Intelligent Reasoning

Promoting, advancing and defending Intelligent Design via data, logic and Intelligent Reasoning and exposing the alleged theory of evolution as the nonsense it is. I also educate evotards about ID and the alleged theory of evolution one tard at a time and sometimes in groups

Saturday, January 04, 2014

Richard T Hughes- Proud to be a moron

Richie spews:

Not to ‘peanut gallery’, but Joe has made the odd claim ” Heck the environment doesn’t even select.” If that were true, men, fish and birds would all be equally as viable underwater, in the air and only on land.

Non-sequitur, asshole. BTW men do swim underwater and we can also live underwater. Birds are viable underwater also- ever hear of penguins? And then we have lung-fish.

But anyway the environment doesn't select. Selection requires consciousness. You and Lizzie can say I am wrong but you will NEVER find anything that demonstrates it. And I am good with that.

Nature is blind and mindless. It cannot select anything you morons.

I will side with Mayr over Richie and Lizzie.

Geez Richie's non-sequitur is full of his ignorance.

BTW Richie, I have created a positive case for ID- you are just to much of a moron to grasp it and you are also ignorant of science because the design inference mandates that the non-design stuff be given consideration FIRST. IOW science mandates criticism of all lesser ideas.

That said YOU to create a positive case for your position that doesn’t require criticism of any other theory but stands on its own experimental and observational merit.

The Origin of Theoretical Population Genetics (University of Chicago Press, 1971), reissued in 2001 by William Provine:

Natural selection does not act on anything, nor does it select (for or against), force, maximize, create, modify, shape, operate, drive, favor, maintain, push, or adjust. Natural selection does nothing….Having natural selection select is nifty because it excuses the necessity of talking about the actual causation of natural selection. Such talk was excusable for Charles Darwin, but inexcusable for evolutionists now. Creationists have discovered our empty “natural selection” language, and the “actions” of natural selection make huge, vulnerable targets. (pp. 199-200)


Post a Comment

<< Home