot of other facts with each quote you have. This causes the quotes to be taken out of context (in some cases) and construed.

I'll get to this later on.

Atomic