betsy

Translation: We can't dispute her claims...so we try another tactic.

Here's an excerpt from:

Thank you for giving an example of a classic distortion of fact! So now, it's everything-science that's under attack!

Note: Post #307 and #309 were edited and some additions have been made.

Hundreds of "missing links" had been claimed to have been found. It's not the "finding" and the "claiming" that matters.....it's the conclusion. Anyway, that same article also has this to say: So, it's to be offered as a distraction because of the economic woes...a form of "escape", like going to the movies? Like watching Star Trek....Planet Of The Apes...Planet Of The Apes Returns.....Planet Of The Apes Returns Again.... ....or....like a carnival side-show? Say Hello To Gramma.

Ha-ha-ha.....you want science to be confined to just one teeny-weeny area....biology? My "wiggle room" is too much to take? Why would I only confine it to biologists? What will happen to the authoritative contributions of Mapleleaf evolotionists posters?? Furthermore, what will we do without the opinion of physicists, geologists, archeologists, paleontologists and to include the ultimate authority, geneticists???? Surely these fields have something to contribute in the "evolution" of the universe. OMIT these areas of science???? In other words, you want to manipulate the truth. Is this some kind of a joke? The irony....you are defending his credibility and yet at the same time, you want us to omit.... to do exactly what he did! I should point out that your suggestion is not helping Dawkins at all.....in fact, it only proves my point about credibility! AND this is an example that some followers mimic their master! Let me repeat: OMISSION OF FACT, whether deliberate....or through negligence....or through irresponsibility, is damning to credibility! Tell me, why should I take you seriously, let alone bother responding? By your reply it shows you really have not followed all the pertinent threads that's inter-related. If you have, you wouldn't be asking or arguing what's already been discussed, argued and rebutted. Check out post #1 on this thread and read it well! Dawkins said a lot about Einstein's views! So I mistakenly wrote "ID" instead of Divine Intelligence! My mistake....but really, what's the difference? How absurd....you accuse me of lying for saying he believes in ID (or Divine Intelligence), and yet on the very next sentence you redeemed me! You said he was a Deist! Therefore, he believes in a god or God! Well? Btw in that Post#1, it shows, Dawkins himself grudgingly admitted to the possibility of Design. Seriously, I think Dawkins is beginning to struggle with his own inner conflict....just like Darwin did! Anyway, for everyone's convenience I've deliberately created three threads: REJOICE ON THIS DAY, DARWIN and this one. Of course, the thread by Jdobbin, CANADIANS DIVIDED... is also related. I suggest you read everything!

But surely you must love it best when Dawkins tar Creationists, and all religion, and all who have faith in God. Supposed to. But what happens when a scientist like Dawkins is a fanatical Atheist consumed with contempt and ridicule for all religion and everyone who have faith? The evidence speak for themselves. I'm sure. But his credibility is in question when it comes to the truth of origin. There's this conflict of interest that come into play! That omission he did on Einstein's belief on ID is damning! And your problem is your incapacity to understand that the man is not credible wearing those hats. You may say he is capable.....but the question is: is he credible?

If you see no need for God....that's your decision. As for supportable claims, I thought I've only my faith.....until I accidentally discovered some facts while debating on this thread. I don't know if you've been on that particular thread, REJOICE ON THIS DAY. Well, evidently there's more weight to ID, as supported by several scientists and learned men. Imagine that, to think that what's supposed to be impossible to prove is actually drawing these men towards that direction....

Btw, there's a book by Vox Day titled: The Irrational Atheist (Dissecting The Unholy Trinity Of Hawkins, Harris and Hitchens). And the following is part of the review of this book by an Atheist blogger named Brent Rasmussen. -------------------------------- In the first chapter Day makes the following audacious statement: Now, he does get quite a bit theological in the late chapters of the book, as I describe below. The theological and philosophical speculation runs deep. (Hah! Gotcha Vox! Take that! Pow! *Biff!*) This was actually the part of the book I enjoyed the most. But in the beginning chapters where he addresses each author's book, Day proceeds to do exactly that. He scrupulously breaks down many of the arguments and claims made by Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens, Dennett, and Onfray in their books, and then demonstrates, with meticulously detailed footnotes and references, why each one is flawed in some fashion - logically fallacious, historically inaccurate, mathematically incorrect, or statistically flawed. It was actually painful for me to read. This is due to the fact that that I really do respect Richard Dawkins and his scientific accomplishments, as well as Daniel Dennett's heady forays into philosophical thought. I also absolutely love listening to Christopher Hitchens speak and debate. As for Michel Onfray and Sam Harris? Eh, not so much, but I do appreciate their ability to raise awareness and articulate some of the same things that I have thought about myself over the years and to put them into commercially successful books. I am not going to go into a point by point review of the various arguments that Day addressed in TIA. Suffice it to say that by the end of the chapters dealing with the individual authors, I was happy that it was over. It was a thorough, detailed, dispassionate (with a little snarky levity thrown into the footnotes for flavor), and completely disheartening take-down of some of the best arguments that the godless have put into print - on their own terms, without using the Bible (in the first part of the book, that is), or any other sacred text to do it with. Amazing. And depressing. It is not my place to defend their books. I truly hope that they do find time to defend and clarify their books, specifically to the counter-arguments and claims made by Vox day in TIA, though, because they really need to. Trust me, it wasn't pretty. http://www.unscrewingtheinscrutable.com/node/1727

No, I'm not calling all Atheists his minions and disciples. I think it's pretty clear why I call him the Evolutionists' Fundamentalist Preacher. You have to read all the way from the beginning of this thread....and the thread Canadians Divided On Creation/Evolution.

Well....the empirical evidence on Dawkins and minions speaks for itself. All I did was present them. That it questions his credibility - no doubt about that, and I'm not denying that - is through no fault of anyone, - not me or Flew or anyone who questions it -, but Dawkins himself! He wrote the book! He was the one who did the omission! So? Take careful note that the Philosopher exposing his sort-of-deception used to be an Atheist ...he used to be one of you guys! BUT with stature, special qualifications and no small amount of achievement! It's the blind effort and oh, the creative contortions they go through....that goes among shell-shocked followers still in denial that I find.....rather amusing!

Disciples keep chanting about the empirical evidence....(empirical evidence, empirical evidence, empirical evidence).... ...yet they can't see what's clearly empirical evidence on Dawkins and minions!

Antony Flew states: Dawkins, in his book, used Einstein and touched on morality, personal God, purpose of life, and Einstein's religious views. And yet Flew charges that he failed to mention Einstein's most relevant report: Einstein's view on Intelligent Design! We know - and it's quite clear - why Dawkins omitted this information! It goes against what he is trying to advance! So the question now: What other facts or important findings that merit considerations - in the realm of science, especially those that goes against what he is trying to advance - did he omit, or suppress? So why should he and his co-horts be taken seriously as scientists? Dawkins didn't really follow the ethics or principle of true journalism on non-fictional writing ...why do we assume he'd follow the ethics and true principles of science? Dawkins is very much caught up in his own religion. He is just like any other preacher of any religion, although he definitely falls under the category of fundamentalist! His belief is that there is no God.

Whew....the waters getting too murky around here. Evolutionist followers make it appear that the whole scientific field is under attack....when the truth of the matter is that only a few scientists - the fundamentalist, fanatical few who use science to advance their Atheistic views are. Only those who fanatically follow Dawkins! What is lost to the disciples of Dawkins - what they refuse to see, what they blindly ignore, or perhaps what they genuinely do not comprehend - is the fact that Dawkins' credibility as a scientist is in question! Omission of fact, whether deliberately ...or through negligence ...or through irresponsibility, is damning to credibility!

No, it's not making too much of it. It just so happen that it collaborated with all the other incidences that have been mentioned on this particular thread - specifically the ones that point to his fundamentalistic attitude and approach towards God and faith. His focus is too much on Religion/God. On Atheism. That puts into question his reliability and credibility when it comes to his scientific opinion of ID!

And just giving the Atheists' responses and replies on this board as an example.....one can see through the ploy! This has nothing to do with the scientific search for the truth of origin. Although that's what they want us to believe. This is all purely about establishing Atheism! And the primary concern is to discredit the idealogical opponent by any means! Well, if the master is doing it....and the disciples are following the lead of their master....why should we even bother listening to their.....lies, er I mean....out-of-context and distortions...half-truths and half-lies....some truths and some lies....and extrapolations... They can give all the sources and all the links in this world saying this and saying that...proving this and proving that....refuting this and refuting that.... But who wants to sift through all that muck?

WHOA! Did I read that Antony Flew article right???? Albert Einstein.....a deist, too?

Wanna see a real whopper? Go to DAWKINS thread! Post #259. But I'm telling you now, I won't be responding to you if you write more rubbish like the one you just wrote above! Ain't gonna happen, babe!

Extra! Extra! Read all about it! Dawkins' credibility on the line! Extra! So now we know who inspires the fundamentalist evolutionist disciples in the art of manipulations and distortions of truths! They mimic their master!

Hey WIP, we both haven't heard about this guy so anyway I found a little bit about Antony Flew from the "product description" of the on-line bookstore selling his book. It's a Christian bookstore, mind you....but still, it gives a bit of info about him. You guys should read his book....to understand exactly what led to his conversion. Okay, that's all. I'll just step out of your way so you can all resume your desperate emergency patch-ups, out-of-context manipulations, twist-and-turns, and creative extrapolations!

Oh boy, the "Atheism-cum- Evolution Damage Control " is in full swing! The Fundamentalist Brigade came out! ALL HANDS ON DECK! It must be serious. I know you guys are very busy buzzing and scrambling, but can l please interrupt you to share this news: Antony Flew did not just convert from Atheism to Deism. Apparently.... He also wrote a BOOK! And the title of this book? Tadaaaaaa..... There is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind By: Anthony Flew

As for the rest of the responses to my last post....to quote Molly...."a'nt gonna happen." Nothing worth replying to. Bye. I've said my piece. That's fact. Take it or remain in blissful denial!

This coming from someone who deliberately took my statement out of context! I no longer have any intention of discussiing or debating with you!

What irony! Sometime ago, Atheists like archeologist Ramsey, Morrison, Greenleaf set out on an investigative mission to debunk Christianity.....only to find themselves believing and converted to the belief they've sought to disprove. Refer to the thread REJOICE ON THIS DAY. Sometime ago, Atheist Darwin set out on a mission - presenting a scientific theory - that would've proved that there is no God....only to find himself doubting his own theory, conflicted, capitulated and tormented by the possible existence of God. Refer to the thread DARWIN. A century later, some highly qualified Atheist scientists veered away from that same theory that would've proved there is no God.....and found themselves not only believing in God, but also converting to Christianity. Refer to thread REJOICE ON THIS DAY. About the same time, some scientists veered away from the same theory that would've proved that there is no God....and found themselves facing an "Intelligent Design"....or an "Intelligent Designer." They prefer to call Him "ID" instead of GOD. About the same time, an Atheist Philosopher known to be a legend among Atheists embarked on several debates....only to find himself converted to the belief that there is a God. About the same time, Atheist Dawkins, "the bulldog of Darwin," set out on a mission to confirm the evolution theory (and more so to debunk the existence of God)....only to find himself manifesting the beginnings of symptoms similar to that which had plagued his master, Darwin. He publicly admitted to the possibility of Design. Refer to the thread on DAWKINS (Fundamentalist Preacher) History repeating itself..... and persistently...consistently showing the Faith that endures.

Phooey! All that nonsense about us all coming from one is the most ludricous fairy tale that's being touted about. The theory of ID by other equally qualified scientists (like as if evolutionist scientists are the only ones) and the admissions by these three men clearly bust that one! Never proven then....not proven now....will never be prooooven! Of course not. I don't even really follow these men....am I an Atheist now? I do my own research of the Bible, remember? BUT when Darwin, the man who gave the theory of evolution questions his own theory, capitulated to Design (and was torn and tormented by it until his death), and several EQUALLY-QUALIFIED scientists debunks Evolution and supports the theory of ID, and a long-time Philosopher said to be a legend among Atheist suddenly does a 180 degree and embraced deism.....and when the "bulldog of Darwin," himself starts admitiing the possiblity of Design....no, that don't make them Christians. That, however, puts Atheism in a very shakey situation. After all, two of these men are scientists behind a theory that would have debunked the existence of any god! Am I relying on just mere quotes of Darwin???? Read the letter exchanges of Darwin and Asa Gray! You should....so you can verify the whole context! Have I heard any of those men I enumerated in "REJOICE ON THIS DAY" thread? Being such important men they've become to Christianity? It's because he is a PHILOSOPHER and not a scientist! Also, see the meaning of Deism below. Hint: rational. What a distortion! Suddenly believing in the existence of a god is not "baby steps!" From Atheism to Deism, I call that a giant leap indeed! According to Webster: Deism - belief in the existence of a God on purely rational ground without reliance on revelation of authority. Keep in mind the important fact that this Antony Flew is a Philisopher, therefore this life-changing decision did not just happen without any serious thought.....very, very, very serious rational thinking invovled. Being an Atheist, do you believe in any god? Being a Christian, I do! So that leaves him closer to where? What do you think? He is as closer to Christians and to Muslims and anyone who believes in God......than ATHEISTS! What a silly question, really! I don't really care what he believes in....it just so happens that his sudden change to deism from atheism (and the reason behind it) supports my argument. But I'm glad he did change to Deism. That's a start. He is on a spiritual journey....hopefully, his travel will lead him to Christ. Either you don't mean what Deism means or..... you're lashing out blindly. You're in denial.