Dennis Venema Begs the Question and Warns the Church That it Must Come to Terms With Human-Chimp Common Ancestry

_{Cornelius Hunter

July 28, 2012

Intelligent Design}

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

In spite of the crystal clear message from science that evolution is not a good hypothesis evolutionists continue to add confusion and uncertainty to promote their mythology. One tactic evolutionists use is to interpret evidence in terms of evolution and then claim the result as evidence for evolution. That is not only bad science, it is fallacious. Conclusions cannot also be premises. Yesterday’s installment from evolutionist Dennis Venema is yet another example of this never ending display of petitio principia. Read more

Comments

Are there any moderators available? I seem to remember 'Joe' (aka Joe-G) being banned from Uncommon Descent for, shall we say, behavioural issues. It would be extraordinary if Uncommon Descent were to allow 'Joe' to continue posting here given his prior conduct. Indeed, it would be a direct slap in the face to the administrator who had previously banned him. I've no doubt that the staff at Uncommon Descent will maintain their high standards and do what is necessary. Thankyou.Bartax_{July 28, 2012
July
07
Jul
28
28
2012
06:14 PM
6
06
14
PM
PDT}

Dear you fartax- could you at least disguise your flatulence? I guess you have never heard of "toungue and cheek"? Ya see the reason why Dr Hunter closed comments was that I was exposing the lies and cowardice of evos, they didn't like it, attacked me and I hit back. It got messy. Then, knowing that the tards who started all of this mudslinging read my blog, I posted that little bit. And now you, being the obvious jerk you are, jump all over it and make something out of nothing. Get a life...Joe_{July 28, 2012
July
07
Jul
28
28
2012
05:54 PM
5
05
54
PM
PDT}

Dear me, Joe! Could you at least try and disguise your sycophancy?
If you ever do open up comments I again I will volunteer to be a moderator- I will never use another bad word on your blog because I will just moderate all evoTARD posts that do not conform to a civil discourse. IOW troy and thorton will not be posting very much as they do not know what being civil is and they are too stupid for any discourse.
Jeepers! Just how dark is it inside Dr. Hunters colon, Joe?Bartax_{July 28, 2012
July
07
Jul
28
28
2012
05:48 PM
5
05
48
PM
PDT}

Dr Hunter, Guess who has shown up at my blog spewing vulgarities? Ms spellchecker herself- thorton. Life is good...Joe_{July 28, 2012
July
07
Jul
28
28
2012
05:07 PM
5
05
07
PM
PDT}

Assuming the very thing that needs to be tested in an old evolutionary ploy. And one that seems to be fooling evolutionists into thinking their position is being tested.Joe_{July 28, 2012
July
07
Jul
28
28
2012
03:44 PM
3
03
44
PM
PDT}

Excerpt: One tactic evolutionists use is to interpret evidence in terms of evolution and then claim the result as evidence for evolution. That is not only bad science, it is fallacious. Conclusions cannot also be premises.
Very clearly put Dr. Hunter! I think it might even be fair to say that with the stunning lack of actual empirical evidence for Darwinian processes to actually generate functional information over and above what is already present in molecular life, then entire Darwinian enterprise can rightfully be called a gigantic exercise in 'begging the question' i.e. Conclusions cannot also be premises!
Where's the substantiating evidence for neo-Darwinism? https://docs.google.com/document/d/1q-PBeQELzT4pkgxB2ZOxGxwv6ynOixfzqzsFlCJ9jrw/edit
Note:
Anti-Science Irony (Who is really anti-science?) - October 2011 Excerpt: In response to a letter from Asa Gray, professor of biology at Harvard University, Darwin declared: “I am quite conscious that my speculations run quite beyond the bounds of true science.” Darwin was “anti-Science”. When questioned further by Gray, Darwin confirmed Gray’s suspicions: “What you hint at generally is very, very true: that my work is grievously hypothetical, and large parts are by no means worthy of being called induction.” Darwin had turned against the use of scientific principles in developing his theory of evolution.,,, Just two weeks before the (re)lease of The Origin of Species, Erasmus Darwin, his brother, consoled him in a letter: “In fact, the a priori reasoning is so entirely satisfactory to me that if the facts [evidence] won’t fit, why so much the worse for the facts, in my feeling.” http://www.darwinthenandnow.com/2011/10/anti-science-irony/
bornagain77_{July 28, 2012
July
07
Jul
28
28
2012
03:38 PM
3
03
38
PM
PDT}

It reminds me of the interpretation by the US journalist, John Strawberry, of the findings of a certain commission of enquiry and similar commissions: 'The lamp broke...' A kind of childish misattribution.Axel_{July 28, 2012
July
07
Jul
28
28
2012
03:15 PM
3
03
15
PM
PDT}

Prev 1 2

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply