Re: Rational Response Squad takes on Christians on ABC

I watched this and the full debate and I couldn't believe (sic) the ignorance or dowright dishonesty of WOTM when they pulled out the "transitional creatures" pictures.

These guys obviously do not have a clue about evolution (or they do and simply want to bamboozle others into thinking it's wrong).

Here is a little excercise to help illustrate the idea of transistional forms using ourselves as a strating point.

I know Richard Dawkins has used this analogy himself but I think it's worth re stating.

Species through evolutionary history are not discrete entities.

All living organisms are transistions.

Or put another way, every living organism is a transition.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Ray
• Comfort
• Kirk
• Cameron
• Kelly
• Brian
• Sapient
• Rational
• Response
• Squad
• God
• debate
• Christian
• atheist
• atheism
• science
• faith

[DaveJonesBSNews]

I'm suprised you didn't comment on how prepared both parties were. It was the worst atheist debaters vs the worst theist debaters. You think ABC could have used their immense resources to get maybe someone who could hold their own in a proper debate.

[ltzippy2]

There were many problems with the debate. RSS have actually admitted that they were not as prepared as they should have been so I decided to leave this. My problem is the ignorance or dishonesty of WOTM (or most creationists) with regards to evolutionary biology.

[DaveJonesBSNews]

I'd say it is dishonesty. Their arguements have been refuted so many times I can't believe they don't know about it. RRS should have watched their videos and produced a point by point rebutal. It's easy as WOTM arguements aren't new or changing.

[ltzippy2]

In know, not just RSS but many many others! What is it WOTM say, "Have you ever told a lie? The you're a liar!" Right back at 'em!

[CousinoMacul]

Dawkins has used the "ancestor chain" analogy to connect humans and chimps in a couple of his books. One of the main problems in the general understanding of evolution is that too many people still see "species" as being discreet and intrinsic distinctions.

[ltzippy2]

I know, and I think that this analogy should be used more often. As I said WOTM are being wilfully ignorant of the way evolution works or wilfully dishonest. Lets repeat this analogy as often as we can and hope it 'plants the seed of truth'

[clownsatemymonkey]

I think you fear crocaduck an it's divine power.

[automaticSOM]

humans are not descended from chimpanzees.They have a common ancestor. but some transitional forms include australopithecus aferensis , homo hagilis, homo ergaster, homo erectus, homo neanderthalensis, ect.... and finally homo sapien

[RationalConclusion]

Evolution is not a "figment of the imagination". Evolution is reality.

Why doesn't it make any sense to you? What don't you understand?

[DrEinstein100]

@RationalConclusion Have you never herd of micro-evolution? This entire world and all of it's wonders appearing from nothing a presto or always having existed, as some claim, and then moving by the tiniest degrees until it is what it is today, is the biggest figment of an imagination that that I can think of. It just doesn't make any sense.

[Shyhalu]

@theuserD Same reason that everytime I see a thiest its either a southern redneck hillbilly, A young guy using the technology that science produced to record himself disputing what science says about our origins, an old priest that molests boys, or an older man that preaches family values while breaking them IE: Ted Haggard

[CapsHockey100]

What is the origin of the first transition? Or using your analogy, that there is not much difference between immediate generations, because each generation is close to its parent, and that one is close to its parent, and so on. Where would the first parent come from? Could their be more than one 'parent?' Instead of common ancestor, common ancestors?

[53sled]

Obviously you are unfamiliar with Kelly O'Connor?

[theuserD]

why is it that every time I see an atheist its the typical neckbearded fat idiot???

[bdrman2004]

Thank you for you example, but you only pointed out that the theory of evolution is based on the understanding that it takes a long time for small changes to occur. We all are aware of this. The Cambrian explosion on the other hand totally disproves the theory of evolution and if you want to make a contribution to this subject i challenge you to explain how Darwin couldn't fit that into his theory. I hope you give that some consideration. Thank you

[RationalConclusion]

maglavagna is correct. Every fossil is indeed a transition fossil.  Evolution has an extraordinary amount of evidence to back it up which clearly shows it to be true. To not believe in evolution you've got to be either ignorant, stupid or insane.