Macro Evolution: The Evidence

[Kristian Joense]

Wattsr1, what I am trying to get to here is that there doesn't appear to be any biological evidence ruling out a common designer and so if I hold to a common designer for other reasons such as divine revelation or various argument for the existence of God then it would be fully rational of me to carry on with that belief. I don't have to infer a common designer from anything in biology but there is nothing in biology that implies there wasn't a common designer. That issue would have to be settled on other grounds.

"Huh? ... until today I had not made any posts in this thread so, what's your problem?"

I know that but I am just giving the regular posters here notice that I don't necessarily agree with you. The reason for this is that your arguments often are of an inferior quality and frankly can be seen as an embarrassment to the YEC movement.

[Jorge]

"Huh? ... until today I had not made any posts in this thread so, what's your problem?"

I know that but I am just giving the regular posters here notice that I don't necessarily agree with you. The reason for this is that your arguments often are of an inferior quality and frankly can be seen as an embarrassment to the YEC movement.

*********************************************************

The good thing about a country like ours is that everyone has the freedom to express
their opinion regardless of how stupid and ill-informed that opinion may be. Rather
than making a blanket statement about "inferior quality arguments" why don't you
try being specific and let's see if you have a point. My guess is that, like many people
here, you don't know what you're talking about but find people like me "easy" to attack.
Prove me wrong, kiddo ........................

Jorge

[Wally]

The good thing about a country like ours is that everyone has the freedom to express
their opinion regardless of how stupid and ill-informed that opinion may be.

Yep :)

[Tiggy]

The good thing about a country like ours is that everyone has the freedom to express
their opinion regardless of how stupid and ill-informed that opinion may be. Rather
than making a blanket statement about "inferior quality arguments" why don't you
try being specific and let's see if you have a point.

Jorge

How about this gem by you ?

Impact Craters and a Young Earth

This is an answer to those that may be under the impression that the 'impact craters' evidence supports millions or billions of years thereby refuting the YEC position.

Using impact craters as positive evidence for an old Earth (or, in the negative, as refuting evidence of YEC claims) hinges on one thing: whether or not these craters are exactly what people claim or believe they are. The strength of the argument thus rests entirely on validating the evidence; i.e., are impact craters actually impact craters?

You pretty much pegged the stupid meter with that one

You feel like defending your claim that Meteor Crater in Arizona isn't really an impact crater, but instead is...what, a giant gopher hole?

453517main_meteor_crater_az_sm.jpg

- T

[rogue06]

********************************************************************

Huh? ... until today I had not made any posts in this thread so, what's your problem?

The same thing I told m004, evidently your reputation precedes you.

[rogue06]

Rather than making a blanket statement about "inferior quality arguments" why don't you
try being specific and let's see if you have a point.

irony.gif sproing.gif

[Jorge]

How about this gem by you ?



You pretty much pegged the stupid meter with that one

You feel like defending your claim that Meteor Crater in Arizona isn't really an impact crater, but instead is...what, a giant gopher hole?

453517main_meteor_crater_az_sm.jpg

- T

*******************************************************************

Hey, Dodo bird, some impact craters are indeed impact craters.
Contrary to your pathetic reading comprehension skills, I never said that
ALL (alleged) impact craters are suspect. But, of course, you are a Master
of distortions so I'm not the least bit surprised at your accusations.

Uhmmm ... I must apologize to the dearly-departed Dodo bird for placing
Tiggy in the same category. That was a low blow ... the poor Dodo did
nothing to deserve such an insult.

Jorge

[Jorge]

The same thing I told m004, evidently your reputation precedes you.

**************************************************

My "reputation" according to who? You? Tiggy? O-Mudd? Roy? Wally?


You DO get the point, right?

Jorge

[Tiggy]

*******************************************************************

Hey, Dodo bird, some impact craters are indeed impact craters.
Contrary to your pathetic reading comprehension skills, I never said that
ALL (alleged) impact craters are suspect. But, of course, you are a Master
of distortions so I'm not the least bit surprised at your accusations.

Uhmmm ... I must apologize to the dearly-departed Dodo bird for placing
Tiggy in the same category. That was a low blow ... the poor Dodo did
nothing to deserve such an insult.

Jorge

Hey , you used the Barringer Crater in Arizona as one of the examples in your idiot article. It's your Figure #3. You said it was not an impact crater.

Want to stick your other foot in your mouth too ? I know there's room.

- T

[rogue06]

**************************************************

My "reputation" according to who? You? Tiggy? O-Mudd? Roy? Wally?


You DO get the point, right?

Jorge

In this case Kristian Joense, who's posts indicate he's not among the, what you like to call, "evo-faithful." Then again considering the number of fellow YECs that have said similar things after encountering you, at some point you should stop and ask yourself if all these folks are wrong or maybe, just maybe, that it really is you.

[Jorge]

In this case Kristian Joense, who's posts indicate he's not among the, what you like to call, "evo-faithful." Then again considering the number of fellow YECs that have said similar things after encountering you, at some point you should stop and ask yourself if all these folks are wrong or maybe, just maybe, that it really is you.

******************************************************************

I don't answer to your accusations involving generic, faceless people.

Name me a specific fellow YEC that has said something and then tell me specifically
what that person said and if it is a valid point then I will be honest enough to say,
"(S)He has a valid point ... I am wrong!"

But do you think that because a person -- ANY person, YEC, Atheist or whatever --
says something negative about me that I will take it as "gospel truth"?

When I'm wrong, I'm wrong and it usually takes me two nanoseconds to admit it.
What you and your henchmen want is for people like me to confess to being "wrong"
when, if we did this, THAT would be a lie.

Get a clue.

Jorge

[Tiggy]

When I'm wrong, I'm wrong and it usually takes me two nanoseconds to admit it.

Jorge

You were wrong when you claimed the Barringer Meteor Crater in Arizona isn't an impact crater.

Been 3 years now and you still haven't admitted you were dead wrong.

Talk is cheap Your actions speak way louder than you do.

- T

[Jorge]

Hey , you used the Barringer Crater in Arizona as one of the examples in your idiot article. It's your Figure #3. You said it was not an impact crater.

Want to stick your other foot in your mouth too ? I know there's room.

- T

**********************************************************************

It had been several years and so I went back and read my Impact Craters article - not bad!

After reading it and your above post, I am forced to consider only two conclusions:

(1) You have a very severe reading comprehension disability or,

(2) You are an extremely dishonest individual that distorts / misrepresents the words of others.

MODS : Before you ban me again, note that evidence for (2) is provided.

Nothing more needs to be said.

Jorge

[rogue06]

******************************************************************

I don't answer to your accusations involving generic, faceless people.

Name me a specific fellow YEC that has said something and then tell me specifically
what that person said and if it is a valid point then I will be honest enough to say,
"(S)He has a valid point ... I am wrong!"

But do you think that because a person -- ANY person, YEC, Atheist or whatever --
says something negative about me that I will take it as "gospel truth"?

When I'm wrong, I'm wrong and it usually takes me two nanoseconds to admit it.
What you and your henchmen want is for people like me to confess to being "wrong"
when, if we did this, THAT would be a lie.

Get a clue.

Jorge

Have you forgotten your run-in with one of the site owners, Dee Dee Warren, "dizzle"? She, a fellow YEC, chewed you up and spit you out for your sloppy "scholarship" among other things. Ironically, her first encounter with you was to come to your defense in the old Dendrochronology thread but then saw you in action firsthand.

I can think of several others but need to double check that they are indeed YEC before I list them.

[rogue06]

**********************************************************************

It had been several years and so I went back and read my Impact Craters article - not bad!

After reading it and your above post, I am forced to consider only two conclusions:

(1) You have a very severe reading comprehension disability or,

(2) You are an extremely dishonest individual that distorts / misrepresents the words of others.

MODS : Before you ban me again, note that evidence for (2) is provided.

Nothing more needs to be said.

Jorge

Here is Jorge's article "Impact Craters: Alleged Creation Challenge to Biblical Creation" so anyone who is interested can determine for themselves whether or not it's "not bad" as Jorge declares.