*In a conversation about ERV's*
It's not deceptive, because it was never God's intention for Darwinism to exist as a scientific theory. Had the ERVs been discovered in these spots without the Darwinian paradigm, scientists would not have assumed that they denote common descent. Instead, scientists would have interpreted the data in a totally different light, and concluded that God made them that way.
29 comments
Well then, if god never intended the theory to exist, he kind of screwed up somewhere along the line, didn't he? Since, you know, it does exist.
Your god is a bit slow on the uptake.
Oh my God.
I don't believe it, how could I of been so blind?
Science and rational logic are worthless. God did it all.
It is so clear now.
... right.
Let me try something here:
"It's not deceptive, because it was never God's intention for gravity to exist as a scientific theory. Had the fall of objects been discovered without the Newtonian paradigm, scientists would not have assumed that they denote a force of attraction between two objects. Instead, scientists would have interpreted the data in a totally different light, and concluded that God did it."
"It's not deceptive, because it was never God's intention for modern cell theory to exist as a scientific theory. Had the cells been discovered in without the modern cell theory paradigm, scientists would not have assumed that they denote energy flow. Instead, scientists would have interpreted the data in a totally different light, and concluded that God did it."
Eh, they didn't flow quite as well as I'd thought, but you get the picture.
By the way, does anyone know how to bold letters? I can't for the life of me figure out which code to use.
Well, as in the eyes of the fundamentalists the bible, of course, is always right, everything has to be interpreted in a way, that fits to creationism.
Or to sum it up:
If god did not want the theory of evolution to exist, couldn't he just give us evidence against it?
Seriously what is so bad about being a theist evolutionist (god started off the evolutionary process). I mean at least you don't sound like a complete retard that way.
@ Dagger
"Instead, scientists would have [...] concluded that God made them that way."
No, they wouldn't, because that doesn't even come close to being a scientific conclusion.
Waidagodsdamnedminute! "God never intended"? Your infallible, omnipotent, omniscient god 'never intended?
How the hell did that happen, and how the hell did you find out?
"interpreted the data in a totally different light, and concluded that God made them that way. "
The theory of goddiddit is only a myth.
Antichrist:
The problem is the fundies get chopped up by Occams razor.
Abbie Smith unavailable for comment...
In any case, as I understand the whole ERV issue, it turns out that if you know what you're looking for you'd have to have a complete failure in pattern recognition to miss how ERVs in different but related genomes line up. It's like learning Latin, then picking up a Sanskrit grammar and somehow missing how similar they are structurally.
"It's not deceptive, because it was never God's intention for Darwinism to exist as a scientific theory."
I always thought you idiots say that EVERYTHING that happens is God's will. Sounds to me like you just questioned God's judgement.
It's not deceptive, because it was never God's intention for Darwinism to exist as a scientific theory.
and yet evolution does exist and is a widely respected theory. Either your lying (well, you are obviously) or gawd is not all knowing which calls into question your entire religion.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
