The Delusion of Evolution

[Neandertal Ned]

There is plenty of evidence that the so-called "process" of evoution is more of a delusion than a real biological process. It is a delusion in the sense that you can only imagine a species of one genus "evolving" into the species of an entirely different animal genus by "natural selection" alone since no one has ever observed it to happen "naturally" in real life. Until physically demonstrated to have ever happened on earth let alone that is physically possible nowadays or at some distant time in the future, it can only be called a mass delusion on the part of the so-called "scientific community."

http://atheismisdead.blogspot.com/2009/ ... ution.html

http://www.god-book.com/TheEvolutionDelusion.htm



http://evolutiondelusion.blogspot.com/

Do you have any doubts or objections to evolution being classified as a mass delusion or modern myth?

[Neandertal Ned]

As you distinguished between them yourself, Man (human) was specially created by God as a living soul, and all other creatures were simply created as animals. You know that. Why play dumb?

Please provide objective and tangible evidence that 1) man was specifically created by God, that man has a 'living soul', and that God exists.

It is written in the Jewish Book of Genesis.

Now, how is that objective?
How is that tangible,
and how is that evidence?

As a book, it is as objective, tangible and evidential as Darwin's Origin of Species is.

And, not only that, how does 'Genesis' show that there is a 'living soul'?

The same way that Darwin showed evolution.

What is the passages, and what do those passages mean, in context?

http://www.heavendwellers.com/hd_%20A%2 ... 20Soul.htm

It seems to me that, well, your answer fails, at every level.

You arrived at your conclusion before I even posted an anwser. This is known as prejudice.

[Neandertal Ned]

You are misrepresenting the sources, blatantly making things up and when called on it denouncing science and logic. Intellectual dishonesty at its most blatant.

That's an opinion, not a fact.

[Neandertal Ned]

i know, and that alone bothers me. does this man have any tangible evidence?

The OP says "It is a delusion in the sense that you can only imagine a species of one genus "evolving" into the species of an entirely different animal genus by "natural selection" alone since no one has ever observed it to happen "naturally" in real life. Until physically demonstrated to have ever happened on earth let alone that is physically possible nowadays or at some distant time in the future, it can only be called a mass delusion on the part of the so-called "scientific community.""

I can just use his logic and say creation is a delusion "since no one has ever observed it happen in real life. Until physically demonstrated to have ever happened on earth let alone that it is physically possible nowadays or at some distant time in the future, creation can only be called a mass delusion on the part of the so-called Christian community."

Dawkins beat you to it.

Don't forget to include the Jewish and Muslim community if you want to go Dawkins on us.

Witty responses are not the same as genuinely responding the the objection raised.

What objection was raised? Have you ever genuinely responded to any objections I have raised?

Batting away questions is not good debating, honestly assessing them is.

Same applies to you. What questions are you talking about? Have you ever honestly assessed any of many questions I ask?

[Neandertal Ned]

actually, i think you'll find they are rather different. for a start, evolutionary sculptors have science and fossils to work with, so they have a set path in mind.
the other kind don't have said science, so just make up a plan, so are you seriously accusing these people of being charlatans?

He accuses practically every biologist and every other person working on or believing in evolution or evolution related research living or dead to be involved in a worldwide conspiracy with the sole purpose of robbing him of his great privilege of having been especially created by a god, if I understand him correctly.

Not only of trying to rob me but of trying to rob everyone else in the world of the priviledge of becoming a child of God.

I accept that evolution is a fact.

I am also blessed to be a child of God.

I really am not sure how the first is supposed to rob me of the second. I have no problem with both.

If anyone thinks believing in evolution robs me of my faith, or attempts to dissuade me from faith by pointing to evolution, I am afraid I must be a sore disappointment to them. I see no reason to have my faith and other beliefs boxed in by the assumptions or illogical arguments of others.

If your faith is in both God and evolution then pointing to evolution would be a confirmation of your faith. Pointing to evolution alone while denying the existence of God or mocking your Christian faith would not be a confirmation of your faith in God and evolution.

[Goat]

As you distinguished between them yourself, Man (human) was specially created by God as a living soul, and all other creatures were simply created as animals. You know that. Why play dumb?

Please provide objective and tangible evidence that 1) man was specifically created by God, that man has a 'living soul', and that God exists.

It is written in the Jewish Book of Genesis.

Now, how is that objective?
How is that tangible,
and how is that evidence?

As a book, it is as objective, tangible and evidential as Darwin's Origin of Species is.

You don't seem to understand what 'objective, tangible and evidence'

The book points to the fossil evidence, and to the various species that exist. Those fossils can be held and examined. That is objective.. since you can look at it yourself.. tangible.. you can actually HOLD those fossils, and it can be shown to others.. so you can see the line of reasoning laid out.


The book of Genesis makes claims that are falsified. The world was not made in 6 days, plants did not exist before the sun.

So, your statement comparing the Origin of Species and the Book of Genesis has been shown to be false and irrational.

And, not only that, how does 'Genesis' show that there is a 'living soul'?

The same way that Darwin showed evolution.

Really?? Charles Darwin pointed to physical evidence, such as the species that exist, and can be compared with each other, and the fossil evidence and geological evidence.

What physical evidence do you have that can be examined that is brought up with the Book of Genesis? Or, is that the misapplied Tu quoque logical fallacy?

What is the passages, and what do those passages mean, in context?

http://www.heavendwellers.com/hd_%20A%2 ... 20Soul.htm

It seems to me that, well, your answer fails, at every level.

You arrived at your conclusion before I even posted an anwser. This is known as prejudice.

For a very simple reason. I know the source of your claims, and your answers are first of all very predictable, and second of all, extremely incorrect when it comes to being evidence. Your answers are very stereotypical of the fundamentalist Christian who has no understanding of what they are talking about. I keep hoping that your answers aren't merely parroting of the anti-intellectual anti science fundamentalist Christians. I keep hoping that you would exceed my expectations rather than reinforce the stereotype.

[Neandertal Ned]

As a book, it is as objective, tangible and evidential as Darwin's Origin of Species is.

You don't seem to understand what 'objective, tangible and evidence'

You don't seem to either.

The book points to the fossil evidence, and to the various species that exist.

Genesis also accounts for all of the plants and animals which exist and accounts for the fossilization of millions of extinct species buried in the earth after the worldwide flood.

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=n ... in+genesis

Those fossils can be held and examined. That is objective.. since you can look at it yourself.. tangible.. you can actually HOLD those fossils, and it can be shown to others.. so you can see the line of reasoning laid out.

That is not true. The first and only time many of the human fossils from around the world were on display to the public in New York was in 1984 and being so fragile, none were allowed to be held and handled, let alone touched. There was no way to determine whether they were all originals or whether some were just casts.

Truth is, this is not the first time important human fossils have come to the United States. In 1984, the American Museum of Natural History gathered original human fossils from all over the world for their "Ancestors" exhibition.
http://www.livescience.com/1769-lucy-to ... ntion.html

The book of Genesis makes claims that are falsified.

Falsified by whom - you?

The world was not made in 6 days,

Impossible to prove.

plants did not exist before the sun.

Why not, if the light which they, the sun and the stars are made out of, existed a priori?

So, your statement comparing the Origin of Species and the Book of Genesis has been shown to be false and irrational.

Only if you take Origin of species literally and believe in the irrationality of evolutionary presumptions.

Charles Darwin pointed to physical evidence, such as the species that exist, and can be compared with each other, and the fossil evidence and geological evidence.

All of which we can equally see for ourselves and none of which prove either evolution or creation. Evolution and creation can only be imagined and believed in, never proved.

I know the source of your claims, and your answers are first of all very predictable, and second of all, extremely incorrect when it comes to being evidence. Your answers are very stereotypical of the fundamentalist Christian who has no understanding of what they are talking about. I keep hoping that your answers aren't merely parroting of the anti-intellectual anti science fundamentalist Christians. I keep hoping that you would exceed my expectations rather than reinforce the stereotype.

None of which supports or lends credence your belief and faith in evolution.

[Clownboat]

actually, i think you'll find they are rather different. for a start, evolutionary sculptors have science and fossils to work with, so they have a set path in mind.
the other kind don't have said science, so just make up a plan, so are you seriously accusing these people of being charlatans?

He accuses practically every biologist and every other person working on or believing in evolution or evolution related research living or dead to be involved in a worldwide conspiracy with the sole purpose of robbing him of his great privilege of having been especially created by a god, if I understand him correctly.

Not only of trying to rob me but of trying to rob everyone else in the world of the priviledge of becoming a child of God.

I accept that evolution is a fact.

I am also blessed to be a child of God.

I really am not sure how the first is supposed to rob me of the second. I have no problem with both.

If anyone thinks believing in evolution robs me of my faith, or attempts to dissuade me from faith by pointing to evolution, I am afraid I must be a sore disappointment to them. I see no reason to have my faith and other beliefs boxed in by the assumptions or illogical arguments of others.

If your faith is in both God and evolution then pointing to evolution would be a confirmation of your faith. Pointing to evolution alone while denying the existence of God or mocking your Christian faith would not be a confirmation of your faith in God and evolution.

Ah ha. So you can believe in evolution and be a child of god. This goes against your previous claim:
- "trying to rob everyone else in the world of the priviledge of becoming a child of God."

[Goat]

As a book, it is as objective, tangible and evidential as Darwin's Origin of Species is.

You don't seem to understand what 'objective, tangible and evidence'

You don't seem to either.

The book points to the fossil evidence, and to the various species that exist.

Genesis also accounts for all of the plants and animals which exist and accounts for the fossilization of millions of extinct species buried in the earth after the worldwide flood.

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=n ... in+genesis

Except, of course, you have to ignore many facts, such as 'DATING OF THE FOSSILS', and 'THE GEOLOGICAL COLUMN' and 'PLANTS BEING FORMED BEFORE THE SUN' in Genesis. So, that falsifies your claim....

Those fossils can be held and examined. That is objective.. since you can look at it yourself.. tangible.. you can actually HOLD those fossils, and it can be shown to others.. so you can see the line of reasoning laid out.

That is not true. The first and only time many of the human fossils from around the world were on display to the public in New York was in 1984 and being so fragile, none were allowed to be held and handled, let alone touched. There was no way to determine whether they were all originals or whether some were just casts.

On the contrary.... you can.. other people can. Fossils in general can be held. It is not just human fossils.. it is the whole range of fossils. Those fossils exist, and they can be examined by people. Let's see you show, in theory, how God can be examined in the same way. If you can't hold a specific specimen, other people and, and those specimens PHYSICALLY exist. They can be held. They have physical substance. You can also go out into places, and get shell fossils, plant fossils, buy yourself a nice mastadon bone, or even a dinosaur bone. .. or even go to the right place, look for, and dig them out yourself, if you have the energy, knowledge, and resources. It's there for the finding.

Let's see you show something similar for God.

Truth is, this is not the first time important human fossils have come to the United States. In 1984, the American Museum of Natural History gathered original human fossils from all over the world for their "Ancestors" exhibition.
http://www.livescience.com/1769-lucy-to ... ntion.html

And your point?? Those specimens physically exist. The claims from Genesis or God do not.

The book of Genesis makes claims that are falsified.

Falsified by whom - you?

By physicists, geologists, archeologists, paleontologists, chemists, astronomers, etc etc etc.

The world was not made in 6 days,

Impossible to prove.

Yes,.. it has been proven. Of course, when someone is having unreasonable denial of evidence and is irrational.. even the most obvious things can be discounted. The evidence of the formation of the earth is pretty good. Now, no amount of evidence will be convincing to someone who is in the constant state of denial and sees no evidence, speaks no evidence, and hears no evidence. However, unbiased observers will take note of such behavior, and will notice on the fact that , well, one side avoids the issue, and projects their behavior on the other side, and ignores all the points presented.. and the other, well, presents facts and evidence.

plants did not exist before the sun.

Why not, if the light which they, the sun and the stars are made out of, existed a priori?

Did it?? Are you even using the term 'a priori' correct? Your sentence doesn't even make sense.

So, your statement comparing the Origin of Species and the Book of Genesis has been shown to be false and irrational.

Only if you take Origin of species literally and believe in the irrationality of evolutionary presumptions.

Wow, talk about mocking the Christian religion, by talking about a book about 'science' being taking literally. What it appears you are doing is equating how some people view the bible, and a book of science. They are not equivalent. It seems you are taking criticisms that you have heard directed against how some people interpret the Bible, and trying to project it on a book on science. This shows a lack of understanding about science, and the bible at the very same time.

That's a fairly ignorant comparison, unless you are being obtuse on purpose, which does not show maturity.

Charles Darwin pointed to physical evidence, such as the species that exist, and can be compared with each other, and the fossil evidence and geological evidence.

All of which we can equally see for ourselves and none of which prove either evolution or creation. Evolution and creation can only be imagined and believed in, never proved.

There is one factor that you are ignoring.. and that is 'Using the theory to make predictions on what will be found for new information'. The TOE makes testable predictions, and can be checked with future events/discoveries.. creationism only retrofits what is found (or denies it). Sorry, again there is no honest comparison.

[Neandertal Ned]

If your faith is in both God and evolution then pointing to evolution would be a confirmation of your faith. Pointing to evolution alone while denying the existence of God or mocking your Christian faith would not be a confirmation of your faith in God and evolution.

Ah ha. So you can believe in evolution and be a child of god. This goes against your previous claim:
- "trying to rob everyone else in the world of the priviledge of becoming a child of God."

Do you have problems with reading comprehension or just with following a logical argument?

[Artie]

If your faith is in both God and evolution then pointing to evolution would be a confirmation of your faith. Pointing to evolution alone while denying the existence of God or mocking your Christian faith would not be a confirmation of your faith in God and evolution.

Ah ha. So you can believe in evolution and be a child of god. This goes against your previous claim:
- "trying to rob everyone else in the world of the priviledge of becoming a child of God."

Do you have problems with reading comprehension or just with following a logical argument?

Is it God and evolution or God or evolution? Make up your mind.