He said it: “There is more evidence for evolution than … the idea that things are made up of atoms”

_{Denyse O'Leary

August 19, 2012

Darwinism, News, science education}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

From a recent Darwin lobby update:

Vincent Cassone, chair of the University of Kentucky’s biology department, told the Herald-Leader, “The theory of evolution is the fundamental backbone of all biological research. … There is more evidence for evolution than there is for the theory of gravity, than the idea that things are made up of atoms, or Einstein’s theory of relativity. It is the finest scientific theory ever devised.” (here)

The only question that remains is, is he stupid or does he think everyone else is? Imagine taking courses from Darwin’s groupie.

The Darwin in the schools lobby definitely needs more supporters like this. Meanwhile, someone, sell this man a used car.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments

'The only question that remains is, is he stupid or does he think everyone else is?' Pass.Axel_{September 20, 2012
September
09
Sep
20
20
2012
02:07 PM
2
02
07
PM
PDT}

Just goes to show you that words are meaningless when they come from indoctrinates. Vincent is a severe evo-5-indoctrinated. Also, I love how evo-indoctrinates use quotes from other evo-indoctrinates who have absolutely no idea what brought any biological system into existence as of the quotes themselves are evidence. http://evillusion.wordpress.com/why-i-say-you-are-indoctrinated/melvinvines_{August 21, 2012
August
08
Aug
21
21
2012
05:19 AM
5
05
19
AM
PDT}

There is more evidence for evolution ...
That is cowardly equivocation:
Main Entry: equiv·o·cate Pronunciation: i-'kwi-v&-"kAt Function: intransitive verb Inflected Form(s): -cat·ed; -cat·ing 1 : to use equivocal language especially with intent to deceive 2 : to avoid committing oneself in what one says
Evolution has several meanings*:
1. Change over time; history of nature; any sequence of events in nature 2. Changes in the frequencies of alleles in the gene pool of a population 3. Limited common descent: the idea that particular groups of organisms have descended from a common ancestor. 4. The mechanisms responsible for the change required to produce limited descent with modification, chiefly natural selection acting on random variations or mutations. 5. Universal common descent: the idea that all organisms have descended from a single common ancestor. 6. “Blind watchmaker” thesis: the idea that all organisms have descended from common ancestors solely through an unguided, unintelligent, purposeless, material processes such as natural selection acting on random variations or mutations; that the mechanisms of natural selection, random variation and mutation, and perhaps other similarly naturalistic mechanisms, are completely sufficient to account for the appearance of design in living organisms.
With the above in mind it is easy to see that the theory of evolution is really a theory of equivocation. That is any and all evidences for evolution 1-5 are always used as evidence for evolution #6. For example- the varying beak of the finch, anti-biotic resistance in bacteria, and genetic similarities (including alleged shared mistakes but regardless of the physiological & anatomical differences), are all used as evidence for evolution #6. It should also be noted that evolution #6, ie culled genetic accidents, does not produce any predictions beyond perhaps change and/ or stasis, nor is it objectively testable. * page 136-37 of Darwinism, Design and Public EducationJoe_{August 20, 2012
August
08
Aug
20
20
2012
05:30 AM
5
05
30
AM
PDT}

Still incompetence cubed, Eric Anderson. One wonders whether experimental particle physicists, noted for scrupulosity, would want to be down there with the Darwinians, defending their junk shop icons. If experimental physicists behaved like Darwinists, they would still be defending phlogiston and ether, making a publicly ridiculous cult out of the lives of their earliest proponents, and there would be lobbies like NCSE snd BioLogos, to reassure us that there is no conflict between phlogiston/ether and Christianity.News_{August 20, 2012
August
08
Aug
20
20
2012
02:55 AM
2
02
55
AM
PDT}

Vincent Cassone, chair of the University of Kentucky’s biology department,
Hey, is that Arthur Hunt's boss? You know, Art, they guy who was tag-team partners with Steve Matheson in a debate with Stephen Meyer and the same Art who visits here. Art will have to agree with da boss won't he? We can ask Art next time if he things is boss is right. :-) What biologist Cassone says is in conflict with what evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne says: "In sciences pecking order, evolutionary biology lurks somewhere near the bottom, far closer to phrenolgy than to physics."scordova_{August 19, 2012
August
08
Aug
19
19
2012
11:53 PM
11
11
53
PM
PDT}

Wow, scary to see such incompetence at that level of authority in a biology department. This is a great example of Philip Johnson's insightful explanation of the evolutionist mindset, namely that "all reality is a single process of evolution." With that kind of metaphysical thinking, one is deluded into thinking that everything they see is an example of evolution in action. Separate point, which I think gets at the heart of the nuance Cassone is trying to hook his argument to: notice he is talking about "theories." He doesn't say the fact of evolution has more evidence than the fact of gravity (it clearly doesn't). It is theory vs. theory. And believing there is some 'theory of evolution' out there that explains this single process of evolution, while at the same time scientists are still trying to understand exactly how gravity operates, he then feels justified (cluelessly, mistakenly so) in saying that the theory of evolution has more evidence for it than the theory of gravity.Eric Anderson_{August 19, 2012
August
08
Aug
19
19
2012
09:30 PM
9
09
30
PM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply