Evolution evidence: the truth

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chris_LaRock
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Chris LaRock:
True, men and women are different. I agree. But men have not attained to a higher eminence over women. This statement, as I already told you, implies that men are superior to women. Not just that they differ.
Click to expand...
Are there things men are better at than women? Are there things women are better at than men?

Peace

Tim
 
40.png
Orogeny:
Are there things men are better at than women? Are there things women are better at than men?

Peace

Tim
Click to expand...
Please read the quote again:

“The cheif destinction in ther intellectual powers of the two sexes is shown by man attaining to a higher eminence in whatever he takes up than women can attain, whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of his senses and hands.” Charles Darwin

Darwin is saying that the intellectual, reasoning, imagination, and motor capibilities of men are more developed than women. Not simply that there are things both sexes are better at than the other. Darwin is saying men have attained more advanced intellectual, reasoning, imagination, and motor capibilities than women.

Don’t you see that is what Darwin was saying??
 
Chris LaRock:
Please read the quote again:

“The cheif destinction in ther intellectual powers of the two sexes is shown by man attaining to a higher eminence in whatever he takes up than women can attain, whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of his senses and hands.” Charles Darwin

Darwin is saying that the intellectual, reasoning, imagination, and motor capibilities of men are more developed than women. Not simply that there are things both sexes are better at than the other. Darwin is saying men have attained more advanced intellectual, reasoning, imagination, and motor capibilities than women.

Don’t you see that is what Darwin was saying??
Click to expand...
What would you say are the difference between men and women?

Peace

Tim
 
40.png
Orogeny:
What would you say are the difference between men and women?

Peace

Tim
Click to expand...
Reproductive, horomonal, and body frame. (Females smell nicer too - lol) Darwin clearly stated that men are intellectually superior to women. I disagree with his assertion.
 
40.png
YahShuaMessiah:
Because your Holy, Righteous and Just God says “I AM”

You can wire me the money, please send me a PM and I will provide my banking information.
Click to expand...
Sorry, you are not a winner! Tim is right, that is not evidence, but faith, which is really more important in the long run anyway. While I personally agree that there is a God, I am afraid your statement is very far from indisputable evidence. Indisputable means it cannot be disputed or doubted and unfortunately with over 2% of the world being atheist (CIA World Factbook, odci.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html)), God is disputed and doubted. Let us pray He opens their hearts to Him and that His existence will never be doubted.

None of this is germane to this thread and you don’t seem to want to answer even simple questions that are so I will no longer detract from this thread with this nonsense. If you would like to create a new thread, by all means please do so.

Peace and Merry Christmas,

George
 
Here’s some for you, IF you are genuine in asking for FACTS rather than rhetoric.

This is an article written in the Nov 2004 issue of National Geographic. It is written for the layman and specifically addresses this controversy. It offers excellent definitions of terms, provides historical background and ACTUAL FACTS.

Was Darwin Wrong?
magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0411/feature1/fulltext.html

The intellectually constipated are privilaged to igonore this opportunity.
 
For those of you who are strict 6-day-young earth-creationists…

Do you believe that God is a liar?

Regardless of ones stance on evolution/ID/special creation, it is rediculous to believe that the earth & surrounding univers are only 6000 years old…the evidence just does not support it. For the last week I’ve been in an argument with my fundamentalist in-laws over the supposed ‘fact’ that there were dinosaurs on Noah’s ark.

There are many visible stellar objects that are millions of light years away. If we look at the Sombrero Galaxy (Messier object 104) which is 50,000,000 light years away and even assume that the margin for error in the measurement was +/- 50%…the universe would still be 24,994,000 years older than you think it is.

All of the natural evidence screams out that the Earth is old. That the universe is old…how old we don’t know for sure, but waaaay fricken older than 6000 years! God would have to be the great deceiver himself to intentionally create a universe that would appear to be old, but not actually be old. If you are right, the objects in the sky don’t actually exist the light was created to trick us! Nothing exists out side our own galaxy! NOTHING.

Either God is a complete and utter deceiver, a liar, and a trickster…or the Earth is old & the universe far older. Take your pick.
 
40.png
Isidore_AK:
And in case it hasn’t already been posted…

Here are extended excerpts from a book on Genesis by Pope Benedict (Cardinal Ratzinger at the time):

bringyou.to/apologetics/p81.htm
Click to expand...
Thanks for the link Isidore! I believe the fourth paragraph gives the Catholic position quite well! Way to go Pope Benedict! 👍

Peace & Merry Christmas!

George
 
I’m going to have to go ahead and agree with LaRock concerning the evolutionary superiority of men over women. Studies have shown that men have the capacity to be more intelligent than women, even though they are not always intellectually superior.

EDIT Sorry, I misread Larock’s reply…I agree that Darwin was talking about the intellectual superiority of men over women. However, I dissagree with Larock that it Darwin was mistaken.
 
L. Kraiger:
I’m going to have to go ahead and agree with LaRock concerning the evolutionary superiority of men over women. Studies have shown that men have the capacity to be more intelligent than women, even though they are not always intellectually superior.

EDIT Sorry, I misread Larock’s reply…I agree that Darwin was talking about the intellectual superiority of men over women. However, I dissagree with Larock that it Darwin was mistaken.
Click to expand...
I just want to clarify:

MEN ARE NOT SUPERIOR TO WOMEN! :mad:
 
Merry Christmas to all, may this be the last evolution thread I post in. Hard to keep track of them, I don’t check non-Catholic section that often. Some of these have already been posted. They are awesome and all on my site, except the last one on Kent Hovind. 👍

Evidence for an old Earth
How we knew the earth was old well before Darwin
Evidence for Evolution
Ratzinger and International Theological Commission on creation and evolution (paragraphs 62-70 especially)
Cardinal Ratzinger / Pope Benedict on Genesis, creation and evolution
Cardinal Schonborn on Genesis, creation and evolution
Adam, Eve, and the Hominid Fossil Record, a few theological answers
Why Gravity too is "Only a Theory", a parody of creationism
How we know Kent Hovind (Dr. Dino) is a stupid, ignorant, insane, wicked lying fraud

Again, Merry Christmas to all creationists, evolutionists, betweeners and fence sitters.

Phil P
 
I have not read much of Darwin’s works, so I can not comment if ‘ol Chuck said men are superior to women or not, however that line of thinking would be consistent with 19th century Europe (and America for that matter). Women were not typically taught subjects such as biology, physics, advanced forms of mathematics, etc., etc… This was due to the prevalent belief of those societies at the time that men were better suited to hard sciences. Yes, this is wrong, but we can not pin it all on Mr. Darwin any more than we can pin the evils of slavery totally on say Thomas Jefferson.

Peace & Happy New Year,

George
 
40.png
YahShuaMessiah:
I believe one brother on this thread provided a link to clain $250,000 if they could prove evolution. There is no evidence. Period. Plus, evolution is not a science it is a “theory”. I do realize Satan is blinding though so all cannot see God’s word.
Click to expand...
Ah, yes, you would be referring to “Dr.” Kent Hovind. His $250,000 “claim” has been around for years. Even among “Young-Earth Creationists”, Hovind is regarded as a kook (if not an outright demagogue) and fraud.

If you’re looking to convice people to your point of view, you need to find more reliable source material than Hovind.

Blessings,
 
Chris,

You have failed to provide any evidence that Nebraska Man is used to show evolution in any current school textbook.

You have failed to show any evidence of a Devonian cow.

You have not responded to my three points from my post #14.

So far you do not appear to have anything to back up your criticisms of evolution beyond bare assertion. You are going to have to show me some evidence if you want me to agree with you; so far the evidence is against you.
Chris LaRock:
Actually, evolution is only a theory.
Click to expand...
In my post #58 I said that evolution is both a theory and a fact. The fact of evolution is that the genetic makeup of an interbreeding population will change over time. This has been observed and is a fact. The theory of evolution explains how this change over time happens. Just like gravity is both a fact (things fall down) and a theory (how things fall down).

I also quoted AiG saying that this is not an argument that creationists should use. At least read AiG if you don’t want to read me. AiG are making a genuine effort to improve the quality of arguments used by creationists - you would do well to follow them in this.
Chris LaRock:
Creation does have science backing it up.
Click to expand...
I am afraid that a weblink to the DrDino site will convince few who are not convinced already since Kent Hovind has no scientific credibility whatsoever. Scientific backing requires scientific evidence, and so far you have not posted any.

rossum
 
40.png
YahShuaMessiah:
You attack me as if you know my identity…do you. Then please make no accusations.
Click to expand...
The only identity I know for you is the one you choose to use here - YahShuaMessiah. If you are actually Kent Hovind then I will withdraw my accusation of plagiarism. If you are not Kent Hovind then my accusation of plagiarism stands. I do not think that the long list of questions and the list of supplementals you posted was your own work and you failed to indicate the source from which you copied it. In my book that is plagiarism.

Furthermore I showed that part of your plagiarised post went over ground that had already been covered in this thread. Either you did not read what you were copying or you did not read this thread before posting. Or both. None of these option looks good for you.

Unless you are Kent Hovind then your identity does not matter. I personally find plagiarism to be dishonest - passing off someone else’s work as if it was your own. If you don’t want to be accused of plagiarism then either make sure that you give credit when you quote someone else’s work or alternatively make sure that everything you post is your owm.

Did you in fact copy your two first posts on this thread?

rossum
 
This is a cut and paste:

Forum Admin Forum Admin is online now
Administrator

Join Date: April 23, 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 2,204
Default Banned Topic: Private Information
Banned Topic: Private Information

Notice:

Please do not use these forums to solicit private information about other participants

If you so wish, you may PM me.
 
40.png
YahShuaMessiah:
This is a cut and paste:

Forum Admin Forum Admin is online now
Administrator

Join Date: April 23, 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 2,204
Default Banned Topic: Private Information
Banned Topic: Private Information

Notice:

Please do not use these forums to solicit private information about other participants

If you so wish, you may PM me.
Click to expand...
YahShuaMessiah,

I don’t think anyone here is soliciting your personal info…what we are doing is accusing you of plagiarizing Kent Hovind.

Just make sure that if you cut and paste an argument that you cite your source. Intellectual dishonesty does NOT help your argument.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top