www.ldolphin.org/wmwilliams.html
does this site disprove evolution? if not, how do you disprove the site?
[after a couple of people pointed out the pamphlet was from the 1920s and laughable]
I undertand why you dont want to read it.
28 comments
Yes, because a horribly-translated 2000 year old book, which has been edited countless times and with far more bias than any textbook, is far better than an expansive field of research which constantly tries to improve itself.
Then again, I'm not surprised someone who'd quote a pamphlet from the 19freaking20's would shit bricks at the slightest hint of change.
The bible was rewritten, rewritten, rewritten, echo, echo, echo...
You're talking points have remained the same for decades, and have remained equally wrong. Science has improved, and shown that the old Creationist positions were even more wrong than were originally expected.
But yes, science updating itself is indicative of flaws. Obviously, we must trust the Bible due to that fact. Perfect sense.
"So what if its written over eighty years ago?"
We've discovered one or two things since then. Technology has advanced a tiny bit too.
"The Bible "...it is written""
Yeah, yeah. It says a lot of things. It also says, "In the beginning..." and goes downhill quickly from there.
"The Evolutionary Textbook, it is rewritten, rewritten, rewritten, etc."
No shit stupid. That's what makes it fucking valuable.
Why argue about a poorly written, 80 year old, fundie propaganda, anti-evolution pamphlet that was obviously written as an advertisement to sell the author's books for profit?
Hey, dingbat. Please learn that new information being added to a textbook, or revisions taking place, is not a BAD thing. It means we have more understanding, douche-clown.
The Bible "...it is written"
Yes, one must admire one's willingness to remain wrong, whatever the truth may be.
It looks like it contains another one of those population growth curves that just absolutely disproves evolution .
Except that it's not even internally consistent.
Major world events sometimes involving millions of people per local event--according to the guy's own supposed history--took place on a world with double- and triple-digit human populations.
Don't they check still crap before publishing? Don't people actually think when they're reading it?
That's the good thing about science. It does change when evidence is found, observed, tested, and proven. It's better than "well, a bunch of old men way the hell back in the day decided that this is the way things should go, so people in the twenty-first century should think the same."
"The Evolutionary Textbook, it is rewritten, rewritten, rewritten, etc."
And thats a good thing. Jeez.
Also - Nationstates? Fundies really are everywhere.
The Bible "...it is written"
Yup, and it gets better everything time, unlike the bible, which stays just as wrong as ever.
I have to say the mathematics argument kinda breaks down when you realize even the Bible contradicts it.
IanC - yes, we occasionally get fundies on the Nationstates General forum. They don't tend to last long but they do make a wonderful BBQ whilst they're there.
Well lets use their math.
They claim the population of the earth is 1,073,741,824 in 1925.
So by 2093 the population of the world will be 2,147,483,648
Oops.
Over 80 years ago your computer wasn't even a glimmer in someone's eye.
Times have change. People have learned. New theories, and technologies, have developed.
So, your argument is?
"The Evolutionary Textbook, it is rewritten, rewritten, rewritten, etc."
It better be... that's precisely how our understanding of the world gets better and better.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
