j*******7
发帖数: 6300 | 1 (The purpose of this page is to present quotations from scientists that
illustrate their recognition that the darwinian theory of evolution is bad
science.)
Interesting Quotations from Scientists on Evolutionism
Here are some of our favorite quotes by scientists speaking on the subject
of evolutionism. Note that many of these scientists are evolutionists
themselves, in spite of their comments. I suppose that they would maintain
that to admit that "God did it" would not be "intellectually satisfying!"
Such a confession, of course, flies in the face of their naturalistic
presuppositionalism.
"Nine-tenths of the talk of evolutionists is sheer nonsense, not founded on
observation and wholly unsupported by facts. This museum is full of proofs
of the utter falsity of their views. In all this great museum, there is not
a particle of evidence of the transmutation of species." (Dr. Etheridge,
Paleontologist of the British Museum)
"I reject evolution because I deem it obsolete; because the knowledge, hard
won since 1830, of anatomy, histology, cytology, and embryology, cannot be
made to accord with its basic idea. The foundationless, fantastic edifice of
the evolution doctrine would long ago have met with its long- deserved fate
were it not that the love of fairy tales is so deep-rooted in the hearts of
man." (Dr. Albert Fleischmann, University of Erlangen)
"By the late 1970s, debates on university campuses throughout the free world
were being held on the subject of origins with increasing frequency.
Hundreds of scientists, who once accepted the theory of evolution as fact,
were abandoning ship and claiming that the scientific evidence was in total
support of the theory of creation. Well-known evolutionists, such as Isaac
Asimov and Stephen Jay Gould, were stating that, since the creationist
scientists had won all of the more than one hundred debates, the
evolutionists should not debate them." (Luther Sunderland, "Darwin's Enigma
", p.10)
"The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that
evolution is based on faith alone; exactly the same sort of faith which is
necessary to have when one encounters the great mysteries of religion... The
only alternative is the doctrine of special creation, which may be true,
but is irrational." (Dr. L.T. More)
"I have come to the conclusion that Darwinism is not a testable scientific
theory, but a metaphysical research programme... (Dr. Karl Popper, German-
born philosopher of science, called by Nobel Prize-winner Peter Medawar, "
incomparably the greatest philosopher of science who has ever lived.")
"The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in
the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory -- is
it then a science or faith? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus
exactly parallel to belief in special creation..." (Dr. L. Harrison Matthews
, in the introduction to the 1971 edition of Darwin's "Origin of Species")
"What is so frustrating for our present purpose is that it seems almost
impossible to give any numerical value to the probability of what seems a
rather unlikely sequence of events... An honest man, armed with all the
knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the
origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle... (Dr. Francis
Crick, Nobel Prize-winner, codiscoverer of DNA)
"Once we see, however, that the probability of life originating at random is
so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes sensible to think
that the favorable properties of physics, on which life depends, are in
every respect DELIBERATE... It is therefore, almost inevitable that our own
measure of intelligence must reflect higher intelligences.. even to the
limit of God." (Sir Fred Hoyle, British mathematician and astronomer, and
Chandra Wickramasinghe, co-authors of "Evolution from Space," after
acknowledging that they had been atheists all their lives)
"The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is
comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might
assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein... I am at a loss to
understand biologists' widespread compulsion to deny what seems to me to be
obvious." (Sir Fred Hoyle)
"I don't know how long it is going to be before astronomers generally
recognize that the combinatorial arrangement of not even one among the many
thousands of biopolymers on which life depends could have been arrived at by
natural processes here on the earth. Astronomers will have a little
difficulty in understanding this because they will be assured by biologists
that it is not so, the biologists having been assured in their turn by
others that it is not so. The 'others' are a group of persons who believe,
quite openly, in mathematical miracles. They advocate the belief that tucked
away in nature, outside of normal physics, there is a law which performs
miracles (provided the miracles are in the aid of biology). This curious
situation sits oddly on a profession that for long has been dedicated to
coming up with logical explanations of biblical miracles... It is quite
otherwise, however, with the modern miracle workers, who are always to be
found living in the twilight fringes of thermodynamics." (Sir Fred Hoyle)
(These "mathematical miracles" that must have occurred are summarized in my
paper "The Second Law of Thermodynamics and Evolution")
"The fossil record with its abrupt transitions offers no support for gradual
change..." (Dr. Stephen Jay Gould, famous Harvard Professor of
Paleontology)
"I admit that an awful lot of that has gotten into the textbooks as though
it were true. For instance, the most famous example still on exhibit
downstairs (in the American Museum) is the exhibit on horse evolution
prepared perhaps 50 years ago. That has been presented as literal truth in
textbook after textbook. Now I think that that is lamentable, particularly
because the people who propose these kinds of stories themselves may be
aware of the speculative nature of some of the stuff. But by the time it
filters down to the textbooks, we've got science as truth and we've got a
problem." (Dr. Niles Eldridge, Curator of Invertebrate Paleontology at the
American Museum)
"The fundamental reason why a lot of paleontologists don't care much for
gradualism is because the fossil record doesn't show gradual change and
every paleontologist has know that ever since Cuvier. If you want to get
around that you have to invoke the imperfection of the fossil record. Every
paleontologist knows that most species, most species, don't change. That's
bothersome if you are trained to believe that evolution ought to be gradual.
In fact it virtually precludes your studying the very process you went into
the school to study. Again, because you don't see it, that brings terrible
distress." (Dr. Stephen Jay Gould)
"To postulate that the development and survival of the fittest is entirely a
consequence of chance mutations seems to me a hypothesis based on no
evidence and irreconcilable with the facts. These classical evolutionary
theories are a gross over-simplification of an immensely complex and
intricate mass of facts, and it amazes me that they are swallowed so
uncritically and readily, and for such a long time, by so many scientists
without murmur of protest." (Sir Ernest Chain, Nobel Prize winner)
"Evolution is a theory universally accepted, not because it can be proved to
be true, but because the only alternative, 'special creation,' is clearly
impossible." (D.M.S. Watson, Professor of Zoology, London University)
http://www.aboundingjoy.com/scientists.htm | j*******7
发帖数: 6300 | 2 (The purpose of this page is to present quotations from scientists that
illustrate their recognition that the darwinian theory of evolution is bad
science.)
Interesting Quotations from Scientists on Evolutionism
Here are some of our favorite quotes by scientists speaking on the subject
of evolutionism. Note that many of these scientists are evolutionists
themselves, in spite of their comments. I suppose that they would maintain
that to admit that "God did it" would not be "intellectually satisfying!"
Such a confession, of course, flies in the face of their naturalistic
presuppositionalism.
"Nine-tenths of the talk of evolutionists is sheer nonsense, not founded on
observation and wholly unsupported by facts. This museum is full of proofs
of the utter falsity of their views. In all this great museum, there is not
a particle of evidence of the transmutation of species." (Dr. Etheridge,
Paleontologist of the British Museum)
"I reject evolution because I deem it obsolete; because the knowledge, hard
won since 1830, of anatomy, histology, cytology, and embryology, cannot be
made to accord with its basic idea. The foundationless, fantastic edifice of
the evolution doctrine would long ago have met with its long- deserved fate
were it not that the love of fairy tales is so deep-rooted in the hearts of
man." (Dr. Albert Fleischmann, University of Erlangen)
"By the late 1970s, debates on university campuses throughout the free world
were being held on the subject of origins with increasing frequency.
Hundreds of scientists, who once accepted the theory of evolution as fact,
were abandoning ship and claiming that the scientific evidence was in total
support of the theory of creation. Well-known evolutionists, such as Isaac
Asimov and Stephen Jay Gould, were stating that, since the creationist
scientists had won all of the more than one hundred debates, the
evolutionists should not debate them." (Luther Sunderland, "Darwin's Enigma
", p.10)
"The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that
evolution is based on faith alone; exactly the same sort of faith which is
necessary to have when one encounters the great mysteries of religion... The
only alternative is the doctrine of special creation, which may be true,
but is irrational." (Dr. L.T. More)
"I have come to the conclusion that Darwinism is not a testable scientific
theory, but a metaphysical research programme... (Dr. Karl Popper, German-
born philosopher of science, called by Nobel Prize-winner Peter Medawar, "
incomparably the greatest philosopher of science who has ever lived.")
"The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in
the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory -- is
it then a science or faith? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus
exactly parallel to belief in special creation..." (Dr. L. Harrison Matthews
, in the introduction to the 1971 edition of Darwin's "Origin of Species")
"What is so frustrating for our present purpose is that it seems almost
impossible to give any numerical value to the probability of what seems a
rather unlikely sequence of events... An honest man, armed with all the
knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the
origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle... (Dr. Francis
Crick, Nobel Prize-winner, codiscoverer of DNA)
"Once we see, however, that the probability of life originating at random is
so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes sensible to think
that the favorable properties of physics, on which life depends, are in
every respect DELIBERATE... It is therefore, almost inevitable that our own
measure of intelligence must reflect higher intelligences.. even to the
limit of God." (Sir Fred Hoyle, British mathematician and astronomer, and
Chandra Wickramasinghe, co-authors of "Evolution from Space," after
acknowledging that they had been atheists all their lives)
"The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is
comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might
assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein... I am at a loss to
understand biologists' widespread compulsion to deny what seems to me to be
obvious." (Sir Fred Hoyle)
"I don't know how long it is going to be before astronomers generally
recognize that the combinatorial arrangement of not even one among the many
thousands of biopolymers on which life depends could have been arrived at by
natural processes here on the earth. Astronomers will have a little
difficulty in understanding this because they will be assured by biologists
that it is not so, the biologists having been assured in their turn by
others that it is not so. The 'others' are a group of persons who believe,
quite openly, in mathematical miracles. They advocate the belief that tucked
away in nature, outside of normal physics, there is a law which performs
miracles (provided the miracles are in the aid of biology). This curious
situation sits oddly on a profession that for long has been dedicated to
coming up with logical explanations of biblical miracles... It is quite
otherwise, however, with the modern miracle workers, who are always to be
found living in the twilight fringes of thermodynamics." (Sir Fred Hoyle)
(These "mathematical miracles" that must have occurred are summarized in my
paper "The Second Law of Thermodynamics and Evolution")
"The fossil record with its abrupt transitions offers no support for gradual
change..." (Dr. Stephen Jay Gould, famous Harvard Professor of
Paleontology)
"I admit that an awful lot of that has gotten into the textbooks as though
it were true. For instance, the most famous example still on exhibit
downstairs (in the American Museum) is the exhibit on horse evolution
prepared perhaps 50 years ago. That has been presented as literal truth in
textbook after textbook. Now I think that that is lamentable, particularly
because the people who propose these kinds of stories themselves may be
aware of the speculative nature of some of the stuff. But by the time it
filters down to the textbooks, we've got science as truth and we've got a
problem." (Dr. Niles Eldridge, Curator of Invertebrate Paleontology at the
American Museum)
"The fundamental reason why a lot of paleontologists don't care much for
gradualism is because the fossil record doesn't show gradual change and
every paleontologist has know that ever since Cuvier. If you want to get
around that you have to invoke the imperfection of the fossil record. Every
paleontologist knows that most species, most species, don't change. That's
bothersome if you are trained to believe that evolution ought to be gradual.
In fact it virtually precludes your studying the very process you went into
the school to study. Again, because you don't see it, that brings terrible
distress." (Dr. Stephen Jay Gould)
"To postulate that the development and survival of the fittest is entirely a
consequence of chance mutations seems to me a hypothesis based on no
evidence and irreconcilable with the facts. These classical evolutionary
theories are a gross over-simplification of an immensely complex and
intricate mass of facts, and it amazes me that they are swallowed so
uncritically and readily, and for such a long time, by so many scientists
without murmur of protest." (Sir Ernest Chain, Nobel Prize winner)
"Evolution is a theory universally accepted, not because it can be proved to
be true, but because the only alternative, 'special creation,' is clearly
impossible." (D.M.S. Watson, Professor of Zoology, London University)
http://www.aboundingjoy.com/scientists.htm | J*******g
发帖数: 8775 | 3 有意思。谢谢分享。
【在 j*******7 的大作中提到】
: (The purpose of this page is to present quotations from scientists that
: illustrate their recognition that the darwinian theory of evolution is bad
: science.)
: Interesting Quotations from Scientists on Evolutionism
: Here are some of our favorite quotes by scientists speaking on the subject
: of evolutionism. Note that many of these scientists are evolutionists
: themselves, in spite of their comments. I suppose that they would maintain
: that to admit that "God did it" would not be "intellectually satisfying!"
: Such a confession, of course, flies in the face of their naturalistic
: presuppositionalism.
| C*******t
发帖数: 766 | 4 马大师转贴造谣是惯犯，你这捧臭脚的来说说，哪里有意思？
Dr. Etheridge是什么时代的人你知道吗就来捧臭脚？
丫就比达尔文小十岁，你怎么不找中世纪的“科学家”来反对进化论呢？
Albert Fleischmann是什么人你又知道吗就来捧臭脚？
丫鸦片战争之后不久才尼玛出生，1907年的统计当时他是唯一个相信creationism的“
biologist”
Luther Sunderland也尼玛是个有名的creationist，scientist? give me a freaking
break!
Harrison Matthews, Karl Popper, L.T. More, Fred Hoyle, etc 一个个都是老掉渣
1900年前后出生的人了，和达尔文属于同一时代的人，拿这些人来反进化论，杨老师这
个臭脚捧的感觉如何？
【在 J*******g 的大作中提到】
: 有意思。谢谢分享。
| C*******t
发帖数: 766 | 5 and enjoy the last quote more closely, honestly how do you feel?
"Evolution is a theory universally accepted, not because it can be proved to
be true, but because the only alternative, 'special creation,' is clearly
impossible." (D.M.S. Watson, Professor of Zoology, London University)
【在 J*******g 的大作中提到】
: 有意思。谢谢分享。
| J*******g
发帖数: 8775 | 6 It's fine.
to
【在 C*******t 的大作中提到】
: and enjoy the last quote more closely, honestly how do you feel?
: "Evolution is a theory universally accepted, not because it can be proved to
: be true, but because the only alternative, 'special creation,' is clearly
: impossible." (D.M.S. Watson, Professor of Zoology, London University)
| C*******t
发帖数: 766 | 7 so you are fine with creationism being "clearly impossible"?
你对你捧臭脚的这些个quotes读过没？知道这些出处在何时从哪里不？
这些假冒科学明显水分极大的quotes你不假思索就捧臭脚了，可耻不？
【在 J*******g 的大作中提到】
: It's fine.
:
: to
| J*******g
发帖数: 8775 | 8 我是说别人愿意相信什么都是别人的自由。
我可不像反基反对别人的信仰。
【在 C*******t 的大作中提到】
: so you are fine with creationism being "clearly impossible"?
: 你对你捧臭脚的这些个quotes读过没？知道这些出处在何时从哪里不？
: 这些假冒科学明显水分极大的quotes你不假思索就捧臭脚了，可耻不？
| J*******g
发帖数: 8775 | 9 你认为这个咋样：
“Evolution is a theory universally accepted, not because it can be proved
to be true,”
也就是说这个教授说 Evolution CANNOT be proved to be true。他不是说现在没有被
证明，而是说不可能被证明是真实的。你同意不？
to
【在 C*******t 的大作中提到】
: and enjoy the last quote more closely, honestly how do you feel?
: "Evolution is a theory universally accepted, not because it can be proved to
: be true, but because the only alternative, 'special creation,' is clearly
: impossible." (D.M.S. Watson, Professor of Zoology, London University)
| G*M
发帖数: 6042 | 10 杨解神一点科学的概念都没有吗？
所有的相信科学的人都同意”Evolution CANNOT be proved to be true“。这里prove
是证明的意思。
当然，日常生活中，人们常用prove来表达检验，而不是证明。
【在 J*******g 的大作中提到】
: 你认为这个咋样：
: “Evolution is a theory universally accepted, not because it can be proved
: to be true,”
: 也就是说这个教授说 Evolution CANNOT be proved to be true。他不是说现在没有被
: 证明，而是说不可能被证明是真实的。你同意不？
:
: to
| | | C*******t
发帖数: 766 | 11 奇怪了，这个引用又不是我贴在这里为我所用的，我认为它咋样有关系吗？
这个是马大师贴在这里反对进化论鼓吹神创论用的，你杨大师捧臭脚也附和了的
那请问你对自己捧着臭脚附和了的“...special creation is clearly impossible”
有什么感想？你自己捧的臭脚回答一下这么难吗？怎么反倒问我觉得如何？嗯？
我把它拎出来就是要证明基督徒为了贩卖自己的信仰，胡贴乱引，不但水分极大挂羊头
卖狗肉，还弄巧成拙搬起石头砸了自己的脚，大出洋相，lol
对这些引用的态度我已经在第一个回帖表明很清楚了，你用和达尔文同一时期的人的言
论反对进化论，和引用哥白尼同一时期人的言论反对日心说有什么不一样？
再次问你有没有去考察这些quote还是像读圣经一样看到自己喜欢的就俯首贴耳？你知
不知道这些quote什么时候的事情？D.M.S. Watson尼马1886年生的人物，你说他对进化
论的评论有多少价值？
【在 J*******g 的大作中提到】
: 你认为这个咋样：
: “Evolution is a theory universally accepted, not because it can be proved
: to be true,”
: 也就是说这个教授说 Evolution CANNOT be proved to be true。他不是说现在没有被
: 证明，而是说不可能被证明是真实的。你同意不？
:
: to
| C*******t
发帖数: 766 | 12 杨解神有科学概念？这要求太高了，哈哈
prove
【在 G*M 的大作中提到】
: 杨解神一点科学的概念都没有吗？
: 所有的相信科学的人都同意”Evolution CANNOT be proved to be true“。这里prove
: 是证明的意思。
: 当然，日常生活中，人们常用prove来表达检验，而不是证明。
| J*******g
发帖数: 8775 | 13 有意思。其实我还真知道好几个人认为evolution is proven的。碰巧他们都是反基。
prove
【在 G*M 的大作中提到】
: 杨解神一点科学的概念都没有吗？
: 所有的相信科学的人都同意”Evolution CANNOT be proved to be true“。这里prove
: 是证明的意思。
: 当然，日常生活中，人们常用prove来表达检验，而不是证明。
| J*******g
发帖数: 8775 | 14 我只是问你一个问题嘛。何必这么紧张。不如你说说，你是同意这句话：Evolution is
proven true.还是这句: Evolution CANNOT be proven true.
【在 C*******t 的大作中提到】
: 奇怪了，这个引用又不是我贴在这里为我所用的，我认为它咋样有关系吗？
: 这个是马大师贴在这里反对进化论鼓吹神创论用的，你杨大师捧臭脚也附和了的
: 那请问你对自己捧着臭脚附和了的“...special creation is clearly impossible”
: 有什么感想？你自己捧的臭脚回答一下这么难吗？怎么反倒问我觉得如何？嗯？
: 我把它拎出来就是要证明基督徒为了贩卖自己的信仰，胡贴乱引，不但水分极大挂羊头
: 卖狗肉，还弄巧成拙搬起石头砸了自己的脚，大出洋相，lol
: 对这些引用的态度我已经在第一个回帖表明很清楚了，你用和达尔文同一时期的人的言
: 论反对进化论，和引用哥白尼同一时期人的言论反对日心说有什么不一样？
: 再次问你有没有去考察这些quote还是像读圣经一样看到自己喜欢的就俯首贴耳？你知
: 不知道这些quote什么时候的事情？D.M.S. Watson尼马1886年生的人物，你说他对进化
| C*******t
发帖数: 766 | 15 这样自欺欺人是不是很爽？以为这样打个马虎眼就能回避基督徒胡引乱贴搬石头砸自己
的脚的事实？哈哈！你为啥不回答你对special creation is clearly impossible作何
感想？这不是你们马大师引用的，你也拍手叫好的吗？说说看快点嘛！
哥的态度已经表明多次了，这个比宣统皇帝还大20岁的人对进化论什么态度哥不屑一顾
，hoho
is
【在 J*******g 的大作中提到】
: 我只是问你一个问题嘛。何必这么紧张。不如你说说，你是同意这句话：Evolution is
: proven true.还是这句: Evolution CANNOT be proven true.
| C*******t
发帖数: 766 | 16 杨解神快来回答为什么马大师引用某古人说 creationism is clearly impossible 你
也拍手叫好？一直避而不答难道是被人戳穿基督徒胡贴乱引，作假造谣，搬起石头砸自
己的脚出了丑，不敢面对了吗？真的好荣耀主啊，哈哈
【在 C*******t 的大作中提到】
: 奇怪了，这个引用又不是我贴在这里为我所用的，我认为它咋样有关系吗？
: 这个是马大师贴在这里反对进化论鼓吹神创论用的，你杨大师捧臭脚也附和了的
: 那请问你对自己捧着臭脚附和了的“...special creation is clearly impossible”
: 有什么感想？你自己捧的臭脚回答一下这么难吗？怎么反倒问我觉得如何？嗯？
: 我把它拎出来就是要证明基督徒为了贩卖自己的信仰，胡贴乱引，不但水分极大挂羊头
: 卖狗肉，还弄巧成拙搬起石头砸了自己的脚，大出洋相，lol
: 对这些引用的态度我已经在第一个回帖表明很清楚了，你用和达尔文同一时期的人的言
: 论反对进化论，和引用哥白尼同一时期人的言论反对日心说有什么不一样？
: 再次问你有没有去考察这些quote还是像读圣经一样看到自己喜欢的就俯首贴耳？你知
: 不知道这些quote什么时候的事情？D.M.S. Watson尼马1886年生的人物，你说他对进化
| C*******t
发帖数: 766 | 17 呼吁杨大师正视自己的行径，反思一下为什么基督徒为了贩卖自己的信仰不惜屡次造谣
，反倒屡次弄巧成拙？请杨大师回忆当初连帖子内容都没看就回帖捧臭脚的时候个是什
么态度，可不可耻？勇敢一点嘛，直视自己的问题，这点勇气都没有，还走啥十架路？
哈哈
【在 C*******t 的大作中提到】
: 奇怪了，这个引用又不是我贴在这里为我所用的，我认为它咋样有关系吗？
: 这个是马大师贴在这里反对进化论鼓吹神创论用的，你杨大师捧臭脚也附和了的
: 那请问你对自己捧着臭脚附和了的“...special creation is clearly impossible”
: 有什么感想？你自己捧的臭脚回答一下这么难吗？怎么反倒问我觉得如何？嗯？
: 我把它拎出来就是要证明基督徒为了贩卖自己的信仰，胡贴乱引，不但水分极大挂羊头
: 卖狗肉，还弄巧成拙搬起石头砸了自己的脚，大出洋相，lol
: 对这些引用的态度我已经在第一个回帖表明很清楚了，你用和达尔文同一时期的人的言
: 论反对进化论，和引用哥白尼同一时期人的言论反对日心说有什么不一样？
: 再次问你有没有去考察这些quote还是像读圣经一样看到自己喜欢的就俯首贴耳？你知
: 不知道这些quote什么时候的事情？D.M.S. Watson尼马1886年生的人物，你说他对进化
| J*******g
发帖数: 8775 | 18 It's fine.也叫拍手叫好？有时间问一下周围的外国友人吧。
而且您可以看看7楼。
谢谢。
【在 C*******t 的大作中提到】
: 杨解神快来回答为什么马大师引用某古人说 creationism is clearly impossible 你
: 也拍手叫好？一直避而不答难道是被人戳穿基督徒胡贴乱引，作假造谣，搬起石头砸自
: 己的脚出了丑，不敢面对了吗？真的好荣耀主啊，哈哈
| J*******g
发帖数: 8775 | 19 不敢说不要紧，GWM在9楼说：
“所有的相信科学的人都同意”Evolution CANNOT be proved to be true“。这里
prove是证明的意思。”
我只是问你是否同意GWM。
而且在美国呆过一段时间的人都不难理解“It's fine.”不算拍手叫好。而且这两者意
思差得很远呢。
我的解释在6楼。
我认为神创论是有可能的。在这点上我不同意他。当然神具体神如何创世，我们可能有
不同的理解，也就是说我所认为的神创论跟他所反对的可能不一样。但是，他显然有自
由相信或不想信某种理论。我不反对他的信仰。所以我才说It's fine.
【在 C*******t 的大作中提到】
: 这样自欺欺人是不是很爽？以为这样打个马虎眼就能回避基督徒胡引乱贴搬石头砸自己
: 的脚的事实？哈哈！你为啥不回答你对special creation is clearly impossible作何
: 感想？这不是你们马大师引用的，你也拍手叫好的吗？说说看快点嘛！
: 哥的态度已经表明多次了，这个比宣统皇帝还大20岁的人对进化论什么态度哥不屑一顾
: ，hoho
:
: is
| C*******t
发帖数: 766 | 20 看来你还是不能直面基督徒的问题啊，真的连这点勇气都没有？
为了贩卖自己的信仰不惜胡贴乱引作假造谣，你怎么说？用尼马达尔文时期的人物来反
对进化论，还打着科学的幌子，你怎么说？就你自己来说，你首先回帖捧马大师臭脚的
时候你看了他的帖子没？请摸着良心据实回答，hoho
【在 J*******g 的大作中提到】
: It's fine.也叫拍手叫好？有时间问一下周围的外国友人吧。
: 而且您可以看看7楼。
: 谢谢。
| | | G*M
发帖数: 6042 | 21 你还真不懂啊。Evolution is proven true。这里的proven是检验的意思。万有引力，
相对论等等，跟进化论一样，都是proven true。
is
【在 J*******g 的大作中提到】
: 我只是问你一个问题嘛。何必这么紧张。不如你说说，你是同意这句话：Evolution is
: proven true.还是这句: Evolution CANNOT be proven true.
| b*****n
发帖数: 4976 | 22
＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝
在科学上， proven true 是可以重做， 结果是可以预测。
例如把醋混漂白水，会释出有毒氯气。
人人做都有同一结果。
这才是 proven true.
有人能把一条鱼养半桶水缸内， 便得出一条爬虫吗？
由鱼变成爬虫， 只是想当然， 会是这样发生的事而已。
(当然你会有不少助证的东西， 仍然是『想当然』的事。）
无人能把进化重做一次。
绝对不是 proven true
【在 G*M 的大作中提到】
: 你还真不懂啊。Evolution is proven true。这里的proven是检验的意思。万有引力，
: 相对论等等，跟进化论一样，都是proven true。
:
: is
| G*M
发帖数: 6042 | 23 进化论预测了“把一条鱼养半桶水缸内，便得出一条爬虫”？
正是由于进化论极强的可预测性，现代分子生物学，制药等才有了坚实的基础。
你以为科学家真的那么无知？
【在 b*****n 的大作中提到】
:
: ＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝
: 在科学上， proven true 是可以重做， 结果是可以预测。
: 例如把醋混漂白水，会释出有毒氯气。
: 人人做都有同一结果。
: 这才是 proven true.
: 有人能把一条鱼养半桶水缸内， 便得出一条爬虫吗？
: 由鱼变成爬虫， 只是想当然， 会是这样发生的事而已。
: (当然你会有不少助证的东西， 仍然是『想当然』的事。）
: 无人能把进化重做一次。
| b*****n
发帖数: 4976 | 24
=============================
鱼不会变成爬虫, 还谈甚么的进化?
收档哩!
【在 G*M 的大作中提到】
: 进化论预测了“把一条鱼养半桶水缸内，便得出一条爬虫”？
: 正是由于进化论极强的可预测性，现代分子生物学，制药等才有了坚实的基础。
: 你以为科学家真的那么无知？
| b*****n
发帖数: 4976 | 25
============================
用浅白说话讲, 便是:
一味靠估
这怎会是 proven true?
【在 G*M 的大作中提到】
: 进化论预测了“把一条鱼养半桶水缸内，便得出一条爬虫”？
: 正是由于进化论极强的可预测性，现代分子生物学，制药等才有了坚实的基础。
: 你以为科学家真的那么无知？
| b*****n
发帖数: 4976 | 26
你以为科学家真的那么无知？
=================================
科学不是无知,
是那些用一知半解的科学便来反基
的是无知。
【在 G*M 的大作中提到】
: 进化论预测了“把一条鱼养半桶水缸内，便得出一条爬虫”？
: 正是由于进化论极强的可预测性，现代分子生物学，制药等才有了坚实的基础。
: 你以为科学家真的那么无知？
| b*****n
发帖数: 4976 | 27
===========================
预测一下人类几时会生出一对翼, 识飞
【在 G*M 的大作中提到】
: 进化论预测了“把一条鱼养半桶水缸内，便得出一条爬虫”？
: 正是由于进化论极强的可预测性，现代分子生物学，制药等才有了坚实的基础。
: 你以为科学家真的那么无知？
| C*******t
发帖数: 766 | 28
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
一味靠估。。。教会小册子很有娱乐性
【在 b*****n 的大作中提到】
:
: ===========================
: 预测一下人类几时会生出一对翼, 识飞
| b*****n
发帖数: 4976 | 29
＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝
那慢用。。。。
【在 C*******t 的大作中提到】
:
: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
: 一味靠估。。。教会小册子很有娱乐性
| C*******t
发帖数: 766 | 30 还是比较适合你口味和质素。。。
【在 b*****n 的大作中提到】
:
: ＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝
: 那慢用。。。。
| | | b*****n
发帖数: 4976 | 31
____________
你讀過教會的小冊子。
要不要去洗眼，換腦？排毒。
小心不知何時毒發，忽然變基。
【在 C*******t 的大作中提到】
: 还是比较适合你口味和质素。。。
| C*******t
发帖数: 766 | 32 呼唤杨大师正面回答问题嘛，这样躲闪很荣耀主吗？hoho
【在 C*******t 的大作中提到】
: 看来你还是不能直面基督徒的问题啊，真的连这点勇气都没有？
: 为了贩卖自己的信仰不惜胡贴乱引作假造谣，你怎么说？用尼马达尔文时期的人物来反
: 对进化论，还打着科学的幌子，你怎么说？就你自己来说，你首先回帖捧马大师臭脚的
: 时候你看了他的帖子没？请摸着良心据实回答，hoho
| C*******t
发帖数: 766 | 33 看来你还是不能直面基督徒的问题啊，真的连这点勇气都没有？
为了贩卖自己的信仰不惜胡贴乱引作假造谣，你怎么说？用尼马达尔文时期的人物来反
对进化论，还打着科学的幌子，你怎么说？就你自己来说，你首先回帖捧马大师臭脚的
时候你看了他的帖子没？请摸着良心据实回答，hoho |
|
