Jump to content


Photo

So I Used The Darwin Is A Plagiarizer Argument...


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
16 replies to this topic

#1 Quaker Reason

Quaker Reason

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 82 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana
  • Interests:Religion, Science, History, Military, Computers, Roman History, Astronomy, Books, The Truth
  • Age: 15
  • Christian
  • Old Earth Creationist
  • Indiana

Posted 17 January 2012 - 05:12 PM

And here is the response I received from two individuals.

QR: So who came up with the idea of Natural Selection?
FB: That's easy Charles Darwin
QR: Wrong, you do realize that Edward Blythe came up with Natural Selection right?
FB: I don't care if it is plagiarized, that was 200 years ago.


And another conversation, with a confirmed Evolutionist.

QR: One of my issues with Evolution is that Charles Darwin plagiarized works. Edward Blythe came up with the original idea of Natural Selection and Charles Darwin received all the credit.
GC: I care not if it's plagiarized or not, I care for the works.

People are either very ignorant, or trying to diverse claims against Evolution.

#2 MarkForbes

MarkForbes

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1023 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Africa
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Waverley

Posted 17 January 2012 - 08:49 PM

Just because someone uses a similar idea then someone else, would that really be plagiarism. Usually plagiarism is copying the work of someone else without properly indicating this.

#3 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 17 January 2012 - 10:35 PM

You just proved that evolutionists do not care if people do the wrong thing as long as it supports their worldview. Which by the way makes one wonder about the wrong things that are done because they don;t care that we don;t know about,

Added: The Bible also speaks of people whom know the truth but prefer to believe the lie instead. Because God is the representation of truth this mocks God. So God's gives them up to the curse called the reprobate mind. A reprobate mind is where someone cannot tell between right from wrong, truth from lies. And even if they were able they would not care for God also removes the felling of guilt. So what this does is basically condemns the person and all the debates and evidence in the world would not matter. They will only see what they want, and continue down the same path set before them because they choose to do so.

Because having a reprobate mind means they cannot see truth because they chose the lie over it. The only way a person with a reprobate mind can be reached is through prayer. Before anything you say will make sense to them, or even be worth saying, one has to have the ability to comprehend it. A reprobate mind will not comprehend any truth you may present. So when God lifts that curse they will see. But you also have to remember that every prayer has 2 answers. Basically when you are praying for someone who has such a curse on them you have to petition for them as well as ask. In other words you have to convince God you are going to make the effort needed, and that they should have another chance.

Is it worth all the trouble? It's a known fact that a lot of the people who rejected God the most and came to the truth turned out to be the most on fire for God.

#4 Quaker Reason

Quaker Reason

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 82 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana
  • Interests:Religion, Science, History, Military, Computers, Roman History, Astronomy, Books, The Truth
  • Age: 15
  • Christian
  • Old Earth Creationist
  • Indiana

Posted 10 February 2012 - 06:40 PM

You just proved that evolutionists do not care if people do the wrong thing as long as it supports their worldview. Which by the way makes one wonder about the wrong things that are done because they don;t care that we don;t know about,

Added: The Bible also speaks of people whom know the truth but prefer to believe the lie instead. Because God is the representation of truth this mocks God. So God's gives them up to the curse called the reprobate mind. A reprobate mind is where someone cannot tell between right from wrong, truth from lies. And even if they were able they would not care for God also removes the felling of guilt. So what this does is basically condemns the person and all the debates and evidence in the world would not matter. They will only see what they want, and continue down the same path set before them because they choose to do so.

Because having a reprobate mind means they cannot see truth because they chose the lie over it. The only way a person with a reprobate mind can be reached is through prayer. Before anything you say will make sense to them, or even be worth saying, one has to have the ability to comprehend it. A reprobate mind will not comprehend any truth you may present. So when God lifts that curse they will see. But you also have to remember that every prayer has 2 answers. Basically when you are praying for someone who has such a curse on them you have to petition for them as well as ask. In other words you have to convince God you are going to make the effort needed, and that they should have another chance.

Is it worth all the trouble? It's a known fact that a lot of the people who rejected God the most and came to the truth turned out to be the most on fire for God.

I got into a debate with some SERIOUS Darnwinists. And I used this argument, and I was given this response.
"You're missing the point, it doesn't (blank) matter, no one cares about copyright in that time."

#5 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 12 February 2012 - 04:42 PM

I got into a debate with some SERIOUS Darnwinists. And I used this argument, and I was given this response.
"You're missing the point, it doesn't (blank) matter, no one cares about copyright in that time."


Justifying lying and breaking laws. Anything to cover up what Darwin did. What this proves is that the person you are debating is not worth your time. Because you could come up with 100 things wrong and his logic would be the same.

So what you could say just as a joke to get a response is: So all the things K*nt H*vind was accused of does not matter either?
1) If they say no then they have no moral code.
2) If they say yes it does matter then it's a double stadard.

#6 jason

jason

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • florida

Posted 13 February 2012 - 07:17 AM

ike they also try to paint darwin as some saint who was against slavery. his book descent of man doesnt even mention slavery as an immoral issue. if he was anti-slavery he wasnt that pushy with it and even some anti-slavery types then were still racists.

#7 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 13 February 2012 - 03:16 PM

ike they also try to paint darwin as some saint who was against slavery. his book descent of man doesnt even mention slavery as an immoral issue. if he was anti-slavery he wasnt that pushy with it and even some anti-slavery types then were still racists.


Let me ask you some questions so you can better understand what's being covered up here.

1) Are you racist?
2) Since you are not racist would you hang around people who are "outspoken" racists and express it? No you would not.

If you are not racist, you don't make racist comments.

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image


And you don't hang around racist people, but Darwin did.

Posted Image

Posted Image

And you don;t have your grand theory put people in zoos like animals to prove it.

Posted Image

Posted Image

and people don't get the idea of making a racist chart of extermination off an idea that is not racist.

Posted Image

Notice that the lower races are compared to apes. Now where do you think Hitler got that idea since Darwin's book had already been published?

They can deby it all they want but history proves otherwise.

#8 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 13 February 2012 - 03:30 PM

Just because someone uses a similar idea then someone else, would that really be plagiarism. Usually plagiarism is copying the work of someone else without properly indicating this.


Edward Blyth wrote down his idea and Darwin read it and used it. Also Darwin used many of the ideas out of his grandfathers book named Zoonomia, the laws of organic life, Once a person starts plagerizing his own works where does it stop? The idea that man came from animals was a pagan religion idea that dates back to Egyptian times. What connects Darwin to this? Darwin's only degree was in theology. He would have had to learn about this pagan religion. So again, and again, and again the dots connect to Darwin constantly using other people ideas as if they were his own. the reason it's wrong is because he never gave credit to anyone but solely took all the credit. Darwin wanted the limelight for ideas that were not even his own.

But let's take this a step further. To prove evolution was solely a Godless natural process, they had to come up with an idea that made life itself sound like a totally natural process (abiogenesis). Is it not strange that the idea is so simular to that Pagan religion Darwin got his idea from? You see the Egyptians believes that all life came from the slime that existed around the Nile River. Basically their from of the primordial soup. But they had the idea first.

#9 Quaker Reason

Quaker Reason

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 82 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana
  • Interests:Religion, Science, History, Military, Computers, Roman History, Astronomy, Books, The Truth
  • Age: 15
  • Christian
  • Old Earth Creationist
  • Indiana

Posted 13 February 2012 - 06:40 PM

What also irritates me is that Atheists argue that morals are not God given. I was debating with someone on this issue and they asserted that "No, the Christian laws are not the first morals. Moral code dates back to civilizations that have laws in them."

But here's the funny part, apart from the law there's really no reason to be moral if God does not exist. Giving money to a kid in charity will not help me at all.

#10 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5799 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 13 February 2012 - 06:50 PM

What also irritates me is that Atheists argue that morals are not God given. I was debating with someone on this issue and they asserted that "No, the Christian laws are not the first morals. Moral code dates back to civilizations that have laws in them."

But here's the funny part, apart from the law there's really no reason to be moral if God does not exist. Giving money to a kid in charity will not help me at all.


Very true, something within motivates to be good. The atheist need not believe it for it to exist.

#11 jason

jason

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • florida

Posted 13 February 2012 - 10:56 PM

i agree, ike. they try to whitewash him so much. its sad when christian also go along with that. on the other forum i should do a white wash of hitler and see how these evos like it.

i have done it before with the che followers and they took offense.

#12 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 14 February 2012 - 12:23 AM

What also irritates me is that Atheists argue that morals are not God given. I was debating with someone on this issue and they asserted that "No, the Christian laws are not the first morals. Moral code dates back to civilizations that have laws in them."

But here's the funny part, apart from the law there's really no reason to be moral if God does not exist. Giving money to a kid in charity will not help me at all.

-

All you have to do here when they argue this is ask them to list the godless written moral law code that all atheists follow. They won't be able to which pretty much suts them up. Because if godless man did this the written law should still exist but it don't because it did not happen.

#13 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 14 February 2012 - 12:26 AM

i agree, ike. they try to whitewash him so much. its sad when christian also go along with that. on the other forum i should do a white wash of hitler and see how these evos like it.

i have done it before with the che followers and they took offense.


Hitler claimed to be Christian, but also it's provable he was a chronic liar as well.

Posted Image

So white-washing Hitler may be taken as your defense of him making that claim.

#14 Salsa

Salsa

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1231 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 57
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Uppsala, Sweden

Posted 14 February 2012 - 03:28 AM

Very true, something within motivates to be good. The atheist need not believe it for it to exist.


Oh, no no no!! .... you are badly mistaken about that. Badly mistaken!

It's all due to the goodness gene.

Sort of like the genes you have for making a tail, or the genes that chickens have for making teeth. I'm sure it's there somewhere...

UD rummages around in his box of genes..

. :tissue:

... a few hours go by ...


:think:... well, as soon as I find it I will let you know..

#15 jason

jason

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • florida

Posted 14 February 2012 - 04:54 AM

Hitler claimed to be Christian, but also it's provable he was a chronic liar as well.

Posted Image

So white-washing Hitler may be taken as your defense of him making that claim.


oh i can make it real good and not even mention christ.

in short,

1)well he did turn germany around from a depression in few years
2) jets
3) rockets
4) advancements in film
5)neutral steer.

so what he killed a few million but didnt the others that we celebrate?

im mean che he set persons free from capitalism and he killed on them bad landowners, he never tortured them men or killed insdiscremently

and i did that years ago

http://www.christian...?t=30862&page=1

#16 Quaker Reason

Quaker Reason

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 82 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana
  • Interests:Religion, Science, History, Military, Computers, Roman History, Astronomy, Books, The Truth
  • Age: 15
  • Christian
  • Old Earth Creationist
  • Indiana

Posted 14 February 2012 - 06:02 AM

Hitler was also a fanatic of Darwin, but we can prove that "Origin of Species" was on the Nazi list of banned books. What I also find ironic is that Darwin more than likely would of been killed by Hitler because later in Darwin's life he had problems with his body to where he could barely walk and usually was bedridden. I would assert that is a case of "being crippled".

#17 Quaker Reason

Quaker Reason

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 82 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana
  • Interests:Religion, Science, History, Military, Computers, Roman History, Astronomy, Books, The Truth
  • Age: 15
  • Christian
  • Old Earth Creationist
  • Indiana

Posted 14 February 2012 - 06:08 AM

Just because someone uses a similar idea then someone else, would that really be plagiarism. Usually plagiarism is copying the work of someone else without properly indicating this.

Obviously it wasn't properly indicated. I don't remember when I read the Origin of Species, anything about Edward Blythe or Erasmus Darwin.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users