Creation Museum with PZ Myers

Care to join us?

http://www.secularstudents.org/conference/creationmuseum

Follow my Creation Museum adventure on Twitter:

http://twitter.com/healthyaddict

Secular Student Alliance Channel Coming soon:

http://www.youtube.com/user/secularstudents

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• healthyaddict
• healthy
• addict
• creation
• museum
• secular
• student
• alliance
• pz
• myers

[fctchk]

"Religion was invented when the first con man met the first fool." Mark Twain

[Prolific85]

this chick is hot. thumbs up if you agree.

[mrtadreamer]

@fctchk Really? Who was the first atheist.?

[Moppy1988]

@Prolific85 y so desperate?

[benthemiester]

@MeBeMat I'm not speaking of classical Darwinism which is a joke. That goes without saying. I am speaking of the neo Darwinian synthesis, or whats referred to to as the Modern Synthesis of Evolution. First it was the creationist who were challenged this axiom, then the ID theorist, & now you even have evo devo biologist like Stuart Newman or others like Mueller, James Shapiro, Scott Minnich, Phillip Skell and the "Dissent from Darwin" list that is almost a thousand strong and growing.

[MeBeMat]

@benthemiester I didn't say that Darwin's original proposal hasn't undergone modification as new data and research has come out, simply that the 150 years of research has been generally, but not perfectly, consistent with Darwin's original proposal.

[benthemiester]

@MeBeMat "150 years of peer-reviewed research that backs up the evolutionary model?"

It was the creationist Gregor Mendel (a man who we ignored for fifty years) who model gave us the law of inheritance, while it was Darwin's theory of Pangenenis that failed. That set us back fifty years alone. It was the creationist Edward Blythe that gave us the.....

[benthemiester]

@MeBeMat cont.... model of natural selection which explains variation but not macro evolution. All one hundred organs that were listed by Darwinist R. Wiedersheim in 1895 as being useless & vestigial have proven to have function and are anything but useless. For years ID theorist refuted the JUNK DNA paradigm which was once the poster child for evolution, (even wikipedia states that this false notion set us back) because we now know that these non protien coding regions of our genome

[benthemiester]

@MeBeMat cont,,,, are critical in gene regulation and expression as well as embryology. Neo Darwinist told us the ERV'S were ancient parasites and useless remnants of our past. We now know that they are so vital that we could not exist without them, and that they are not Junk. C value enigma has shown us that there is know way to determine an orgasms complexity on a genetic level which destroys the simple to complex paradigm. We now know that random ......

[benthemiester]

@MeBeMat cont.... mutations mostly deleterious and are limited and unable to produce novelty. Our understanding of biology is far more advanced than the early 20th century. If anything, the last thirty years have destroyed the model of the current modern synthesis. Your reading from an out dated mantra. Right now as we speak there are many evolutionary development biologist that are challenging the limitations of the modern synthesis and its central dogmas and babe been for years.

[MeBeMat]

@stormrider777 Yup, because your magical sky-man has so much more of a scientific basis, all us "evolutionists" just love to sin so we ignore God and all his lack of evidence. Do you seriously not see your double-standard here?

[MeBeMat]

@Solitarious2011 Darwin is referring to races as the archaic use of the word "species", but even if he weren't and you'd demonstrated that Darwin was a racist and IF that was the basis for his writings, how do you account for the ~150 years of peer-reviewed research that backs up the evolutionary model?