Comments on: “The whole story needs to be presented” — and other creationist lies

By: John A. Davison

John A. Davison — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 22:03:52 +0000

Bye now. Have a nice “groupthink.”

By: Carolina_guitarman

Carolina_guitarman — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:27:53 +0000

John Davison wrote:

“Naturally, I am very pleased.
I suspect this will evoke more of the usual invective. Vent your atheist spleens with gay abandon because -
I love it so!”

In other words, you admit you are here to troll, that you enjoy trying to piss people off.

How 5th grade.

By: CeltJew

CeltJew — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:40:53 +0000

If you don’t mind, I’ll vent some believing spleen:

You really think we’re the best God can do? You actually believe that this rickety shape and barely-seeing mind could actually be in God’s image? What a tiny, shoebox-sized god you believe in to limit creation to this half-finished form.

By: John A. Davison

John A. Davison — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:01:05 +0000

While I am persona non grata just about everywhere in cyberdumb, it is enciouraging that Denyse O’Leary, the co-sponsor of Uncommon Descent, from which forum I have been twice banished by David Springer, has allowed me to hold forth as you can see from the following link to her forum -Overwhelming Evidence.

http://www.overwhelmingevidence.com/oe/node/550#comment

Naturally, I am very pleased.

I suspect this will evoke more of the usual invective. Vent your atheist spleens with gay abandon because -

I love it so!

“A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”

By: Don Read

Don Read — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 07:00:59 +0000

“homozygous atheist”?

By: midwifetoad

midwifetoad — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 20:17:17 +0000

What an honor it is to haveyou posting here

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/12/in_case_youve_been_wondering_a.php

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&suggon=0&as_q=davison&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&num=10&lr=&as_filetype=&ft=i&as_sitesearch=http%3A%2F%2Fscienceblogs.com%2Fpharyngula%2F&as_qdr=all&as_rights=&as_occt=any&cr=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&safe=images

By: midwifetoad

midwifetoad — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 20:05:59 +0000

“The first to recognize the failure of natural selection was Mivart In Darwin’s own day. He was followed by Henry Fairfield Osborn in 1909, William Bateson in 1914, Reginald C, Punnett in 1915 and, most important of all, Leo Berg in 1922 who identified the real role for natural selection”

Good thing there hasn’t been any research since 1922. ;^)

On the other hand You might want to check out the Science News link in the “Experimental Science” article below.

There’s nothing like laboratory work to settle this kind of question.

By: John A. Davison

John A. Davison — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 09:57:13 +0000

http://john.a.davison.free.fr/?p=18#comment-579

message #160

By: Mike O'Risal

Mike O'Risal — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 17:52:48 +0000

I just got finished chewing up a “strengths and weaknesses” lawyer-to-be from Alabama this morning. Of course, he didn’t reveal that he used to be the “collegiate outreach director” for a rightwing Dominionist group called “Redeem the Vote” in his letter to the editor.

Meh. More here if you have a whole bunch of free reading time on your hands.

What is it about Southern lawyers and anti-evolutionism?