Search results

  1. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Airbrushing the Evidence for Reverse Engineering in Biology: Darwinist Makes Wikipedia Reference ‘Disappear’ By Michael Egnor In the Soviet Union, censors would routinely make out-of-favor party leaders disappear from photographs... Darwinists, who are scientific, rather than...
  2. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Bruce Chapman and John West: Are the Darwinists afraid to debate us? We want a discussion of ideas 07:37 AM CDT on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 Nowhere is the free exchange of ideas supposed to be more robust or uninhibited than on college campuses. Thus, it is disheartening that...
  3. T

    Evidence of evolution: Sex ratio as a function of male competition

    James Bond 3rd: What nonsense. Right on the first page of my thread "ID isn't creationism" I said:
  4. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Ignorance Is Bliss When It Comes to Many Opponents of ID By John West A student at Southern Methodist University (SMU) has provided more evidence for why there needs to be events like tonight’s Darwin v. Design conference on college campuses. In today's campus newspaper, anthropology...
  5. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    James Bond 3rd: What I don't have is overwhelming evidence. Just as you don't have overwhelming evidence for abiogenesis. What a moron.
  6. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    James Bond 3rd: No. I bailed out when you demanded overwhelming evidence for a design inference.
  7. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    TraderNik, What post did I delete? And show where I said this: "I never said that I had empirical data to support the inference that the first cells were designed".
  8. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    TraderNik wrote: More lies. I said that one could build a circumstantial case based on subtle clues that the first cells were products of bioengineering. But you ID critics want "overwhelming evidence" and that translates to "show us the designer designing." If you are ever willing to settle...
  9. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Teleologist said: James Bond replied: Nice dodge. If you really had any evidence that Darwinism has contributed anything to advance the field of medicine you would have provided it rather than engage in ad hominem attacks.
  10. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Stu wrote: Wow! I can't believe you said that. Let's see you back up your bold claim. What knowledge has Darwinism contributed to microbiology, molecular biology, and the treatment of infectious diseases?
  11. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    2 cents wrote: Reverse engineering is fundamentally a design perspective. Even an atheist like Michael Ruse recognizes this: Imagine the following scenario. In the future, space travelers land on a sterile planet to colonize it. Upon mapping the planet, they find a strange conglomeration of...
  12. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Stu wrote: Nonsense. Darwinism hasn't contributed anything to advance medical science. Dr. Egnor succinctly points this out:
  13. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    The article you posted doesn't provide a shred of evidence that Darwinism is useful to medical science and medical students are not required to take courses on evolution.
  14. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Darwinists insult our intelligence when they claim that Darwinism is indispensable to any area of science or medicine By Michael Egnor Philip Skell, a member of the National Academy of Sciences and a pioneer in antibiotic research, said it best: Darwinism is a "narrative gloss" on...
  15. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Is Darwinism indispensable to modern medicine? By Michael Egnor Darwinists claim that their theory, which is the assertion that all biological complexity arose by random heritable variation and natural selection ("chance and necessity"), is indispensable to modern medicine. What was...
  16. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Do Scientists ever use the Design Inference in Biology? (Hmmm...let me think…) By Michael Egnor Orac, a prominent Darwinist blogger who is also a surgical oncologist, recently challenged me: It took me a while to answer, because there are so many examples of it that I couldn’t decide...
  17. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    ID is not anti-evolution. ID disputes that evolution is an entirely non-teleological process. ID is not creationism as most Americans would define it. The only way you can claim that ID is creationism is by defining creationism so broadly that 90% of Americans would be creationists.
  18. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    What if Darwinism Were True? By Michael Egnor I’m a faithful Catholic. I’ve often thought: what if Darwinism were true? I don’t mean all of the philosophical materialism that Darwinists drag along with the science. Materialism is nonsense, because if matter and energy are all...
  19. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    Darwinist Sleight-of-Thumb By Michael Egnor If you want a clear example of Darwinist sleight-of-hand, read the Panda’s Thumb tirade about my posts on the relevance of Darwinism to modern medicine. My interlocutors, between puns on my name, insults and obscenities, raise off-point topics...
  20. T

    Intelligent Design is not creationism

    TraderNik: Where was I ever proven to be a liar? You're the one that's lying. TraderNik: That's a lie. I never said anything about everyone being out to get me. As far as the first cells being designed, I said that one could build a circumstantial case based on subtle clues that...
Back
Top