|
Author
|
Topic: John A. Davison: An Evolutionary Manifesto: A New Hypothesis For Organic Change
|
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 10. November 2008 14:48
http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin/ikonboard/ikonboard.cgi?s=4918962bfde89202;act=ST;f=14;t=1272;st=9060
Daniel Smith continues with over 500 messages to reduce the anonymous cowardly blowhards to shambles. They are now admitting that they are atheists which can go a long way in explaining why it is impossible to communicate with them. Whether one is an atheist or a theist has now been firmly established to have a strong congenital basis. Like eye color and fingerprints, all such features are quite incurable and certainly not subject to modfication through debate.
The question that should be asked is -
Which features of all living things do not have a firm congenital, preformed basis? I know of none myself.
Ergo -
"EVERYTHING is determined...by forces over which we have no control."
Albert Einstein, my emphasis.
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
[ 11. November 2008, 04:47: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 11. November 2008 05:28
http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/would-you-want-your-child-to-marry-an-atheist/#comments
Bill Dembski has introduced an interesting analysis of the great mystery of organic evolution. I have but one comment to offer.
While it is true that there are no known connections between the taxonomic categories of Order and above, there is absolutely no question that within the Order level true evolution has definitely occurred. In the Order Primates to which we belong, our affinities with the higher apes is obvious to any objective scientist. There is no question in my mind that we had apelike ancestors and I have very little sympathy for those who continue to deny that affinity.
With that provision however, I freely admit that continuity between Orders, Classes and Phyla and their counterparts in the Plant Kingdom have yet to be established and may never be.
This perspective is what led Leo Berg to state -
"Organisms have developed from tens of thousands of primary forms, i.e, polyphyletically."
Nomogenesis, page 406.
There is absolutely nothing in the fossil record at variance with this statement and much in support of it. While Berg never invoked a biblical connotation, his statement is clearly in accord with the Genesis account of the separate creation of "kinds."
As I have stated in my recent essay "What is an atheist? -
There is no more reason to believe in a monotheistic God than there is in a monophyletic evolution.
Nevertheless, to deny the past existence of one or more Gods is unthinkable for this investigator.
I might add that I see no reason to assume a male God when the primary role of the male in organic evolution was always to put a stop to progressive evolution of that particular lineage. It still is. We don't call her Mother Nature for nothing.
It is Mary to whom the sincere Catholic often prays. It was the "fruit of her womb" that became Jesus.
Pardon my heresy as it is not meant to be blasphemous. Quite the contrary, there is much in Judeo-Christian dogma in accord with the fossil record.
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
[ 16. November 2008, 18:12: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 14. November 2008 21:47
http://jadavison.wordpress.com/2008/01/23/why-banishment/#comment-1095
My second to last message just posted answers the question about who has always run and still runs Uncommon Descent with his intolerant iron fist, the biggest bully in cyberdumb - David Springer. My last message characterizes the second biggest bully in cyberdumb - Paul Zachary Myers. They make a lovely pair don't you think?
They call themselves moderators. I call them insecure intellectual bigots.
I love it so!
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
[ 14. November 2008, 21:58: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
DaveScot
Member
Member # 1545
|
posted 15. November 2008 14:28
Dear John,
Forrest Mims and I get along famously. We've exchanged dozens of emails and he's complimented me at least several times for writing about the many analogies between cellular machinery and human engineered systems.
Thanks for asking.
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 15. November 2008 14:31
David Springer
Thanks for suddenly changing your attitude towards environmentalists. You may now resume your favorite activity of denigrating and deleting all those who disagree with you. That has always been your forte. In any event, now that you are in complete charge, do me a favor and just pretend I don't exist. Thanks.
I love it so!
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
[ 15. November 2008, 14:39: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
nosivad
Member
Member # 767
|
posted 16. November 2008 09:16
http://www.uncommondescent.com/adminstrative/no-atheisttheist-slugfest-here/#respond
Atheists in science should not only be antagonized; they should be thoroughly despised, ridiculed and exposed. Unless, of course, you happen to be one yourself!
I find it remarkable that Barry Arrington, a sincere Christian like his predecessor, William Dembski, finds it necessary to retain, as his primary moderator, a Godless atheist who is now warning Arrington's congregation to stop anatagonizing the Darwinians. I can only conclude that Arrington is either a spineless wimp or a congenital masochist or perhaps both.
It is hard to believe isn't it?
"A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."
John A. Davison
[ 17. November 2008, 04:12: Message edited by: nosivad ]
IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
