Skip to content

Teach the Controversies!

October 6, 2012

I thought these might be appropriate considering the latest ignorant ramble from “Dr.” David Tee… or to use his full academic title: David Tee.

 

 

 

Knowledge and belief are different things David. Even more so Knowledge and ignorance. If you understood this, or had any actual academic training whatsoever we could have an actual conversation. However, unfortunately, you continue in the arrogance of your ignorance…

About these ads
20 Comments leave one →
  1. October 6, 2012 11:22 am

    DDT probably just needs a hug.

  2. October 6, 2012 2:37 pm

    What rant? Where? At least we know you do not understand Christian life and the criteria believers are to follow. Knowledge doesn’t replace belief nor does knowledge over-rule it. But then you do not want to believe God or the Bible so you need to create false rules to justify your rejection of what God wants.

  3. October 6, 2012 2:43 pm

    In your second video, it displays point 15 and it talks about explaining the evidence taught in science.

    First off, believers do not have to explain anything taught n science about origins. We have to explain what is taught in the Bible. Second, there is no evidence taught in science concerning origins. They do not teach biblical creation but some false alternative thus there is no evidence being taught for the truth.

    Third, secular science has not proven or verified one supposed piece of evidence for their alternative origin models. They can’t as they cannot observe one historical claim in action, produce the original common ancestor or conditions it supposedly thrived under, and it cannot produce one transition in action from this supposed common ancestor.

    Not one fossil demonstrates any claimed historical transition. Such claims are all read into the fossil by those who do not have the truth.

    • Ken Gilmore permalink
      October 7, 2012 4:48 am

      >>Not one fossil demonstrates any claimed historical transition. Such claims are all read into the fossil by those who do not have the truth.

      Really?

      “In summary, we now have a much richer fossil record that has improved our understanding of the timing, sequence of events, and conditions in which the origin of tetrapods took place. The boundary between “fish” and “tetrapods” is becoming progressively more difficult to draw, and a more complex story is emerging in which, for example, the origin of limbs with digits, the origin of walking and terrestriality, and the origin of tetrapods in a strict sense, may be three different things.” [1]

      “Today, the century-old debate on bird ancestry has largely been resolved. The uncertainties that led to this long controversy—both empirical and methodological—have been clarified and there is an overwhelming consensus in support of the idea that birds evolved from maniraptoran theropods. Current evidence highlights the fact that many features previously thought to be exclusively avian—from feathers to a wishbone—have now been discovered in the immediate dinosaur predecessor of birds.” [2]

      “The hind limbs of basilosaurids retain the bones present in earlier whales and indeed land mammals: the femur, tibia, fibula, tarsals, metatarsals, and phalanges (Gingerich et al. 1990). However, the hind limbs are greatly reduced in size and the pelvis is not attached to the vertebral column, making the hind limbs unsuitable to support the body weight of these whales. There are no external hind limbs in normal modern cetaceans, although, very rarely, an anomalous individual with such limbs is born. Internally, there are pelvic or hind limb remnants in all species, which provide origin for the muscles to the genitals. In some species, pelvis, femur, and tibia are present.

      “In the past two decades, the origin of whales has gone from being based on barely any fossils to one of the best-documented examples of macroevolution.” [3]

      “In short, the fossil record of hoofed mammals is full of transitional fossils and even longer transitional sequences that demonstrate the origins of nearly all the living ungulates and tethytheres from ancestors that looked almost completely unlike their descendants. We now have the fossils that show where the perissodactyls came from (phenacodonts, Radinskya) and that document the radiation of the earliest horses, tapirs, rhinos, and brontotheres when they were almost indistinguishable to the untrained eye. We have the fossils that demonstrate the evolution of the horse family, the rhinoceroses, the tapirs, and the brontotheres, along with other examples not covered in this article. Their phylogenies are now much more bushy and branching, but otherwise, the general trends are the same that were observed over a century ago.” [4]

      I could go on, but the point has been made. Besides, arguing with someone so firmly in the grip of the Dunning-Kruger syndrome rapidly becomes tedious. Not all Christians are uninformed science denialists like yourself. Thankfully.

      1. Clack, J. A. (2009). The Fish–Tetrapod Transition: New Fossils and Interpretations. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 2(2), 213–223.

      2. Chiappe, L. M. (2009). Downsized Dinosaurs: The Evolutionary Transition to Modern Birds. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 2(2), 248–256.

      3. Thewissen, J. G. M., Cooper, L. N., George, J. C., & Bajpai, S. (2009). From Land to Water: the Origin of Whales, Dolphins, and Porpoises. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 2(2), 272–288.

      4. Prothero, D. R. (2009). Evolutionary Transitions in the Fossil Record of Terrestrial Hoofed Mammals. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 2(2), 289–302.

  4. October 7, 2012 2:25 pm

    fossils are dead bones and any person can read into them whatever they want.evolution is a lie of convenience and can be altered whenever it is shown to be false.

    • Ken Gilmore permalink
      October 7, 2012 7:59 pm

      >>fossils are dead bones and any person can read into them whatever they want

      Your evasion of the references above is duly noted. Time to come clean, Mr Tee, You don’t know the first thing about palaeontology.

      >>evolution is a lie of convenience

      Creationist blathering devoid of evidence.

      >. and can be altered whenever it is shown to be false.

      Citation required., Try to avoid anything Kent Hovind wrote, okay?

      >> the process of evolution and natural selection are just magical forces invoked by evolutionists whenever they can’t find some sort of answer for their dilemma.

      Citation required. I don’t take the word of a fundamentalist layperson such as yourself,

      >> neither exist or have existed but they are endowed with magical powers because the evolutionist needs to fill the void they have created when they rejected God and His creative act.

      Spare me the tirade, and try to address the evidence for common descent.

      >>read the book Life Ascending it is very illuminating on how evolutionists use both imaginary processes in magical ways.

      Really? When I looked at the book, I saw an elegant presentation of the evolutionary origin of many key events in life’s history. Looks like you failed to understand the book, or read it with your fundie blinkers on. So, I’m going to call your bluff. Show us. Make sure you document your case with references from the peer-reviewed literature.

    • 4xi0m permalink
      October 10, 2012 7:58 am

      Just my two cents: quibbles about the fossil record might have been relevant 20 years ago, but by now we’ve sequenced the genomes of a large number of organisms. The genomic signature of evolutionary history is so clear that fossil evidence is basically adjunct at this point, anyway. You might try reading something about genetics or genomics, DDT.

  5. October 7, 2012 2:29 pm

    p.s. the process of evolution and natural selection are just magical forces invoked by evolutionists whenever they can’t find some sort of answer for their dilemma. neither exist or have existed but they are endowed with magical powers because the evolutionist needs to fill the void they have created when they rejected God and His creative act.

    read the book Life Ascending it is very illuminating on how evolutionists use both imaginary processes in magical ways.

    • QBall permalink
      October 7, 2012 8:04 pm

      “the process of evolution and natural selection are just magical forces invoked by evolutionists whenever they can’t find some sort of answer for their dilemma.” If only scientists would rely on non-magical forces… such as those enlightened soles who believe in the Bible. They would never use some magical force to justify their position, like a dude turning water into wine, or walking on water!

      Shame on you, science!

      I have read Green Eggs & Ham! It too was illuminating! I guess it is all a matter or perspective.

  6. October 8, 2012 5:45 am

    Remember, David Tee: your fake PhD in biology will never top your real PhD in Relentlessly Applied Bovine Excrementing and Assorted Delusional Disorders.
    And thumbs up for the utter lack of self-awareness when calling evolution “a magical force” after blathering about God creating stuff by snapping fingers and cracking rib cages. The irony is making heads explode.

    • October 8, 2012 7:59 pm

      Never said I had a biology degree but where is your THD so you can comment on the Bible?

      • Brian M permalink
        October 8, 2012 8:04 pm

        So you have a doctorate in theology as well? Because most educated Christians not steepd in narrow, thin delusions have no problems accepting evolution.

      • October 9, 2012 10:29 am

        Seriously, you have the unmitigated gall to ask someone where their theology degree is as if it affords some sort of rank and privilege? You? Really?

        Really, really?

        After the amount of stupid things you have said about others education, and your blatant lies about your own… you–YOU of all people?!?–still have the nerve to ask someone where their degree is?

        Every single time I start to think my opinion of you could not get lower you write something that amazingly hypocritical and stupid, and it goes lower.

        Please, never visit my site again, and if you do, please don’t comment. Seriously it’s costing me IQ points every time I read your inane drivel. Please stop commenting while we all still have functioning brains left, because if we keep going at this pace…

      • October 9, 2012 10:44 am

        Well, there’s the difference: it seems you can’t stop repeating that biologists can’t grasp biology but you are utterly incapable to explain why they are wrong. I guess you are really just whining because they say something you don’t like.
        So only people with a doctorate in theology (which doesn’t mean anything) can speak about the Bible, but people WITHOUT a doctorate in biology (like you) can speak about evolution. Really? Come on, grow up.

  7. October 8, 2012 11:22 pm

    @B.M. Well those so-called christians are just showing that they do not believe God. Kind of a sad statement to make to call your own God a liar or say you doubt Him.

  8. Ken Gilmore permalink
    October 8, 2012 11:30 pm

    >>Never said I had a biology degree

    Which is hardly surprising given your demonstrated ignorance of the subject. That of course means we can safely disregard every claim you make against the validity of the subject as by your own admission you are simply not in a position to offer an informed opinion.

    >> but where is your THD so you can comment on the Bible?

    I’d be very careful with that line of questioning, Mr Tee, given that you don’t appear to have a legitimate doctorate. And on that subject, time to tell us something about that alleged degree of yours, University, date of granting, thesis subject right now, or your claims to have a genuine doctorate will be forever disregarded. Your word is not good enough for us – we need independent verification of your claims.

    Interestingly, genuine evangelical scholars – such as the likes of Bruce Waltke – appear to have no problems with evolution:

    “The best harmonious synthesis of the special revelation of the Bible, of the general revelation of human nature that distinguishes between right and wrong and consciously or unconsciously craves God, and of science is the theory of theistic evolution.” [1]

    Not that Waltke is advancing anything novel here:

    “Darwin’s cause in America was championed by the thoroughgoing Congregationalist evangelical Asa Gray, who set himself the task of making sure that Darwin would have “fair play” in the New World. Let us be clear right away that this cannot be dismissed as capitulation to the social pressure of academic peers. To the contrary, Gray had to take on one of the most influential naturalists in America at the time to maintain his viewpoint – none other than Louis Agassiz, a Harvard colleague who vitriolically scorned Darwin’s theory. But Gray was not alone. Many of his countrymen, associates in science and brothers in religion took the same stand. And indeed even those who ultimately remained unimpressed with if not hostile to Darwin were quite prepared to admit that evolution had occurred. It is surely not without significance that Christian botanists, geologists, and biologists – that is to say, those best placed to see with clarity the substance of what Darwin had proposed – believed the evidence supported an evolutionary natural history” [2]

    Wrong on the science, and wrong on the theology, Mr Tee. I suggest it’s time to apologise to the internet, and retire gracefully.

    References

    1. Bruce K. Waltke and Charles Yu, An Old Testament Theology: An Exegetical, Canonical, and Thematic Approach (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2007), 202.
    2. Livingstone D.N. “Darwin’s Forgotten Defenders” (Eerdmans 1984) p xi-xii

    • October 12, 2012 2:32 pm

      “Never said I had a biology degree”

      Neither did Darwin or most of the original pack of cohorts who promoted his evolutionary theory. It is amazing how many scientists follow 19th century non-scientists. the irony is wonderful.

      What you all do not understand is that origins is NOT in the realm of science. It is in the realm of theology and science is the interloper and usurper.

      • Ken Gilmore permalink
        October 12, 2012 5:41 pm

        >>Neither did Darwin or most of the original pack of cohorts who promoted his evolutionary theory.

        Darwin and his contemporaries spent years examining the evidence in detail before coming to the conclusion that evolution had occurred. Your assertion carries no validity.

        >> It is amazing how many scientists follow 19th century non-scientists.

        False. Contemporary science is not a commentary on Darwin. In fact, his contemporaries accepted the fact of evolution, but rejected his proposed mechanism for evolution (natural descent) in no small part to the lack of a decent theory of inheritance (Mendel’s work was only rediscovered in the early 20th century). Darwin knew nothing of comparative genomics as the discipline did not exist in his era. This subject alone makes the case for common descent overwhelming. Your assertion – as with everything else you have said – betrays a complete ignorance of the history of evolutionary biology, as well as its rudiments.

        >>What you all do not understand is that origins is NOT in the realm of science

        Mr Tee, you’re no authority in science or theology, so frankly your opinion is worthless, Get a real PhD, do some research, get it published in reputable journals and then you can start talking, Until then, you’re merely embarrassing Christians like myself who do not regard ignorance as a prerequisite for belief.

  9. dan permalink
    October 13, 2012 7:11 pm

    At this point in my life, I am a believer in Christ as well, I don’t understand the fear of evolution that plagues Christianity. I see no conclusive biblical evidence to say evolution couldn’t have happened, as I understand metaphor, allegory, and apocalyptic literature for what is is and how it conveys meaning. I have no fear of evolution or an old universe, and see at this time no contradiction. If God so chose to evolve the universe to a time that humans became what we are then so be it. I was not there when he laid the foundations of the earth.

Trackbacks

  1. Ignorance Is Just As Good » Jason Coleman

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 105 other followers

%d bloggers like this: