On Darwin, On Darwin’s Day

Enough reading about Darwin. Write about Darwin. Just start typing.Ready? Go.PS, I’m on Alan Colmes’ radio show Thursday night at 11:00pm EST debating Ray Comfort about Darwin. Hopefully we’ll talk about bananas.

121 Responses to “On Darwin, On Darwin’s Day”

  1.  jcc says:

    Krys:

    No it’s not

    Yes, it is! Nyahhh!

    & what follows is a request for anecdotal evidence.

    I’ll even take that, so pony up!

    Keep your fallacies straight. I committed none.

    …that you’re willing to admit to, anyway…

    it’s ‘design’ is horrendously flawed

    Ahh, The World According to Krys, still PO’ed that he wasn’t given the job.

    How is it that a loving, ‘intelligent’ designer allows worms to burrow in living children’s eyes?

    And I see you’re still chompin’ at that theodicy bit… Ok, (you’re gonna love this) : for the same reason He gave a dog fleas… to remind him he’s just a dog, and not God.

  2.  jcc says:

    Krys:

    Correction: that should’ve read: “for the same reason He lets a dog get fleas…”

  3.  reluctantatheist says:

    jcc – apparently, you had ad hominos for breakfast this morning.
    A. Not an authority
    B. You won’t take any evidence, so not taking the bait
    C. I admit to having shortcomings. Just call me Gunga Din
    D. No, who’d want a job like that?
    E. Comparing something as horrible as eye worms to a dog getting fleas is just…it’s despicable. That’s not an answer: that’s AFU.
    What do the kids call that? Oh yeah – EPIC FAIL.

  4.  sisyphus says:

    jcc: Yikes! You got me…it wasn’t Japan in 1945. It was London in 1943! And it wasn’t mutation induced by radiation…it was thermal and/or acoustical shock. “Rare plants,unknown to British botany,were discovered in the bomb craters and ruins of London in 1943.” “Botany”,Britannica Book of the Year,1944,p.117 ……..Does this invalidate my claim that MASS MUTATION will result in some candidates for survival?…..(home schooling…I guess you get what you pay for..)

  5.  jcc says:

    sisyphus:

    Does this invalidate my claim that MASS MUTATION will result in some candidates for survival?

    No, but it does virtually nothing to support it… one little blurb under a photo with no accompanying detailed article is scientifically worthless. If you provided results of a controlled experiment that attempted and succeeded in duplicating such an event, then you’d have my attention.

  6.  jcc says:

    Krys:

    Comparing something as horrible as eye worms to a dog getting fleas is just…it’s despicable.

    Told ya you’d love it. ;)

    That’s not an answer

    …that you approve of… It’s a sound analogy as well as sound theology.

  7.  johnny b says:

    Evolution as described by Darwin is scientifically proveable. The problem is it covers a span of 4.6 billion years, which is a hard concept to visualize. Man has only been on Earth 2,000,000 years, and religion for about 2,000 years. In my opinion, religion is based on the fear of the unknown.

  8.  reluctantatheist says:

    jcc – that’s an awful analogy, a non sequitor of the highest order, and I hate to say this…but you’re an awful, horrible, horrible human being. Truly, your epistemology is horrid, bankrupt, morally devoid.
    As for ’sound theology’ that’s an oxymoron, as non-existent as the jackalope.

  9.  jcc says:

    Krys:

    I hate to say this…but you’re an awful, horrible, horrible human being.

    Let me get this straight… you have no problem at all calling me a moron, yutz, putz, idiot and dolt, but only now do you “hate” to say something like that???? And you say I’m disingenuous!

    your epistemology is horrid, bankrupt, morally devoid.

    Again, that’s according to you… and where do you get off on lecturing anyone on what is and isn’t moral???

  10.  reluctantatheist says:

    Let me get this straight… you have no problem at all calling me a moron, yutz, putz, idiot and dolt, but only now do you “hate” to say something like that???? And you say I’m disingenuous!

    As usual, you don’t get it.
    It’s gone from finger-pointing & laughing @ the village idiot, to something dark & more deeply disturbed.
    Seriously, please – seek help.

    Again, that’s according to you… and where do you get off on lecturing anyone on what is and isn’t moral???

    I don’t need the supernatural to keep me ‘moral’, that is, if we’re using the same definition.

  11.  jcc says:

    As usual, you don’t get it.

    Uh huh… ditto.

    Seriously, please – seek help.

    You bet, but being “dark and deeply disturbed,” I can’t conquer the urge to first go pull the wings off flies, or maybe something even worse… Lemme guess, you know a great humanist shrink who can quickly disabuse me of my “God delusion” that you can recommend.

    I don’t need the supernatural to keep me ‘moral’

    Guess who’s laughing at who now?

    that is, if we’re using the same definition.

    Hmmm? Mr. Eschew Absolutes? We ain’t even in the same ballpark.

  12.  reluctantatheist says:

    No, no, JCC, I do get…that’s part of what’s so horrifying about it.
    That you can equate something as horrific as eye worms in an innocent child’s eyes w/a dog getting fleas – your ‘creator’ (who probably for all intents & purposes doesn’t exist) is a miserable sadist. & you APPROVE of the sadism. You EXCUSE the mindless suffering.
    As for the ‘morality’ crap, it’s a hoary old chestnut, the shelf life of it expired some time a decade ago. So laugh away.

    Hmmm? Mr. Eschew Absolutes? We ain’t even in the same ballpark.

    Again, you have me confused w/someone else. I’m just as moral as you, just as empathic, just as human.
    No sky daddies need apply, that’s all.

  13.  NotSoFast says:

    Krystalline Apostate to jcc:

    You EXCUSE the mindless suffering.
    As for the ‘morality’ crap, it’s a hoary old chestnut

    Ignore the source. This message is true.

  14.  reluctantatheist says:

    Ignore the source. This message is true.

    That I NEED a supernatural higher power to be moral? I don’t think so.

  15.  NotSoFast says:

    Krystalline Apostate

    Ignore the source. This message is true.

    That I NEED a supernatural higher power to be moral? I don’t think so.

    You really are spoiling for a fight! Mischaracterizing your own quotes.

  16.  reluctantatheist says:

    You really are spoiling for a fight! Mischaracterizing your own quotes.

    Please elaborate.

  17.  neowolfe says:

    While Jcc admits himself that he doesn’t believe in his ancient book of gods and heroes, you guys continue to argue with him like he has some vague scientific point. Nothing in his bible explains the millions of years of evolution proven in the fossil record, nor explains that prehistoric whales have leg bones they no longer needed, nor why humans have a several segmented tail bone we still have though we no longer swing from trees. It’s okay to humor him by confronting the argument, but why do you guys let him drag it down to such an idiotic level?

    His bible is a farce on so many different levels, and evolution is so real on many more, why do you guys let him dictate the conversation? He’s a total tool and the lamest spin doctor of all, when he’s pinned in the corner he makes some vague philosophical bullshit generality, and most of you let him off the hook??? Why?

    NeoWolfe

  18.  neowolfe says:

    What the hell, I’m bored, I can waste my time playing pc games, or trying to put a rational thought in JCC’s inpenetratable skull. The idiot spewed this:

    “Done? All you’ve pointed out is how species are decimated or go extinct. You, like Krys, have failed to demonstrate or reproduce the process in which a totally new, morphologically distinct, species appears.

    You fucking idiot. LOL. If science has proven that a previously dominant species disappeared (reptiles) and a new one took it’s place (mammals), your question becomes so laughably absurd as to not warrant an answer. And you keep asking for us to reproduce it in the lab, which is not a point without validity, but now YOU reproduce your god in the lab, okay?

    What a mindless turd.

    NeoWolfe

  19.  jcc says:

    you can equate something as horrific as eye worms in an innocent child’s eyes w/a dog getting fleas

    I didn’t “equate” them. The two are the same in principle, hence the analogy. And innocence has absolutely nothing to do with it. The point is, everything (kids, dogs, and worms) are all part of the creation, and we should think twice about even kidding ourselves about ever being able to accomplish what He’s done.

    who probably for all intents & purposes doesn’t exist

    Probably??? Whoa! So now His existence has been promoted from “absolutely not,” to “probably?” What caused this change of heart?

    your ‘creator’ …

    Uh-uh-uh-a! If He exits, then He’s our ‘creator’!

    is a miserable sadist.

    That perception is most common among those who are in rebellion against Him.

    you APPROVE of the sadism.

    First, all suffering is not the result of God’s “sadism.” Second, I’ve never alluded to such a thing.

    You EXCUSE the mindless suffering.

    No, but I understand its nature and purpose.

    Again, you have me confused w/someone else.

    Nope. It’s you.

    I’m just as moral as you

    No, you’re not. We follow two distinct codes of morality. The one I strive to follow is not defined by me or the society in which I live. It is immutable. You follow what suites you.

  20.  jcc says:

    neowolfe:

    While Jcc admits himself that he doesn’t believe in his ancient book

    Please read my post in the On Forced Atheism thread ( http://tinyurl.com/avgo83 ) responding to, and refuting again, this asinine claim of yours.

    you guys continue to argue with him like he has some vague scientific point.

    You seem to be suffering from a selective short-term memory loss. Your words exactly from the On Forced Atheism thread:

    the content of your [jcc] posts, … do exhibit an fairly high order of intelligence.

    You seem to be exhibiting symptoms of schizophrenia.

    when he’s pinned in the corner he makes some vague philosophical … generality

    Please specify which “corner” I’ve been pinned in.

    You fucking idiot.

    Well that was original. Is that the best come-back you could come up with?

    your question becomes so laughably absurd as to not warrant an answer.

    Nice dodge. Again, all science has proven is that species go extinct; it’s clueless as to how new ones appear.

    now YOU reproduce your god in the lab, okay?

    He’s appeared many times throughout history, but historic events, as you’re well aware, cannot be repeated. However, He readily appears in every human heart that welcomes Him and the results are always publicly noticed.

    What a mindless turd.

    Make up your mind. Just 48 hours ago I had “a fairly high order of intelligence.” So, which is it?

    Both you and your son are in my prayers.

    And don’t be afraid to give those blockquotes a try. I know you can do it!

  21.  reluctantatheist says:

    jcc:

    I didn’t “equate” them. The two are the same in principle, hence the analogy.

    Yes, that’s equation all right.

    And innocence has absolutely nothing to do with it. The point is, everything (kids, dogs, and worms) are all part of the creation, and we should think twice about even kidding ourselves about ever being able to accomplish what He’s done.

    WTF? There’s an eye-crosser.

    Probably??? Whoa! So now His existence has been promoted from “absolutely not,” to “probably?” What caused this change of heart?

    That’s not a ‘change of heart’. Wow, you really DO pounce on any code words, don’t you?
    Still waiting for evidence. You’ve not provided any of substance.

    That perception is most common among those who are in rebellion against Him.

    Okay, I’m going to deal w/this once and for all.
    I’m not ‘in rebellion’. I’m not ‘jealous’. My atheism is a conscious, intellectual choice, not an emotional one, like yours.
    Your commentary indicates that you STILL think that you’re dealing w/a bunch of willful, fractious children who are simply denying this creator god of yours out of spite and/or desire to go doing as they please. Or whatever other rationales you’ve been spoon-fed by your ridiculous ideology.
    Which is why, after 3 years of doing this, you’ve made no headway @ all.
    Atheism is for adults, religion for children.
    End of that discussion.

    First, all suffering is not the result of God’s “sadism.” Second, I’ve never alluded to such a thing.

    Your hypothetical creator allegedly created everything, did it not? & yet when faced w/the greatest argument against this deity, you pull special pleading.

    No, you’re not. We follow two distinct codes of morality. The one I strive to follow is not defined by me or the society in which I live. It is immutable. You follow what suites you.

    Wow. This from the guy who can’t explain why his deity allowed slavery. I’d love to hear why Ham was punished for seeing his dad nekkid.
    ‘It is immutable’. What a laugh. The same codes that forbade women any kind of vote, allowed slavery, polygamy, pederasty, child brides – sad, sad little man you are.