Jump to content
Evolution Fairytale Forum


Veteran Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


driewerf last won the day on April 24 2017

driewerf had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

30 Excellent

About driewerf

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Previous Fields

  • What is your Gender?
  • How old are you?
  • What is your affiliation/religion?
    no affiliation
  • What is your Worldview?
  • Where do you live (i.e. Denver, Colorado)

Recent Profile Visitors

226 profile views
  1. driewerf

    No Evidence Could Convince Me Evolution Occured

    Congratulations Mike, for portraying your close mindedness, irrationality and bigotry in such an eloquent way.
  2. Satan's lie? Darwin's theory you mean (later expanded and improved by thousands of other scientists). Satan, who just like god I doesn't believe to exist, has/had nothing to do in this.
  3. Of course I don't expect that from you. Truth doesn't matter to you. And by the way: - magic RNA? What's magic about RNA? - it's autotrophic/ heterotrophic.
  4. I posted a link to the entire text of Popper's lecture. Of course if you know better what Karl Popper thought and meant than Popper himself...
  5. Quote mine? You like modifying into "Mud to man is your myth" If I'm good a quote mining, that's because i learned it from the best: you.
  6. So now you are openly lying again.Yes Mike Summers. Again you are attributing claims to I have never made. I challenge you. Produce a post of mine where i say:"Adolph Hitler and his followers damaged evo by eliminating nine million " and I donate a 100 euro to cancer research. Fail to do this within a week, and you donate 100 dollar to cancer research. Come on show me such a post. This is the second time that you falsely attribute a claim or position to me that i either never made, or where I clearly write that that is NOT my position.
  7. Mud to man is your myth. Ah, no wait, according to Mike the Wiz it's dirt to man. So dirt to man is your myth. Any way, as has been explained to you mud is made of silicates. Humans, and all living beings are carbon based. Mud to man is thus a flat out lie, since you have been corrected different times about this. And when he learned about the ToE and understood it he has corrected his views: quoting Popper: Darwin is not only the greatest of biologists — he has often been compare to Newton — but also a most admirable, venerable, and indeed a most lovable person. ... The famous argument from design for the existence of God was at the center of Paley's theism. If you find a watch, Paley argued, you will hardly doubt that it was designed by a watchmaker. So if you consider a higher organism, with its intricate and purposeful organs such as the eyes, then, Paley argued, you are bound to conclude that it must have been designed by an intelligent Creator. This is Paley's argument from design. Prior to Darwin, the theory of special creation — the the-that each species was designed by the Creator — had been widely accepted, only in the University of Cambridge, but also elsewhere, by many of the best scientists. There were of course alternative theories in existence, such as Lamarck's; Hume had earlier attacked, somewhat feebly, the argument from design; but Paley's theory was in those days the one most seriously entertained by serious scientists. It is almost unbelievable how much the atmosphere changed as a consequence :he publication, in 1859, of the Origin of Species. The place of an argument really had no status whatever in science has been taken by an immense number of the most impressive and well-tested scientific results. ... The Darwinian revolution is still proceeding. But now we are also in the midst of a counter-revolution, a strong reaction against science and against rationality. I feel that it is necessary to take sides in this issue, if only briefly; and also, in a Darwin lecture, to indicate where Darwin himself stood. ... My position, very briefly, is this. I am on the side of science and of rationality, but I am against those exaggerated claims for science that have sometimes been, rightly, denounced as "scientism". I am on the side of the search for truth, of intellectual daring in the search for truth; ... Although Darwin destroyed Paley's argument from design by showing that what appeared to Paley as purposeful design could well be explained as the result of chance and of natural selection, Darwin was most modest and undogmatic in his claims. ... When speaking here of Darwinism, I shall speak always of today's theory — that is Darwin's own theory of natural selection supported by the Mendelian theory of heredity, by the theory of the mutation and recombination of genes in a gene pool, and by the decoded genetic code. This is an immensely impressive and powerful theory. ... I have changed my mind about the testability and the logical status of the theory of natural selection; and I am glad to have an opportunity to make a recantation. My recantation may, I hope, contribute a little to the understanding of the status of natural selection. ... http://www.informationphilosopher.com/solutions/philosophers/popper/natural_selection_and_the_emergence_of_mind.html Except that Popper had the guts to see and admit his error. Well, that's the first time I see you using that phrase. Now hypothetitcal hypothesis is something like a superfluous redundancy, where there is too much. Or a repetitive tautology. Because it's true... All scientists and popper disagree. Nope. Just a passion for truth.
  8. Nope. I have also seen discussions about religion, politics and mainly science. Mostly I discuss science. I don't discuss philosphy because i know I'm poorly equipped for this. ideas =/= philosophy. You had to reason (practice science) to make the statement there is no God. Reasoning is much broader than "practice science". Philosophy, remember. So the one writing baloney is you. LOL, you mean the claim I 've never made (see quote above)? I literally write that I 've never claimed atheism to be a scientific fact. I literally write that and yet you continue to answer me as if that's what I claim. LOL Nope. It's a scientific theory. It's a scientific theory with philosophical implications, but is first a scientific theory. Oh, and it's a fact too.
  9. driewerf

    Atheism & Satan

    This was a quickly written response, made with aspecially American christians in mind. All the things listed above characterizes the American christian conservative right. I did not way that all this applies to all christians, or as Mike the Wiz took it personally, that this applied to Mike the Wiz personally. But yes, all the things listed above have been done by some christians, in the name of christianity --- and affects the lifes of non christians. That's the reason for the words "causing trouble". The christians imposing the things listed above are afeecting the lifes of the non christians, or even the lifes of the christians diagreeing with this. I can add to that list that christians supported dictators like Franco and Mussolini. That's historically well documented. But of course this doesn't mean that all christains then did this, or that young christians now are supportive of these dictators and their regime.
  10. driewerf

    Atheism & Satan

    Of course we, atheists don't believe in Satan's existence. It is just that the few satanists around are really the fringe, and much lesser vocal than christians. Satanists don't try to impose any teaching of creationism in school don't go mad during s@x education lessons don't block stem cell research don't try to defund planned Parenthood don't try to block same s@x marriage or any other equality before the law. Don't try to get Harry Potter books or the Anne Frank diaries removed from school libraries. http://www.csmonitor.com/Books/chapter-and-verse/2013/0508/Is-the-unabridged-Anne-Frank-Diary-of-a-Young-Girl-too-much-of-a-good-thing they just don't cause much trouble.
  11. It took more than 250 years before Fermat's theorem was proven. It took 250 years before the mathematicians proved Fermat's Theorem. Only 300 years after Copernicus and Galileo proposed heliocentrism, stellar parallax was observed by Friedrich Bessel. 115 years after Einsteins formulation of the Theory of Relativity we first recorded a gravitational wave. We still have not found a cure for cancer and to this date there is absolutely no cure for the disease of Hutchinson, we can't even slow down the disease. We still don't know why we sleep. Just saying.
  12. driewerf

    Volcanic Island Chains

    How, Mike the Wiz. My entire post was this (with the correction of one type error) Because if that is your "explanation" and "data", it's codswallop. 1) provide evidence for this flood. And the Hawaiian islands can't be used, otherwise you'll making the fallacy of circular reasoning. 2) explain that the islands have been growing, once cut off from the lava chamber of the hot spot. 3) provide evidence that they have grown at all. 4) what does this difference in size means, as that somehow has made sense according to you. Until now you have just made bare assertions. You deleted the part "once cut off from the lava chamber" which is an essential part of your "flood model" for the Hawaiian Islands. And a fatal flaw of your model.
  13. Not to me, not to Goku, not to Wibble. faith =/= god Ah, the god of the gaps. The shrinking god. close to 70% is not christian. If yours is an argument, mine is too. Oké, I'll better convert to islam then. Mostly polytheism.
  14. Wait. What? 1) I consider atheism as a philosophical position. (Though i wont discuss philosphy with you) 2) Who has ever claimed atheism "a scientific fact"? Certainly not me, not Fjuri and not Goku. Where that nonsense comes from I have no idea. 3) What claims did I make about atheism -- pray tell, I have no idea what claims I made. But the most important: 4) What is the link between the fact that I will know only 2500 people with atheism and how does this make my claims "not a scientific fact" -- where ever that comes from? Please explain. This will wait until later, first the 4 points above.
  15. And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, dust = dried mud.

Important Information

Our Terms