quote:

---

To: the editor
From: 666 666

Greetings:
I've noticed Dr. Kimes' "Creation Curmudgeon" article. I just thought I'd provide some correction:

* Bumper Sticker: "Evolutionists meet your maker - play the Lotto."
This is repeating the lie that it's only "random chance" that's involved in evolution. If you wanted to present evolution as evolutionists actually see it, then your doctor Kimes could have a look through these articles.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/fitness/
http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/wieland_information_pp.htm


The first one especially describles how natural selection PLUS mutations, etc. that are involved in evolution. There's a lot more to it than the inaccurate picture the bumper sticker lets on. How about some honest representations of the other people's positions?

Then there is this saying:
"In evolution, only the fittest survive. You're on your own. With God, the righteous, and you have help. "

With all due respect, I think that Sept 11 has pretty much disproved that statement. For all the "good" that God did them, those people may as well have been on their own, because they obviously were. For an evolutionist's take on this, see: http://www.ffrf.org/dawkins.html where Dawkins said:
"The resilience of this form of hereditary delusion is as astonishing as its lack of realism. It seems that control of the plane which crashed near Pittsburgh was probably wrestled out of the hands of the terrorists by a group of brave passengers. The wife of one of these valiant and heroic men, after she took the telephone call in which he announced their intention, said that God had placed her husband on the plane as His instrument to prevent the plane crashing on the White House. I have the greatest sympathy for this poor woman in her tragic loss, but just think about it! As my (also understandably overwrought) American correspondent who sent me this piece of news said:


"Couldn't God have just given the hijackers a heart attack or something instead of killing all those nice people on the plane? I guess he didn't give a flying f--about the Trade Center, didn't bother to come up with a plan for them." (I apologize for my friend's intemperate language but, in the circumstances, who can blame her?)
Is there no catastrophe terrible enough to shake the faith of people, on both sides, in God's goodness and power? No glimmering realization that he might not be there at all: that we just might be on our own, needing to cope with the real world like grown-ups?"

Let's face it; that actions of a non-existant God seem to be identical to those of yours, therefore Dr. Kimes cute statement about God being on your side (an obvious effort to emotionally manipulate people) is exposed as another falsehood. What "help" did God give?



LAST TOPIC:

Then there is http://www.creationequation.com/HokieScience.htm were you talk about "Piltdown man", "Nebraska Man", etc. You realize of course, that all of those were found out by other evolutionists.You never mention any of the creationists hoaxes. Why? Is it because you want to give the impression that only evolutionists fall for this? Let me help you:, here are some examples of creationist mistakes:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_anomaly.html#calaveras -->the Calavars Skull

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy/meister.html --> the Meister Print

http://members.aol.com/Paluxy2/wilker5.htm -->the Burdick Print

http://members.aol.com/gkuban/moab.htm -->Moab Man, resurrected as Malachite Man

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy.html -->the Paluxy man and dinosaur prints.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy/tooth.html -->a fish tooth mistaken for a human' tooth

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_anomaly.html#freiburg--> " Whitcomb and Morris (1961) claim that a skull stored at Freiburg in Germany is far older than evolutionary theory would allow. Creationist Wayne Frair has shown it to be a fake, molded out of pieces of brown coal (Frair 1993)" (at least it's one of the few times creationists have corrected each other!)

then there's http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy/plesios.html--> a basking shark mixed-up with a plesiosaur.

" In the never-never land of mega-evolutionary make-believe, this was not the first, and unlikely to be the last example of science gone fishing. "

Since you creationists have made more mistakes than evolutionists have, (and one of your contributers, Dennis Peterson of awesomeworks.com STILL spreads these hoaxes around), you people would serve yourselves well by heeding Jesus' advice to: take the beam out of your own eye before you can see to take the speck out of your brother's eye, and refrain from making these self-righteous statements since the exposed creationists hoaxes have shown there to be more make-believe in creationism than evolution so far.



(something about Haeckel):

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/wells/#haeckel-embryo



Thanks for reading:

---

quote:

---

I honestly don't know why I keep doing this

---

quote:

---

October11, 2002

Dear Mr.-----

Your words address an issue that deserves endorsement: absolute academic integrity irrespective of the issue. To intentionally embrace fraud as fact in the name of science is dishonorable. In our quest for understanding life’s origin, we encounter limits to finite comprehension. At that point, it’s time to stand back and acknowledge how little we know.

To his credit, Darwin recognized the shortfall confronting his own speculations. …I am quite consciousthat my speculations run beyond the bounds of true science….It is a mere rag of an hypothesis with as many flaw[s] & holes as sound parts. (Charles Darwin to Asa Gray, cited by Adrian Desmond and James Moore, Darwin, (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1991) pp. 456, 475).

God often takes a bum rap when His character is misrepresented by some who claim to be His agents. Instead of an all-powerful, loving Being capable of speaking life into existence, ugly caricatures distort the picture. Many depict God as a tyrant, bent on vengeance, eager to destroy the disobedient---to blame for all the world’s hurts. At least two things in Darwin’slife led him to reject the ritualized religion of his day: the heart-wrenching death of his ten-year-old daughter and the doctrine (erroneous) that God would unleash vengeance on all sinners by torturing them in hell fire forever.

Turned off by a religion prevalent in his culture, Darwin reached out for an alternate explanation of life---without the sophisticated tools available to modern science. Still, while the guru of evolutionism floated his opinion arguing for biological evolution, he was wise enough to recognize he lacked the faintest clue explaining the spontaneous generation ofa living cell from inorganic matter. ...Science as yet throws no light on the far higher problem of the essence or origin of life. (CharlesDarwin, The Origin of Species, (New York: Random House, 1993), p.637).

The allegedly simple, primitive, cell seen by 19th century evolutionists as a mere blob of protoplasm arising spontaneously from unknown, primordial soup, has proven to be superstitious nonsense.  Microbiologist Michael Denton speaks for contemporary science.

To grasp the reality of life as it has been revealed by molecular biology, we must magnify a cell a thousand million times until it is 20 kilometers in diameter and resembles a giant airship large enough to cover a great city like London or New York. What we would then see would be an object of unparalleled complexity and adaptive design. On the surface of the cell we would see millions of openings, like the portholes of a vast spaceship, opening and closing to allow a continual stream of materials to flow in and out. If we were to enter one of these openings we would find ourselves in a world of supreme technology and bewildering complexity. . . .The simplest of the functional components of the cell, the protein molecules, were astonishingly, complex pieces of molecular machinery, each one consisting of about 3,000 atoms. . . .What we would be witnessing would be an object resembling an immense automated factory . . . larger than any city and carrying out almost as many unique functions as all the manufacturing activities of man on earth . . . a factory which would have one capacity not equaled in any of our own most advanced machines, for it would be capable of replicating its entire structure within a matter of a few hours. (Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crises, (Bethesda, Maryland: Adler& Adler, 1986) Â pp. 328-329).

Given the mathematically impossible eventuality that this complex cell could organize itself without an Intelligent Designer, evolutionism drops dead at the starting gate, the anchor to its faith demolished.Â

---

quote:

---

Yep, an IDer, Micheal Denton. Maybe I should give this url back to them: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/denton.html

---