"The Origin of Specious Nonsense"

sponsoredwalk

J C wrote: »

Kevin Myers 'hit the nail on the head', as far as I am concerned ... "Theories of evolution when tested on the origin of protein molecules, not to speak of DNA, usually imitate Mr Gladstone when replying to Queen Victoria's question: "Yes, prime minister, but what is it exactly that lesbians do in bed?"

Evolution cannot explain the most basic question about how a simple protein like insulin could have first been formed. "Simple" is a relative term: insulin is composed of 51 amino acids and has a molecular weight of 5808. Water is just 18. You can boil the primeval molecular broth for an awful long time and put it under enormous pressures, but you will not spontaneously create an insulin molecule, never mind one of the titin molecules, that have a molecular mass of almost 3,000,000 and a total length of almost 27,000 amino acids."

Like I have said Geocentrism and Evolution complement each other perfectly, in the 'observationally challenged' stakes!!!

Did you even read my post a minute ago where I answered this
claim of his? Here it is again.

J C

Wicknight wrote: »

I have a great penis but I'm not showing you is your chat up line? How that working out for you

zing! :P:pac:

... action speaks louder than words!!!!:)

Turtwig

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

Did you even read my post a minute ago where I answered this
claim of his? Here it is again.

Yep he read it.

How to read a post creationist style

vibe666 wrote: »

i think he just assumes that because he himself hasn't evolved since he checked himself in the mirror last week that evolution doesn't exist. see, FACT!

thats the problem with believing this 6000 years crap. once you close your mind to the idea that things could have happened over a much wider time period than that, it's impossible to comprehend that life could be continually evolving slowly over the course of thousands of generations during hundreds of millions or years.

when you base your whole life and beliefs on a 2000 year old book written by a bunch of bronze age farmers and are told that this is the unimpeachable word of god and that you must never question it, you get to a point where you can't allow for even the tiniest possibility that it might just be a load of crap written by people living in mud huts who didn't know any better and that there might just be other explanations now that we're a little more knowledgeable about our world and how it (and we) work.

the rest of us however understand that the scientists of today are building on the work of those that have come before them. continually questioning their predecessors works and improving and changing them as required when new ideas and discoveries present themselves and then building more on top of that for the next generation in turn to build from.

thankfully for those of us happy to be living in a modern world, science demands that we question everything about everything, hence the word "theory" being used to often.

we leave open the possibility that ANYTHING is subject to change if new evidence comes to light, but when something like the theory of evolution has stood up to the brightest minds in the world for this long, we can be 99.9999999% certain it's correct and that the word "theory" is only there to remind is that nothing is ever 100% guaranteed in science and it always leaves room for the possibility for things to change, just in case.

having said that, i'm pretty sure that the millions of qualified scientists who've studied and dissected Darwin's work over the last 150 years would pretty much all agree that John May, who freely admits that he ISN'T a scientist IS ARE a total quacks.

stevejazzx

Dougla2 wrote: »

yeah she put him in his place about the pomegranates too

Genius; tequila sunrises on me....

mikhail

Today I'm going to forget about anti-science and the rather sad and strange people who believe in it. Today, I'm going to celebrate. 175 years ago this day, Charles Darwin arrived in the Galapagos Islands.

Here's some of the BBC's incredible footage of the islands.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMIltYbSXBg

Dougla2

stevejazzx wrote: »

Genius; tequila sunrises on me....

you and me take her out for a drink and show her our appreciation afterwards ay? lol

stevejazzx

Dougla2 wrote: »

you and me take her out for a drink and show her our appreciation afterwards ay? lol

This is getting wierd...
I only wanted to buy the nice lady a drink for dismantling May, now I'm double teaming her with a stranger in some drunken pro-evolutionist orgy...I'm not sure I'm ready for this....then again...

Dougla2

stevejazzx wrote: »

This is getting wierd...
I only wanted to buy the nice lady a drink for dismantling May, now I'm double teaming her with a stranger in some drunken pro-evolutionist orgy...I'm not sure I'm ready for this....then again...

aww come on it'd be fun

sponsoredwalk

Malty_T wrote: »

Yep he read it.

How to read a post creationist style

That's good

I never would have been able to express it like that but you've captured my
feelings perfectly!

sponsoredwalk

stevejazzx wrote: »

This is getting wierd...
I only wanted to buy the nice lady a drink for dismantling May, now I'm double teaming her with a stranger in some drunken pro-evolutionist orgy...I'm not sure I'm ready for this....then again...

Weird how evolutionismists conversationisms evolve eh? :pac:

J C

darjeeling wrote: »

And if anyone's not heard enough of John J May yet, here he was yesterday on Phantom FM in debate with TCD Genetics lecturer Aoife McLysaght: link
(scroll down to 'Evolution Discussion')

Here you have an eminently qualified Scientist ... and an ordinary Dub debating ... and speaking as a scientist myself, I think that John gave an excellent account of himself.

He was passionate, courteous, articulate and proved his points, starting with a quote from a mutually agreed eminent Evolutionary Biologist Prof Lynn Margulis who is a passionate anti-Darwinist. http://www.uncommondescent.com/darwinism/lynn-margulis-challenges-neo-darwinists-and-teaches-somewhere-now-but-she-has-interesting-ideas/

Dr McLysaght, as you would expect from an eminently qualified scientist, was also highly articulate. However the DNA evidence cited by her as evidence for common ancestry is actually evidence for common designer ... as illustrated by the commonality of Banana DNA and Human DNA ... and this was pointed out by John May.

I would summarise it as an excellent debate between two highly articulate and competent people.

Turtwig

stevejazzx wrote: »

This is getting wierd...
I only wanted to buy the nice lady a drink for dismantling May, now I'm double teaming her with a stranger in some drunken pro-evolutionist orgy...I'm not sure I'm ready for this....then again...

Oh Gawd, people, this is the number TWO hit on the google search for the book title. Let's not make this good geneticist the topic of Kevin Myers disdain for dogmatic evolutionists and their repugnant erotic internet thoughts.

Dougla2

J C wrote: »

Here you have an eminently qualified Scientist ... and an ordinary Dub debating ... and speaking as scientist myself, I think that John gave an excellent account of himself.

He was passionate, courteous, articulate and proved his points, starting with a quote from a mutually agreed eminent Evolutionary Biologist Prof Lynn Margulis who is a passionate anti-Darwinist. http://www.uncommondescent.com/darwinism/lynn-margulis-challenges-neo-darwinists-and-teaches-somewhere-now-but-she-has-interesting-ideas/

Dr McLysaght, as you would expect from an eminently qualified scientist, was also highly articulate. However the DNA evidence cited by her as evidence for common ancestry is actually evidence for common designer ... as illustrated by the commonality of Banana DNA and Human DNA ... and this was pointed out by John May.

I would summarise it as an excellent debate between two highly articulate and competent people.

Your a scientist?

Oh god (ironic)

MagicMarker

J C wrote: »

He was passionate, courteous, articulate and proved his points

eh?

I actually thought he came across as quite aggressive tbh.

stevejazzx

Malty_T wrote: »

Oh Gawd, people, this is the number TWO hit on the google search for the book title. Let's not make this good geneticist the topic of Kevin Myers disdain for dogmatic evolutionists and their repugnant erotic internet thoughts.

Not anymore, google has evolved....dare I say spontaneously.

Turtwig

Dougla2 wrote: »

Your a scientist?

Oh god (ironic)

While I have stringent doubts about JC's claim that he is a scientist, all I have to do is remind myself of this guy to see that it is actually plausible.

sponsoredwalk

J C wrote: »

and speaking as scientist myself

:eek:

Stranger things Horatio, stranger things...

I bet we've got a creation scientist on boards :cool:

Dougla2

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

:eek:

Stranger things Horatio, stranger things...

I bet we've got a creation scientist on boards :cool:

I didn't know such a thing existed , WITCHCRAFT I TELLS YOU WITCHCRAFT (no offence to wiccans i love you guys )

Turtwig

Dougla2 wrote: »

Ididn't know such a thing existed , WITCHCRAFT I TELLS YOU WITCHCRAFT

No that would be the spontaneous eruption of eruption of man from muck.;)

stevejazzx

J C wrote: »

and speaking as scientist myself....

Having left out the all important 'a' in the above sentence I'm asuming there is a person or thing called 'scientist myself' and this person or thing has nothing to do with scienece. In which case I believe you.

J C

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

Did you even read my post a minute ago where I answered this
claim of his? Here it is again.

'Queen Victoria's question' still hasn't been answered by any of these papers ... HOW did the specific sequences arrange themselves spontaneously ... when we find that insulin is tightly specified (or in Evolutionist Speak 'highly conserved during Vertebrate evolution')!!!

Stop ponsing about ... and answer the question ... you might even win €10 Grand!!!
... or lose your faith in Evolution!!!

Turtwig

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

:eek:

Stranger things Horatio, stranger things...

I bet we've got a creation scientist on boards :cool:

Ooooh Oooh Ooh, I forgot! This marvellous scientist.

Dougla2

FCKIN love that show

J C

MagicMarker wrote: »

eh?

I actually thought he came across as quite aggressive tbh.

... just shows that you cannot be objective about the man ... who is a courteous gentleman to his (intelligently designed) fingertips.

stevejazzx

J C wrote: »

'Queen Victoria's question' still hasn't been answered by any of these papers ... HOW did the specific sequences arrange themselves spontaneously ... when we find that insulin is tightly specified (or in Evolutionist Speak 'highly conserved during Vertebrate evolution')!!!

Stop ponsing about ... and answer the question ... you might even win €10 Grand!!!
... or lose your faith in Evolution!!!

\hmmm treats diabetes and disproves evolution...handy hormone indeed.

Dougla2

J C wrote: »

... just shows that you cannot be objective about the man ... who is a courteous gentleman to his (intelligently designed) fingertips.

he has been aggressive on every radio program he is like Bill O'Reilly

stevejazzx

Dougla2 wrote: »

he has been aggressive on every radio program he is like Bill O'Reilly

"SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE"

[shows evidence]

"NO NOT THAT EVIDENCE..."

Repeat as required.

J C

stevejazzx wrote: »

Having left out the all important 'a' in the above sentence I'm asuming there is a person or thing called 'scientist myself' and this person or thing has nothing to do with scienece. In which case I believe you.

... stop nit picking and 'sweating the small stuff' ... this must be the Atheists equivalent of arguing about how many angels could dance on the end of a pin ... or some other such irrelevancy!!!!

There is an enormous evidentially challenged evolutionist 'elephant in the room' ... and the best you can come up with is to cite a typo on my part ... the non-inclusion of the letter 'a' in one sentence!!!!:eek:

J C

stevejazzx wrote: »

\hmmm treats diabetes and disproves evolution...handy hormone indeed.

Yes indeed!!!

mikhail

stevejazzx wrote: »

\hmmm treats diabetes and disproves evolution...handy hormone indeed.

"Treats" is a bit of a strange choice of word. Diabetes is essentially the inability to produce the stuff yourself. That's why diabetics inject it.

I'm confused by what I've seen of Meyers excrement reproduced here. Our bodies make insulin from other stuff. It's not like we first licked it up off the ground after it spontaneously appeared among pond scum. Which brings me neatly back to Meyers...