Should at Least Make Evolutionists Consider

[Purple Knight]

Question for Debate: Why, and how, does the muntjac deer have only seven pairs of chromosomes?

Please don't look this up, at least until you've considered for a moment how weird this is. Imagine you have 20 pairs of chromosomes, and you have a baby that has sixteen pairs. He shouldn't be able to breed with the rest of your species.

Is this at least weird? A regular deer has around 40-70 chromosomes. Is it at least strange that he can even be alive having lost that much genetic information? One more halving and he'll be a fruit fly (they have 4 pairs).

[The Barbarian]

Austin tried to pull a fast one, and he got caught. And he just walked away from the disaster afterwards. Because he submitted material younger than the method could analyze,
he knew in advance it would give misleading results. It's not the first time he got caught in an attempted deception...

It was Austin's intention to use the Mt St Helens eruption to convince us that catastrophes can cause rapid, large-scale changes on the earth's surface. Austin said that he had once been an evolutionist, but that his observations of the Mt St Helens eruption had converted him to catastrophism and creationism.
...
At the end of the presentation Austin was confronted by another member of our group, who asked, "Whatever happened to Stuart Nevins? Does he publish anymore?" Those of you familiar with ICR literature may recognize the name from tracts published in the late 70's. Austin admitted that he had published under that pen name. So much for his recent, Mt St Helens-induced conversion to creationism!
https://ncse.ngo/visit-institute-creation-research

Why would anyone be willing to trust this guy?

Marke: Austin's findings are just as valuable to the debates as are those of other researchers in spite of the unjustified biases of those who resent him and his findings.

He blatantly lied about being "an evolutionist." He got publicly called out on it. Why would anyone believe anything he says?

Marke: All men are liars, especially those who reject God and falsely promote errors in the name of science and truth.

Austin's rejection of God's creation isn't what makes him a liar. There are many honest creationists. Austin had so little confidence in his error, that he lied to make it more credible.
[/quote]

Marke: For this discussion, calling Austin out for something unrelated to this issue does not prove he is wrong about the report in question.
[/quote]

It merely means that Austin is willing to lie to support YE creation. So it's not surprising that he falsely claimed that he removed unmelted rock crystals from his sample, knowing that it would give a misleading result.

[Jose Fly]

Marke: If Collins accepts evolution myths then it is not because he lied about Covid that he is wrong about evolution.

Yeah, that's pretty much the extent of creationist logic. "Everything and everyone who agrees with me is right, and everything and everyone who disagrees with me is wrong."

No actual thought required.

[marke]

Austin tried to pull a fast one, and he got caught. And he just walked away from the disaster afterwards. Because he submitted material younger than the method could analyze,
he knew in advance it would give misleading results. It's not the first time he got caught in an attempted deception...

It was Austin's intention to use the Mt St Helens eruption to convince us that catastrophes can cause rapid, large-scale changes on the earth's surface. Austin said that he had once been an evolutionist, but that his observations of the Mt St Helens eruption had converted him to catastrophism and creationism.
...
At the end of the presentation Austin was confronted by another member of our group, who asked, "Whatever happened to Stuart Nevins? Does he publish anymore?" Those of you familiar with ICR literature may recognize the name from tracts published in the late 70's. Austin admitted that he had published under that pen name. So much for his recent, Mt St Helens-induced conversion to creationism!
https://ncse.ngo/visit-institute-creation-research

Why would anyone be willing to trust this guy?

Marke: Austin's findings are just as valuable to the debates as are those of other researchers in spite of the unjustified biases of those who resent him and his findings.

He blatantly lied about being "an evolutionist." He got publicly called out on it. Why would anyone believe anything he says?

Marke: All men are liars, especially those who reject God and falsely promote errors in the name of science and truth.

Austin's rejection of God's creation isn't what makes him a liar. There are many honest creationists. Austin had so little confidence in his error, that he lied to make it more credible.

Marke: For this discussion, calling Austin out for something unrelated to this issue does not prove he is wrong about the report in question.
[/quote]

It merely means that Austin is willing to lie to support YE creation. So it's not surprising that he falsely claimed that he removed unmelted rock crystals from his sample, knowing that it would give a misleading result.
[/quote]

Marke: Calling him a liar is not the same thing as proving him wrong.

[marke]

Marke: If Collins accepts evolution myths then it is not because he lied about Covid that he is wrong about evolution.

Yeah, that's pretty much the extent of creationist logic. "Everything and everyone who agrees with me is right, and everything and everyone who disagrees with me is wrong."

No actual thought required.

Marke: Evolutionists are in the minority and Christians who believe humans descended from animals and not from Adam are an even smaller minority within the evolutionists minority.
https://www.pewresearch.org/science/200 ... 0evolution.

Despite the evidence presented and accepted by the vast majority of the scientific community that evolution through natural selection is the mechanism by which life developed on earth, an August 2006 poll4 by the Pew Research Center found that only about a quarter of the American public actually accepts evolution through natural selection. Why have scientists not been able to convince the vast majority of the American people on this particular issue?

[Jose Fly]

Marke: If Collins accepts evolution myths then it is not because he lied about Covid that he is wrong about evolution.

Yeah, that's pretty much the extent of creationist logic. "Everything and everyone who agrees with me is right, and everything and everyone who disagrees with me is wrong."

No actual thought required.

Marke: Evolutionists are in the minority and Christians who believe humans descended from animals and not from Adam are an even smaller minority within the evolutionists minority.
https://www.pewresearch.org/science/200 ... 0evolution.

Despite the evidence presented and accepted by the vast majority of the scientific community that evolution through natural selection is the mechanism by which life developed on earth, an August 2006 poll4 by the Pew Research Center found that only about a quarter of the American public actually accepts evolution through natural selection. Why have scientists not been able to convince the vast majority of the American people on this particular issue?

You're out of date.

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/20 ... evolution/

And that's just the US, which has a larger proportion of fundamentalist Christians than the rest of the developed world, where agreeing that evolution is reality is the majority view by a lot.

[The Barbarian]

Marke: For this discussion, calling Austin out for something unrelated to this issue does not prove he is wrong about the report in question.[/b]

It merely means that Austin is willing to lie to support YE creation. So it's not surprising that he falsely claimed that he removed unmelted rock crystals from his sample, knowing that it would give a misleading result.

Calling him a liar is not the same thing as proving him wrong.[/b]

For a Christian, lying is always wrong. Austin was certainly wrong to have claimed to be an "evolutionist" when in fact, he was publishing creationist articles under a pen name.

[The Barbarian]

Despite the evidence presented and accepted by the vast majority of the scientific community that evolution through natural selection is the mechanism by which life developed on earth, an August 2006 poll4 by the Pew Research Center found that only about a quarter of the American public actually accepts evolution through natural selection. Why have scientists not been able to convince the vast majority of the American people on this particular issue?[/b]

Actually, no scientist will tell you that evolution by natural selection is about the origin of life. Even Darwin just suggested that God created the first living things. One of the reasons that YE creationists often do so poorly in their arguments, is that they don't know what evolution is.

Why not take a little time to read up on it, and come back to take part in the discussion? It could save you a lot of embarrassment.

And last time I looked, most Americans admit the fact of evolution. About 58% of Americans acknowledge that humans developed from other species, most of them believing that the process was part of God's creation:

Creationist Belief Linked to More Religious, Less Educated, More Conservative Americans

Americans' views on human origins continue to vary sharply, depending on their religious identification, how often they attend church, their political ideology and their education level.

Strict creationism -- Majorities of U.S. adults who attend religious services weekly or more often, identify as politically conservative, and are Protestant believe that God created human beings in their present form. Half of those who attend religious services nearly weekly or monthly also believe in creationism. (37%)

Strict evolution -- A majority of those who say they do not affiliate with any religion think humans evolved over millions of years without any involvement from God. Pluralities of those who attend religious services less than monthly and political liberals also ascribe to the same strictly evolutionist belief. (24%)

Evolution influenced by God -- Pluralities of Catholics and college graduates believe in evolution over millions of years that was guided by God. (34%)

https://news.gallup.com/poll/647594/maj ... onism.aspx

And yes, 58% is pretty close to an "overwhelming majority" that favors evolution.

[marke]

Marke: If Collins accepts evolution myths then it is not because he lied about Covid that he is wrong about evolution.

Yeah, that's pretty much the extent of creationist logic. "Everything and everyone who agrees with me is right, and everything and everyone who disagrees with me is wrong."

No actual thought required.

Marke: Evolutionists are in the minority and Christians who believe humans descended from animals and not from Adam are an even smaller minority within the evolutionists minority.
https://www.pewresearch.org/science/200 ... 0evolution.

Despite the evidence presented and accepted by the vast majority of the scientific community that evolution through natural selection is the mechanism by which life developed on earth, an August 2006 poll4 by the Pew Research Center found that only about a quarter of the American public actually accepts evolution through natural selection. Why have scientists not been able to convince the vast majority of the American people on this particular issue?

You're out of date.

https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/20 ... evolution/

And that's just the US, which has a larger proportion of fundamentalist Christians than the rest of the developed world, where agreeing that evolution is reality is the majority view by a lot.

Marke: I believe the Bible, not flawed results from bad dating schemes built upon unprovable assumptions.

[marke]

Marke: For this discussion, calling Austin out for something unrelated to this issue does not prove he is wrong about the report in question.[/b]

It merely means that Austin is willing to lie to support YE creation. So it's not surprising that he falsely claimed that he removed unmelted rock crystals from his sample, knowing that it would give a misleading result.

Calling him a liar is not the same thing as proving him wrong.[/b]

For a Christian, lying is always wrong. Austin was certainly wrong to have claimed to be an "evolutionist" when in fact, he was publishing creationist articles under a pen name.

Marke: Lying is wrong and so also is the propagation of bad science. God does not lie and the Bible does not contradict accurate science.

[marke]

Despite the evidence presented and accepted by the vast majority of the scientific community that evolution through natural selection is the mechanism by which life developed on earth, an August 2006 poll4 by the Pew Research Center found that only about a quarter of the American public actually accepts evolution through natural selection. Why have scientists not been able to convince the vast majority of the American people on this particular issue?[/b]

Actually, no scientist will tell you that evolution by natural selection is about the origin of life. Even Darwin just suggested that God created the first living things. One of the reasons that YE creationists often do so poorly in their arguments, is that they don't know what evolution is.

Why not take a little time to read up on it, and come back to take part in the discussion? It could save you a lot of embarrassment.

And last time I looked, most Americans admit the fact of evolution. About 58% of Americans acknowledge that humans developed from other species, most of them believing that the process was part of God's creation:

Creationist Belief Linked to More Religious, Less Educated, More Conservative Americans

Americans' views on human origins continue to vary sharply, depending on their religious identification, how often they attend church, their political ideology and their education level.

Strict creationism -- Majorities of U.S. adults who attend religious services weekly or more often, identify as politically conservative, and are Protestant believe that God created human beings in their present form. Half of those who attend religious services nearly weekly or monthly also believe in creationism. (37%)

Strict evolution -- A majority of those who say they do not affiliate with any religion think humans evolved over millions of years without any involvement from God. Pluralities of those who attend religious services less than monthly and political liberals also ascribe to the same strictly evolutionist belief. (24%)

Evolution influenced by God -- Pluralities of Catholics and college graduates believe in evolution over millions of years that was guided by God. (34%)

https://news.gallup.com/poll/647594/maj ... onism.aspx

And yes, 58% is pretty close to an "overwhelming majority" that favors evolution.

Marke: Evolution is a false theory that has no fountation since abiogenesis is clearly a lie.