17 Comments

1. Logicynic | March 25, 2008 5:57 AM
   

   Hahaha great post! I hope the lunatic who sent you the email comes back to read it :)

    
2. The Evolved Rationalist | March 25, 2008 7:40 PM
   

   He responded with a pile of copy-and-paste tripe from ICR (Institute for Certified Retards).
   
   Sigh.

    
3. PhillyChief | March 27, 2008 12:08 AM
   

   Perfect marriage of great post with great imagery. Always a winner

    
4. Paul d'Aoust | June 1, 2008 10:06 PM
   

   dude, what's with all the vitriol? I don't want to be too forward, but that's no way to have a rational debate.
   
   (for the record, I'm a Christian who thinks evolution is probably right. By the reasoning presented in #1, I think life shouldn't exist, evolution or not. But it's clear that it does... so... maybe life just fights entropy rather than outright defying it.)

    
5. Stephen | July 12, 2008 1:57 AM
   

   i realize my comment is long enough to be an article, but hey, you don't have anything to do? why not read it? it really goes quicker than you think.
   
   So yeah, whoever sent that e-mail didn't debate very well. BUT do i believe he's right? YES! I'm a christian and creationist, and this sickeningly one-sided, propogandist, derisive (to the point of immature) blog is infuriating. Your answers to each of the points were humorously evasive and vague (for example, the paragraph right under the picture of star trek is nothing but Anti-Christian insults a 10-year-old could think of). I'm going to tell you right now, i really dont like science and math. i'm into english and languages, but i'm not very calculating. But the tiny bit of fundamental stuff i know about science actually does refute a lot of the evolution theory. i'm not going to try and sound smart with big words i dont understand i'm just going to say what i know. the law of entropy, in so many words, says, i believe, that things in a closed system tend to fall apart, not come together. After babbling insults and saying "theistard" and such every other word, you said that the earth isn't a closed system, and thus: "epic fail." Again, i know very little about science, so i should be the easiest to convince. But what i dont understand is: Why should a lot of planets that came from an exploding ball (!that came out of nowhere!) coming together or whatever be any different than one planet that came from an exploding ball? Next time, learn how to support ur points before "sounding like the MORON you undoubtedly are". i thought i'd be wicked funny and use big boy words like you.
   
   You tried to disprove the second point about spontaneous generation by saying "as abiogenesis doesn't work that way [fully formed life] your argument falls flat on its face". Well, actually, you added an apostrophe that doesn't belong (if u can't tell i'm using the same childish style of debate aethiests seem to love so much, like when the e-mailer wrote "principal" and not "principle" and u devoted an entire paragraph to it. i mean, come on, THAT is an epic fail!) Anyway, yeah, you're right, evolution doesn't say that organisms come out of nowhere. But where did it first come from?? i have never heard an even slightly intelligent answer to that question. It's hysterical listening to scientists write about the chemicals that were swirling around on infant earth that must've come together in such a way to make amino acids which somehow found the perfect way to form themselves into all of the proteins necessary to create a multi-organnelled living cell.
   
   And you think I HAVE FAITH??
   
   through hours and hours of research, scientists have found a few chemicals that when but together with the perfect temperatures at the perfect speed sometimes creates amino acids. well, then, all they have to do is tell the public "it's just a few steps from there, and that can happen by itself!". They dont realize that creating those amino acids, that tiny, simple stage, was actually a supernatural process. it didn't occur by itself, we've never seen that occur by itself, it had to be acted upon by another force to come about, and even with all that help, it can't go any farther!
   
   Your response to his third point is HUH-FRICKING-LARIOUS. Your entire argument was this, and i quote, "Now, what the f**k are you trying to show in your third point? Information theory somehow disproves evolution? You fail." No seriously, that's the best refute you could come up with? if i knew absolutely nothing about creation or evolution, that alone would shut me up to your ENTIRE article because it is so obvious you have no argument against it! the human genome has 3 billion pairs of genetic information. To give you all an idea of how big 1 billion is, if you were to count at a pace of 3 numbers a second (it's impossible to do when u get the big numbers, but it doesn't matter) for eight hours a day, you wouldn't reach one billion in your life time. the human genome has THREE billion PAIRS! that's SIX billion parts! and that was an accident? As i said before, I have faith??? the numbers alone should make you think "wow, there has to be someone out there who designed this" but instead, you choose to believe faulted scientists with political and moral agendas who say "no it's an accident, we have the answers". You must have read this far, so you must be interested enough to look up a scripture if i encouraged you to :). read Romans 1:16-32 to get the whole picture (or the whole chapter, if you'd like). i'd like to bring special attention to a few verses, though:
   
   (verses 20-22): For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
   
   i was in awe when i read this. these words, written 2000 years ago, could not describe the evolutionist better: he is given all of the resources that scream that he has been created, but he, in his "wisdom" is made foolish, as are you all made fools.
   
   As to your fourth point, the number of universes seems irrelevent, unless you can clear it up for me, please and thank you. i dont know if you know what the anthropic principle is, but i think it's just that everything here, all forces of gravity, energy, etc, all are perfect for man's survival,and all math says that they shouldn't. i know that of the 90 or so different big contributors to the way the cosmos operate, just two of them, the weak and strong gravitational forces, must be tuned so perfectly that if they're off by one novemdecillionth (spelling? haha that's "1/10 E 60th"), all life would completely fall apart. that's two out of about 90 things, if i remember correctly. just so you realize how big 10 E 60th is, one billion, which we went over before, is 10 E 9th. the 9th. this is to the 60th!! to simply say, "WOW, we hit the jackpot, didn't we?" (as all of you ARE saying) honestly emarrasses me. The fact that you actually look at such ridiculous numbers and just think, "Well, hey, i guess it did work, cuz we're here!" is beyond shameful, it's SHOCKING that you can all think so shallowly and be lead by such weak twine.
   
   Now for a point that wasn't really covered but is still rather interesting: evolution says that the species came about by the random adding of genetic material through advantageous mutations. what's interesting is that we've NEVER SEEN THAT HAPPEN. babies who are born with down-syndrome have all of the disabilities they have becase they have an extra half chromosome. in fact, many birth disorders come from added genetic material. it has NEVER been advantageous. so, basically, the driving force behind evolution has never occured and will never occur. also, genetic entropy says that our genome is only falling apart, not adding more, so we couldn't have started out with less than what we have. Interesting.
   
   i'm saying right now that i dont believe in Jesus Christ because it gives me a fuzzy feeling, or because evolution is complicated and i like life simple, or because i like the christian outlook on life. I believe in Jesus Christ because my eyes have been opened. I was starting to think that i was smarter than everyone in my church because i listened to an evolutionist rant and i gave myself a ticket to a world without heaven and hell, without responsibility, without eternity after death. but when i finally gave in, when i literally screamed at the top of my lungs, "i want the hope everyone here has!!", i felt His Holy Spirit come into me and i just broke down in tears. i'm sure you'll say it was a "religious experience" or a "psycological episode" or whatever because that's what i thought was happening to everyone else. but i'm telling you that it was real and it changed my life and continues to change my life. to feel the love of the creator, to realize what he's given for you is indescribable. again, i dont believe in Jesus Christ because i like the lifestyle: I believe because I know it's true and because evolution is IMPOSSIBLE. i'm sure ur sitting at your computer going, "whatever, that's not for me". hey, whether you think it's for you or not, the unbelieving will burn for eternity. not believing in jesus doesn't save you from hell: it damns you. so u can close up your heart to what i'm saying because you think it's foolish, or you can come (and yes, i'm saying this on purpose) with the humility of a child, trusting that the Father won't turn you away. you've spit on the mercy of Jesus your whole life, mocked his spilling blood that was shed for your sin, and twisted the crown of thorns. i'll tell you right now, i dont want you to convert so i have a supporter on this site, i want you to believe and be changed by the power of the Holy Ghost so that I can see you in heaven and we can bow at his feet and thank him forever!

    
6. PhillyChief | July 12, 2008 10:38 AM
   

   "i really dont like science and math"
   "i'm not very calculating"
   
   Well those admissions right there reveal how the rest of your comment is likely to go.
   
   "i know very little about science, so i should be the easiest to convince"
   
   On the contrary, it makes you the easiest to deny it in favor of something else that seems simpler.
   
   "that came out of nowhere!"
   
   That's an assumption. Since matter can't be created or destroyed, it's certainly possible matter has always been.
   
   For the rest, I'll just briefly go through it:
   • Your characterization of an experiment being a supernatural process is incorrect. The process of simulating an environment and watching what happens does not reinforce that "design" is necessary. Had you ever experienced a science class, you'd understand this.
   • Evolution isn't about accidents. If you knew more about evolution and science in general you'd understand how you're mistaken.
   • Nothing is "tuned so perfectly". Douglas Adams explains this very well, especially at the end with his puddle analogy.
   • We see advantageous mutations happen almost daily in organisms with shorter life cycles like viruses and insects.
   • Although you claim you don't believe "because evolution is complicated and i like life simple", that's essentially what you're saying throughout this long comment. More specifically, because you don't have a solid grasp of science, you're more likely to accept a simpler explanation. It's perhaps not as willful as you said, but it's an inevitability of your current state, which is itself willful.
   
   You're entire comment is simply one big Argument from personal incredulity. This is so common and so frustrating for people who have taken the time to try and educate themselves that it often causes outbursts and name calling like "theistard". Perhaps that's wrong, but what is far worse is preferring ignorance over knowledge, accepting fables as facts, and putting more stock in faith than observation and understanding.

    
7. Stephen | July 23, 2008 11:33 PM
   

   first of all, phillychief
   1) thank you for actually taking time to read the whole thing! (at least, i think u read it all)
   2) thank you for being polite in your response. it makes the debate far more intelligent and worthwhile.
   
   that being said, i disagree with you on everything you said :) .
   
   You said my limited knowledge of science makes me favor something simpler. you need to understand that that is not the case. as i said in my comment, i began to believe evolutionists with all of the high falutant terminology and seemingly sensical explanations of the origins of life. but when i really came to the Lord (which is something i can't make you believe, but i pray you take to heart) i looked at evolution with a critical eye. i didn't just shut my eyes and ears to everything they said and just said "wrong, wrong, wrong!", but i didn't suck in every word with an open heart. i took time to look carefully at what evolution theory said, and, even with my limited knowledge of science, saw fatal mistakes. that is what i meant when i said i wasn't very calculating, i wasn't really into science, etc. i did not mean that i dont understand science and that i prefer life simple, i meant that even my tiny scope shows how impossible evolution is.
   
   "...it's certainly possible matter has always been."
   that's an assumption.
   
   I have experienced a science class, and i know full well that experiments are made to simulate occurances in nature. however, to "simulate" the environment that scientists invented from their own imagination that needed a miriad of bizarre factors to come to "completion" once in a great while is fantastic enough to be supernatural.
   
   and yes, evolution is about accidents. MICROevolution isn't about accidents, it is, as i said, about EXISTING genetic information that survives better than other information because it is advantagous for survival. i believe in natural selection 100%. MACROevolution is when a random mutation accidentally occurs that is advantagous, and thus it stays. that i dont believe. lets' say a krill in a swarm of billions has a random mutation that allows him to swim faster. wow! he's taken a big leap toward a fitter species of krill! he'll mate and make strong krill (assuming the mutation carries on to his offspring). great! then a whale comes and eats him and half of his swarm. too bad! that exceptionally rare advantageous mutation was just lost. of course, you could argue that whales won't be around yet because krill are simpler or something like that, but please just accept the argument as one that says luck of the draw plays a huge part in survival.
   
   and actually, yes, life is tuned perfectly. i suppose it's useless to argue that life is tuned perfectly for mankind, but that wasn't at all my point anyway. my point was that all of the forces that are involved with the world existing at all are mathematically impossible. all of the things that support life at all, human or not, are tuned perfectly. i dont' care right now if u think it's tuned for man or for everything, the fact is that life in general exists, and real science and real math says it should not.
   
   comparing advantagous mutations of a single-celled virus to advantagous mutations in organisms that supposedly move from living in water to breathing air and then flying is no comparison. As for the insects, i would honestly like you to explain that in detail. i'm not saying that to be obnoxious or anything, i just want to know.
   
   you have completely warped what my comment was about. "Although you claim you don't believe 'because evolution is complicated and i like life simple', that's essentially what you're saying throughout this long comment. " that is not at all what i said! evolution is not complicated at all: it's IMPOSSIBLE. i understand the theories that drive it, but i also understand the proven laws that refute it. i dont like life simple, otherwise i would bend to the undefeatable current the scientific community creates. if i liked life simple, i would assume that all the smart people who got PhD's in biology know more than me and must be right. i dont like life simple. i love the truth.
   
   by the way, this isn't personal incredulity (thanks for the link lol). this isn't just a case of "no, i dont believe that." this is a case of "oh, i thought that made sense, but real science says it's impossible." i'd appreciate it if you would not attribute me with personality traits that those who are for evolution have invented. i'm not blindly willful, i dont prefer the simple explanation by virtue of it's simplicity, and i dont' accept ignorance over knowledge. it was knowledge that took away my ignorance. the "fable" that created you is the same "fable" that will throw the unbeliever in hell. of course, according to the argument from ignorance, since i can't prove it's true, you'll say it must be false. and i really can't make you believe that, and i can't prove it. but there is nothing more real to me than God. call it a religious experience or a psychological episode if you want, i know it's true. my gut tells me more than "observations and understanding" can ever tell me. well actually, observations and understanding tells me evolution isn't possible, but i've already gone over that. just because God can't be revealed through empirical doesn't take away from His truth.
   you mock and criticize me for putting stock in faith rather than knowledge; i fear for your soul because your damning pride keeps you from accepting Jesus Christ as your Savior. Whether you believe me or not, "phillychief", i'm praying for your soul.

    
8. PhillyChief | July 24, 2008 1:12 AM
   

   "i began to believe evolutionists with all of the high falutant terminology..."
   
   You see, right there I can stop reading because clearly you don't understand the subject matter. When you then choose to argue about subjects you don't understand, you're simply making a fool out of yourself and you waste everyone's time. THAT is why people will call you names and dismiss you.
   
   I wish you the best, but I doubt you'll come by it on the road you're on.

    
9. Stephen | July 25, 2008 5:25 PM
   

   phillychief, i'm not an idiot.
   i completely understand what evolutionists are saying, and i'm sure you understand what my point was. they speak as if they're better informed or more intelligent or something like that. as i said in my first post:
   
   Romans 1:21+22...
   
   Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. PROFESSING THEMSELVES TO BE WISE, THEY BECAME FOOLS.
   
   That's what i'm talking about and you know it.

    
10. PhillyChief | July 25, 2008 6:03 PM
    

    What you repeatedly show in your comments is both an ignorance of the subject matter you're arguing against and a willful intent to remain that way. Both are amplified by what appears to be resentment towards those with knowledge which exceeds your own.
    
    I suggest you try to read more than just one book in your lifetime.

     
11. Stephen | July 26, 2008 2:58 PM
    

    what i see in your comments is an inability to continue the debate my points, despite the fact that i've only "read one book in my lifetime." apparently that's an attempt at an insult...
    but really, you haven't debated any of my points from my second post, but attempted to cover it up with warping something i said as if that was sufficient.
    
    "resentment towards those with knowledge which exceeds your own."
    hahahahaha! "knowledge" about a fatally flawed theory is nothing to be proud of, and i have nothing but pity for people who completely buy into a world limited to what can be observed with the five senses.
    nice try, chief, but you're the one who's in the dark.

     
12. PhillyChief | July 26, 2008 3:03 PM
    

    Your "points" can't be addressed at your current level of knowledge. As your bible says, "cast not pearls before swine".
    
    I wouldn't say swine, but you know, the bible is a bit heavy handed. Don't take it personal. ;)

     
13. Stephen | July 28, 2008 12:40 PM
    

    wow, chief. with every comment u post, it just goes to show how desperately u want to end this debate because you have no answers. "Your 'points' can't be addressed at your current level of knowledge." that's the worst cover-up of ignorance i've ever heard. If I dont have enough knowledge, ENLIGHTEN ME!
    
    By the way, dont twist the Word of God. If you took the whole verse, you'd know that it says,
    
    "Give not that which is HOLY unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you."
    
    it's an analogy for the believer to THE UNBELIEVER, dear phillychief, not the other way around. it refers to people like you who are put on the same intelligence level as curs and swine, who don't know something precious when they see it, and bite the hand that feeds them, so to speak. There is another verse in Mark, when Jesus is giving his disciples instructions on how to spread his word, he says,
    
    "And whoever will not receive you nor hear you, when you depart from there, shake off the dust under your feet as a testimony against them. Assuredly, I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city!”
    
    You, and most of America, are like that city. Christians are bringing the good news of eternal joy and the warning of eternal suffering, but you won't hear. if you didn't know, Sodom and Gomorrah were two sinful nations that were destroyed by fire and brimstone sent from God. it will be worse for you.
    
    Indeed, the Bible is heavy-handed.
    
    2 Corinthians 4:4 says,
    
    "The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God."
    
    The god of this age is, I believe, (quote-unquote) "Science". You're blinded by your "knowledge" and "understanding" and it keeps you from really seeing how much more there is to this life.
    
    I'm sure you realize now that the point of my comments isn't just to win the debate (which so far, I think I am), but more importantly, to do everything I can to win you to Christ for the sake of your own souls. If you don't believe in Christ and serve him, you will go to hell. it's as simple as that. However, if you let go of your worthless pride, and just let his "peace... which transcends all understanding"(Phillipians 4:7) come into your heart, you can enter into the Kingdom of God.

     
14. PhillyChief | July 28, 2008 1:31 PM
    

    There are plenty of resources online, and I'm sure your local librarian would be more than happy to help you enlighten yourself. If you want to go beyond free resources, I have to give a plug to The Teaching Company where you can purchase recorded lectures by notable college professors on dvd, cd, or as audio downloads (the cheapest option and what I recommend).
    
    Knowledge is out there, and it's probably more readily accessible than in any other time in history, so really, if you remain ignorant on subjects of science and other such things, you only have yourself to blame.

     
15. Stephen | July 29, 2008 11:51 PM
    

    Ha! i've given you chances to accept Christ and I've lengthily explained fatal flaws with evolution (which you've yet to refute) and you won't hear.
    
    (John 3.16) "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
    
    So when you die and the devils come and pull you kicking and howling into the flaming mouth of hell, 'you only have yourself to blame'.

     
16. PhillyChief | July 30, 2008 1:14 AM
    

    NiB
    
    Ha!

     
17. Stephen | August 2, 2008 1:09 AM
    

    dude, chief, this isn't a joke.
    I'm not trying to sound scary to look cool for anyone who's reading this or whatever. Eternity, whether it be in heaven or hell, is REAL, and i'm doing everything i can to help you. Your soul is on the line, and you need to realize how serious that is.
    
    btw, it wasn't even funny....

     

Post a Comment