Quote# 40185

[When asked what would prove evolution to him]

interesting question....I don't know about scarlets but if I came across proof of evolution from monkeys I'd probably just go ahead and start a life of crime or engage in something real risky and exciting. If i was just an evolved ape, made in the image of a bug-picker, nothing would really matter.

supersport, CARM 14 Comments [5/31/2008 6:17:57 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By: Zoda

Quote# 39295

My first Hitler thread

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok so it seems to be a form of entertainment for some Christians to point out that darwinism and Hitler's behavior (killing) goes hand-in-hand. I usually stay out of those types of arguments because I already have enough enemies as it is. But my honest opinion about it is that atheism -- which ToE is the offspring of -- offers absolutely nothing in the way of a moral reason not to engage in the killings and other atrocities that Hilter and other atheists (such as abortionists) engage in. Of course this is not to say that people of faith are perfect, but at least Christians have a moral foundation of what's right and wrong.

But what gets me is the tenacity that evos will distance themselves from Hitler and deny that (at least in part) he used darwinism as justification for the murders he committed. But seriously, what's the big deal?...why be ashamed of it? Hitler may have killed millions of people and done all sorts of torcher on thousands or millions of others -- but what's wrong with that?...under ToE, the world was built on survival of the fittest....so just because someone happened to come along who enjoyed killing people for his own pleasure and/or power should not be looked down upon by evos....just as a butterfly who flutters around in the garden shouldn't be looked down upon. They're just different animals ----- one isn't better or worse than the other because each was just an accidental product of evolution. How can we expect someone or something to act moral and "right" when they are nothing but an accident and also a prisoner of the genes they were dealt in life? We certainly don't look down on lions for killing zebras...why should evos be afraid of being associated with Hitler, who killed the Jews? What's the difference? Why try to act all moral on these boards when there is nothing inherently immoral about killing? Heck, your whole theory is built on the construction of life via death -- you evos are obsessed with it....so why not embrace it openly and in public?

Supersport, CARM 60 Comments [5/15/2008 8:33:22 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By:

Quote# 39221

[Supersport is trying to claim that Richard Dawkins is as unreliable as oral tradition of 'the ancients', the whole back and forth is full of this non-sense.]

...we have no way of confirming what Richard Dawkins has "observed." There are no pictures, videos, procedures, data sets....or anything else. Prove me wrong.

supersport, CARM 27 Comments [5/13/2008 7:47:30 PM]
Fundie Index: 0
Submitted By: jc

Quote# 38963

[I know this is a bit of an oldie but Sport has been busily defending it on CARM so...]

The evolution of fruits and vegetables

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would like to know how the story goes with the evolution of fruits and vegetables. With animals, evolutionists like to say that a worm, for instance, could turn into a centipede or millipede simply by the addition of some new legs. Humans happen to be chimps with larger brains and opposable thumbs. () So evolutionists like to look at different parts and try to figure out how they came about or how they got modified to lead from one creature to the next.

But what about fruits and vegetables? How would a plumb or a grape, for example, evolve into an orange or a grapefruit? You wouldn't be able to do that by changing out small parts -- an orange is pretty much an orange through and through. And what type of mutation would turn one type of fruit into another? I realize certain berries can be selectively manipulated to spin off new varieties. Same with tomatoes. But berries are still berries...and tomatoes are still tomatoes.

How would natural selection work with plants? How would a population of lemon trees (which obviously all came from lemon seeds), for example, grow trees that produced fruit that was not quite a lemon? Isn't a lemon a lemon? And wouldn't only lemons come from lemon trees?

Supersport, CARM 36 Comments [5/9/2008 1:41:12 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By:

Quote# 37691

do you vote for liberal politicians? If so, yea. Your vote is essentially sticking the knife in thousands of skulls. Of course if you evolved accidentally from a worm, what do you care.

supersport, CARM 37 Comments [4/15/2008 3:36:52 AM]
Fundie Index: 1
Submitted By:

Quote# 37662

[long post on 'evilutionists' and the vast conspiracy that is 'the left']
The whole point of science in the past 100 years is to deny the power of the individual. Look at any debate regarding evolution, and it's often the common denomnator. This is why evos deny the mind. They deny intelligence. They deny information. They deny mind/body. They deny chiropractic. They deny accumpunture. They deny prayers. They deny Christ. They deny everlasting life. They deny anything and everything that doesn't promote the population, government, or death.

Supersport, CARM 47 Comments [4/13/2008 10:19:44 PM]
Fundie Index: 1

Quote# 37373

my wife's wisdom teeth
...or lack of them.


My wife stands at 5'1 and, like most small/short people, has small features. Luckily for her she has no wisdom teeth...(probably because her head is small and has no room for them.) When she was 12, her dentist took xrays and informed her that she'd never have problems with wisdom teeth because she didn't have any to break through.

This is interesting to me, because both of her parents had their wisdom teeth taken out years ago.

Now if you're to listen and believe in ToE, you would believe that certain organisms just happen to be born with certain traits, and, if the said traits were beneficial (aka helped them breed more successfully) this is how the population evolves. And the thing is, "fit" parents are supposed to be passing on their "fit" traits to their offspring. If inheritance was not true and parents did not necessarily pass down specific traits according to whatever lucky genes they happened to possess, then ToE is thrown for a huge loop, as the offsprings' traits would be more of a biological crapshoot as opposed to a representation of their parents.

But my wife's parents both have wisdom teeth. So how and why did she end up with no wisdom teeth?

Also, everyone's heard the imaginary scenario that evos dreamed up about cheetahs, whereby faster cheetahs are more likely to breed, thereby supposedly having faster offspring...(which is how cheetahs came to be fast)..... But how does ToE -- or the laws of genetics -- stand if both parents have a physical trait, (such as speed or wisdom teeth), yet their offspring ends up not having it???

Supersport, CARM 61 Comments [4/8/2008 12:59:36 AM]
Fundie Index: 1

Quote# 37376

[part of a much longer rant]

Now this is curious.....why would all species of frogs lay eggs, except one? Taken from "The Great Evolution Mystery" by Gordon Rattray Taylor

Then there is the puzzling frog discovered in the mountain meadows of New Guinea, which Professor Etienne Wolff described in 1971 under the rubric "The Big Problems posed by a little Frong." Unlike all other frogs, which lay eggs, Nectophrymoides occidentalis brings forth its youth alive. That implies a womb, a placenta, a yolk sac and other modifications, for which it must possess the genes. (SS: or not) Are they present in other frogs unactivated? If so, why have they been activated in this one species? On the evolutionary scale it has jumped a few million years. Similarly, there is just one viviparous earwig. Or again, only one shark in the genus Mustelus has a placenta, although they all live in an identical environment, namely coastal waters.

Speaking of frogs, if you go here: http://www.answersingenesis.org/crea...15/i2/frog.asp you'll learn of actually another frog who gives birth to live young -- but these frogs give birth through their mouths. Go figure.

And evidently there are other organisms who just simply don't fit in with their peers. This, it would seem to me, to be difficult for ToE to explain...

Supersport, CARM 40 Comments [4/8/2008 12:22:41 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 37314

[After being called out on his false claim that scientists say the blood-brain barrier cannot be breached, Supersport continues to show a lack of respect for irony-meters]

nice copout. You don't really know that much about science, do you.

supersport, CARM 30 Comments [4/7/2008 7:26:29 AM]
Fundie Index: 2

Quote# 37312

[supersport's theory on why the majority of scientists believe global warming is a threat]

oh yea...I've often wondered if that's one of the reasons science is deathly afraid of global warming. Can you imagine if civilizations were unearthed under what used to be ice in antarctica?

supersport, CARM 37 Comments [4/7/2008 1:13:37 AM]
Fundie Index: -2