~ Bush: "I'm God's Delivery Boy" ~

"Robey Price" wrote in message
...
After an exhausting session with Victoria's Secret Police, "Tarver
Engineering" confessed the following:

You are completely missing the point here, Robey.

The scientific method everywhere except evolutionists is:
That which is "experimentally demonstrable and repeatable" is a theory.

So please tell us what experiements Einstein conducted to explain his
theory of quantum physics? None...nothing in the lab, it was all brain
power. Yet Einstein's work was scientific in 1905.

Study up, Robby.

Darwin could NOT provide traditional scientific proof. He never
claimed he could, but he did assemble considerable nay overwhelming
circumstantial evidence for evolution. You will not see evolution in a
single creature...but you will see it between successive generations.

Darwin's followers made up their own "scientific method" which cased them to
engage in the worst kind of racism based on scientifically unsound ideas.

From the end of his Beagle voyage, Darwin spent six years working on
his theory before his first draft and a total of 22 years elapsed
before Darwin even published ANYTHING about evolution. In 1858 he read
Alfred Russel Wallace's own work on natural selection and finally
published his"On the Origin of Species."

Darwin has no theory, only a hypothesis that is experimentally demontrable
and repeatable can be scientific theory. Darwin's origin of species was
bull**** from the get go, but now we can know it is false. (geological
evidence)

Darwin wrote to persuade scientists and educated folks that evolution
was a BETTER explanation of the origin of a species than creationism.
To wit, natural selection was the plausible explanation. The book was
a direct assault on the Genesis myth.

Natural selection leading to species is bull****, false, not true.

Evolution as an origin of species fails even the evolutionist's own very
low
standard.

Man oh man, don't know where you come up with that. Evolution is
change...as permutation and combinations of alleles occur species
evolve. The Westminster Dog show is proof species evolve.

And here we are full circle to "the dog breeder's science".

After an exhausting session with Victoria's Secret Police, "Tarver
Engineering" confessed the following:

Darwin's origin of species was bull**** from the get go,
but now we can know it is false. (geological evidence)

Ahh yes...full circle...un-cited, non-specific, shadowy not for
attribution geological evidence...OK.

I await the publication of your proof.

Natural selection leading to species is bull****, false, not true.

Clearly you are the embodiment of "don't confuse me with the facts, my
mind is made up."

Have a nice day...

"Robey Price" wrote in message
...
After an exhausting session with Victoria's Secret Police, "Tarver
Engineering" confessed the following:

Darwin's origin of species was bull**** from the get go,
but now we can know it is false. (geological evidence)

Ahh yes...full circle...un-cited, non-specific, shadowy not for
attribution geological evidence...OK.

Why did you suppose Jay Gould created his 1300 page band aid?

I await the publication of your proof.

Natural selection leading to species is bull****, false, not true.

Clearly you are the embodiment of "don't confuse me with the facts, my
mind is made up."

Jay Gould's 1300 page band aid is an admission that Darwin's origin of
species through evolution does not happen. The hard physical geological
evidence discredited Darwin's fairy tale long before Gould attempted to
reconcile the two. By the 1930s quantum physics had proven that a vacuum
fluctuation might very well be Creation, from a human perspective.
Cosmology has tabbed on to some quantum origin of the universe, as there are
big problems with the big bang. Hubble has provided photographic evidence
that the genesis of the universe is an ongoing process.

So onward marches the Church of Darwin, in denile over all of science having
moved on from their dog breeder science.

After an exhausting session with Victoria's Secret Police, "Tarver
Engineering" confessed the following:

Why did you suppose Jay Gould created his 1300 page band aid?

Asked and answered...Gould was a prolific writer, he was trying to
educate and entertain that is why one particular work was 1474 pages
long.

Why is Stephen Wolfram's "A New Kind of Science" 1100+ pages long?
Answer: 200 pages was insufficient.

Jay Gould's 1300 page band aid is an admission that Darwin's origin of
species through evolution does not happen.

Really? I missed that in the preface, I'll go back to the library and
look for that admission. Guess the book could have been a magazine
article then.

The hard physical geological evidence discredited Darwin's fairy tale...

JT, sincerely I have no opposition to looking at the evidence you keep
referencing. For all I know you could be using the biblical flood myth
as your cite. Honest, cite for me...let me be the skeptic to your
claim. And just so you understand, I have ZERO problem with your
skepticism (denial) of biological evolution, I'm simply trying to get
you to cough up your evidence.

For me (and biologists, paleontologists, geologists etc) evolution and
natural selection offer the BEST, most logical explanation, based upon
the evidence gathered thus far.

By the 1930s quantum physics had proven that a vacuum
fluctuation might very well be Creation, from a human perspective.

This is an interesting statement. If not from human perspective (we
are human afterall) what other perspective would you reference (in
realtivistic terms)...I'm currently watching the relativity/quantum
physics lectures by Richard Wolfson PhD.

Cosmology has tabbed on to some quantum origin of the universe, as there are
big problems with the big bang. Hubble has provided photographic evidence
that the genesis of the universe is an ongoing process.

Considering the time it has taken the light to reach the Hubble
telescope, the redshift currently noted (expansion) can be in the past
or the "elsewhere". The universe could be contracting at the edges by
now, but our sun will have gone supernova (more than likely) by the
time the light (evidence) reaches our part of the galaxy. Of course
Prof Wolfson could be fabricating that.

So onward marches the Church of Darwin, in denile over all of science having
moved on from their dog breeder science.

Sorry JT, it would appear that ALL OF SCIENCE has not gotten the memo
that Darwin's theory has been disproven (and replaced by a BETTER
model). It all goes to a lack of supporting evidence, to say nothing
of some ulterior motive you seem to be placing on proponents of
evolution.

Why would a "darwinian evolutionist" (as a label for discussion)
object to adopting a better explanation? There is no reward to
clinging to a disproven theory. That is illogical.

Bottom line...I have nothing further to dispute your claims of
geological evidence. Nor do I understand how you have mentioned spurts
(for lack of better word) of biological change (which incidently
sounds a great deal like Gould's notion of Punctuated Equilibrium) and
said that natural selection is viable, but say evolution does not
occur.

I finally figured out your reference to Sanger had something to do
with social Darwinism and eugenics. Allow me to point out that the
abuse/application of science does not nullify the science. IOW, Nazi
claims about dirty jews and arayan superiority or KKK attitudes toward
blacks does not nullify evolution.

Juvat