Article <scgotj9au0c1v4ua1p5jrj00d31ndn5rkh@4ax.com>

Deutsch English Français Italiano
<scgotj9au0c1v4ua1p5jrj00d31ndn5rkh@4ax.com>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article
Path: ...!news.roellig-ltd.de!news.mb-net.net!open-news-network.org!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!feeds.news.ox.ac.uk!news.ox.ac.uk!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!news.eyrie.org!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail
From: Martin Harran <martinharran@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: Evolutionary creationism
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2025 16:28:14 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 450
Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org
Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org
Message-ID: <scgotj9au0c1v4ua1p5jrj00d31ndn5rkh@4ax.com>
References: <an9itjd1fq7mpm5ieurhocml3dqprd67vp@4ax.com> <vrbt5h$2io2n$1@dont-email.me> <ol8jtj5aeheqpf6f7hnbok176nrf4r2ion@4ax.com> <vrcsa8$3ev76$1@dont-email.me> <g29ltj18v4dd5nqcs5kvlv87rfgsqci6a8@4ax.com> <vrefsr$u5df$1@dont-email.me> <vihltjtp3u0snr25sm0tqlkh20pogvdigt@4ax.com> <vrem8j$12619$1@dont-email.me> <ukpltjdtafbq4it85c2ss00nsrolpv0r0d@4ax.com> <vrf2fe$1ei06$1@dont-email.me> <eiamtj9di10srcei8e59520uahfa4b9hcm@4ax.com> <vrfiuv$1rl81$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89";
	logging-data="6690"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org"
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Cancel-Lock: sha1:apf+m9XLU3ruIOVorOS+YcPlGC0=
Bytes: 27622

On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 18:11:27 -0500, RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On 3/19/2025 3:36 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>   And so the bullshit contuue to fly.n Wed, 19 Mar 2025 13:30:04 -0500,
>> RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 3/19/2025 10:57 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 10:01:39 -0500, RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 3/19/2025 8:28 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 19 Mar 2025 08:12:58 -0500, RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/19/2025 6:24 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 17:32:39 -0500, RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 3/18/2025 12:13 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 08:41:05 -0500, RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/18/2025 3:02 AM, Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> rOn Mon, 17 Mar 2025 12:42:09 -0500, RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> [Mercy snip]
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What does this matter?  You were still lying.  They aren't literally
>>>>>>>>>>>>> denying natural mechanisms
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So you have kept insisting that they deny that natural mechanisms were
>>>>>>>>>>>> involved in evolution. Now you admit that they don't say that but you
>>>>>>>>>>>> claim that I am the one who is lying. It's perfectly clear that I have
>>>>>>>>>>>> been right all along, the claims you have been making about them are
>>>>>>>>>>>> all the products of your bullshit interpretation.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I have never denied that, what I have always contended is that they deny
>>>>>>>>>>> that it was all natural.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Let's get this perfectly clear, do you now agree that the stuff you
>>>>>>>>>> are claiming about them is not what they actually say, it is what
>>>>>>>>>> think is the consequence of what they say?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Let's get this perfectly clear, you have lied about what I have claimed
>>>>>>>> >from the beginning.  They are Biblical literalists that claim that their 
>>>>>>>>> god made man in his own image.  I have always claimed that they are
>>>>>>>>> theistic evolutionists.  Their own claims make them tweekers like Behe.
>>>>>>>>> They claim that their god is using miracles and is actively involved in
>>>>>>>>> the creation, and still is actively involved today.  It isn't the
>>>>>>>>> consequence of what they claim, it is what they claim.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why try to lie about "consequences" of what they claim?  It is literally
>>>>>>>>> what they are claiming.  You ran from the quotes, and now you are just
>>>>>>>>> lying about them again.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I didn't run from any quotes, on the contrary I endorsed them. What I
>>>>>>>> did was disagree with *your conclusions* which you tried to present as
>>>>>>>> some sort of established fact. You have this rather weird notion that
>>>>>>>> when somebody disagrees with your conclusions, they are telling lies.
>>>>>>>> That's not just with me, I've seen you do it with other people.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why lie about what you did.  Go up and see for yourself.  You left the
>>>>>>> quotes in, but ran from them and started lying about what they meant.
>>>>>>> What is the definition of supernatural miracles?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> My example has always been Behe as a tweeker,
>>>>>>>>>>> and you know that for a fact.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You keep insisting that there is no difference between them and Behe.
>>>>>>>>>> He, however, gave three specific examples of what he regards as
>>>>>>>>>> tweaking - the bacterial flagellum, the blood clotting cascade and the
>>>>>>>>>> immune system.[1]  You have not been able to give even one example of
>>>>>>>>>> anything that Biologos regards as tweaking, all you can do is try to
>>>>>>>>>> change the goalposts by waving your hands about unspecified miracles
>>>>>>>>>> which are something completely outside of science, nothing to do with
>>>>>>>>>> denying science. For example, what *science* is contradicted or denied
>>>>>>>>>> by the belief in the supernatural Resurrection of Christ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have always said that some of them are tweekers like Behe because of
>>>>>>>>> what I quoted them as claiming.  They are more honest about it than
>>>>>>>>> Behe, in that they admit that they believe supernatural miracles were
>>>>>>>>> involved.  "Supernatural" was their claim making them just as much a
>>>>>>>>> denier of natural processes as Behe.  Supernatural miracles are not
>>>>>>>>> natural by definition.  "Puffs of smoke" is all that Behe has claimed
>>>>>>>>> about the unnatural designer did it mechanisms that he claims for his
>>>>>>>>> designer tweeking.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You keep bringing up miracles as some form of tweaking. Behe gives 3
>>>>>>>> specific examples of what you regard as tweaking.  His bacterial
>>>>>>>> flagellum is a new life form; his blood clotting cascade and the
>>>>>>>> immune system affect multiple species and all individuals belonging to
>>>>>>>> each specie. Please give an example of a miracle that Biologos claims
>>>>>>>> to create a newlifeform or affect an entire species - just one example
>>>>>>>> will do.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They claim that their god made man in his own image (one of the quotes
>>>>>>> that you are denial of), and they claim that their Biblical literalist
>>>>>>> interpretation makes them believe that.  Not only that, but they do not
>>>>>>> have to make specific claims about what miracles had to occur, just that
>>>>>>> they did occur.  Behe's claims are not about new lifeforms, but about
>>>>>>> subsystems within existing lifeforms that existed at that time.  Behe
>>>>>>> has claimed that his designer would have been responsible for creating 3
>>>>>>> neutral mutations in order to evolve a new function like the flagellum.
>>>>>>> Behe understood that parts of the flagellum like the F0 ATPase motor had
>>>>>>> existed for a couple billion years before it was used in the flagellum.
>>>>>>> It likely evolved in the first chemotrophes before it was also used in
>>>>>>> photosynthesis, and then in oxidative phosphorylation.  Behe was a
>>>>>>> tweeker.  His designer was working within an evolutionary framework to
>>>>>>> create what he wanted created.  Behe's designer was obviously modifying
>>>>>>> existing functional units, and putting them together to do different things.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>      
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> [1] Even in regard to Behe's three specific claims, I have already
>>>>>>>>>> given you a link to an article on the Biologos site that dismantles
>>>>>>>>>> those claims and shows they don't stand up to scrutiny. Here it is
>>>>>>>>>> again in case you missed it:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://biologos.org/common-questions/how-can-evolution-account-for-the-complexity-of-life-on-earth-today
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It doesn't matter.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It matters because you insist they are the same as Behe yet they
>>>>>>>> outright reject his acclaims.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You know that it doesn't matter how bogus Behe's argument to support his
>>>>>>> tweeking is.  They are obviously not against his tweeking claims.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Everyone should know how bogus Behe's claims are by
>>>>>>>>> now.  He never could demonstrate that his type of IC systems exist in
>>>>>>>>> nature.  That doesn't mean that he was not a tweeker, and that these
>>>>>>>>> guys are also not tweekers.  They just understand that Behe's method of
>>>>>>>>> detecting miracles doesn't work.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> They are obviously claiming devine
>>>>>>>>>>> intervention.  Supernatural miracles are not natural mechanisms.  You
>>>>>>>>>>> have been deluding yourself and lying about what was claimed.  You know
>>>>>>>>>>> why you ran from the requoted material the first time and started lying.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> You really need to get a grip on yourself; your paranoid fear of
>>>>>>>>>>>> religious belief is on a par with the IDers' paranoid fear of science.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You need stop lying about the situation when you know that you were
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========