Are creationists purposely misquoting evolutionists?

[UTEOTW]

I have already shown the work many times. Just follow the above links to see some of the times.

Here, just follow the last one and I think that you will see most if not all of your quotes from this thread destroyed.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=437298&postcount=164

 

[BobRyan]

So what is the response to the failed and exposed antic of UTEOTW in PRETENDING that one can not QUOTE an atheist darwinist admitting to a blunder in evolutionism's past history of "story telling" - IF that atheist does not ALSO give up evolutionism and become a Bible believing Christian???

CM said -
But Uteotw has simply been honest in his appraisal of the data. The honest creationist can quite justifiably hold to his/her stance based on the biblical narrative.
But in Christian demeanor he/she must be honest in reporting the facts - even if they do not always go where we want them to.

Charles appears to GO BACK to the failed conclusion of UTEOTW that Christians are not being hones to NOTE these ADMITTED BLUNDERS in evolutionism's checkered past -- admitted EVEN by atheist Darwinists THEMSELVES!

Honestly folks this level of blind accpetance of such failed arguements when it comes to such an EASY example is beyond explanation.

Charles - just one question "What in the world are you thinking"!

In Christ,

Bob

 

[UTEOTW]

Here is the classic mind numbingly baseless invention that UTEOTW uses
"as predicted"



As ALREADY stated in my earlier posts - UTEOTW claims that it is "dishonest" to quote an atheist darwinist IF THAT atheist darwinist DOES NOT become a Bible believing Christians that ACCEPTS the Genesis account!

And there HE DID IT AGAIN!

He does not QUOTE ME as EVER saying "Simpson does not believe in evolution any more nor does Simpson think that horses evolved" -- so he just MAKES IT UP!!

How in the world can objective "thinking" Christians be duped by such shallow transparent tactics as UTEOTW offers time after time??

I don't get it! This is EASILY SEEN right through!

In Christ,

Bob

Excellent, Bob.

Then tell us just what you were getting at when you quoted Simpson as saying

The uniform continuous transformation of Hyracotherium into Equus, so dear to the hearts of generations of textbook writers, never happened in nature.

So you were not trying to suggest to us that "Simpson does not believe in evolution any more nor does Simpson think that horses evolved." Boy, it sure seems to me that this is just what you implied with that quote.

Great, enlighten us as to what you really meant then. This should be good.

And you know very well that I have never suggested that for a quote to be valid that you must show that the author "become a Bible believing Christians that ACCEPTS the Genesis account." All that I demand is that the original meaning of the author not be changed.

You just told us that you were not trying to suggest that Simpson does not accept horse evolution. So just what were you trying to suggest?

 

[BobRyan]

I have already shown the work many times. Just follow the above links to see some of the times.

Here, just follow the last one and I think that you will see most if not all of your quotes from this thread destroyed.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=437298&postcount=164

FROM THAT LINK we find this quote from me regarding the fraudulent, failed, debunked horse series that now stands fully and blatantly discredited EVEN by Atheist darwinists that CONTINUE to believe in evolutionism --

Bob said
Worse still is that the greatest of evolutionary believing scientists admit that there are no such “series” of any kind found in the fossil bearing layers.

Here I show that the FAILED fossil sequence PROPOSED (see the QUOTES THEY GIVE not simply the droning disclaimers of UTEOTW) is ADMITTEd to be a failed blunder. This is NOT the claim that "THEY all then went out and became Bible believing Christians denying that horses evolved AT ALL" as UTEOTW would love to "spin it".

The fact is that with EACH post UTEOTW simply digs himself deeper into the hole of his own making.

Hint UTEOTW: At some point it pays to just throw away the shovel.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

UTEOTW still not giving up the shovel for the hole he is digging for himself says --

Quote:
The uniform continuous transformation of Hyracotherium into Equus, so dear to the hearts of generations of textbook writers, never happened in nature.

So you were not trying to suggest to us that

"Simpson does not believe in evolution any more nor does Simpson think that horses evolved." Boy, it sure seems to me that this is just what you implied with that quote.

Here UTEOTW ADMITs that HE is INFERRING (read INSERTING ideas) into the mere fact that Simpson is being QUOTED!! Having NO STATEMENT from ME that actually SAYS "I think Simpson stopped believing in evolution" or some quote FROM ME that actually SAYS "I think Simpson no longer believes that horses EVOLVED" UTEOTW in the statement above ADMITS he merely INFERS it!!


Then taking HIS OWN inference INSERTED into the MERE fact that the QUOTE from Simpson dares to be PUBLISHED in the thread in the post - UTEOTW accuses me of every form of dishonesty he can "further imagine" as he INSERTS his own story telling into THIS process - JUST as Patterson points to evolutionists doing with atheist darwinist evolutionism every day!

How sad!

How transparent!

And what a huge failure for those Bible believing Christians that would let themselves be duped by such shallow antics.

In Christ,
Bob

 

[UTEOTW]

Wow, all those words and you never told us just what it is that you were trying to suggest that Simpson was saying.

Tell us, please. Tell us what you were suggesting that Simpson was getting at. Because if you were not trying to tell us that "Simpson does not believe in evolution any more nor does Simpson think that horses evolved" then please tell us what you were trying to argue. Because now I don't know what you were getting at.

Here is the quote again, for reference.

The uniform continuous transformation of Hyracotherium into Equus, so dear to the hearts of generations of textbook writers, never happened in nature.

 

[BobRyan]

UTEOTW

Then tell us just what you were getting at when you quoted Simpson as saying


Quote:
The uniform continuous transformation of Hyracotherium into Equus, so dear to the hearts of generations of textbook writers, never happened in nature.


So you were not trying to suggest to us that "Simpson does not believe in evolution any more nor does Simpson think that horses evolved." Boy, it sure seems to me that this is just what you implied with that quote.

Great, enlighten us as to what you really meant then. This should be good.

I have only said it about a zillion times!

#1. SIMPSON ADMITS that the horse series initially published -- and promoted as THE BEST example of evolution - was in fact BOGUS!! NOT because HE does not think horses evolved but because the STORY they were telling was so easily DEBUNKED as it was a pathetically transparent FABRICATION of a fossil SEQUENCE that is in fact NOT FOUND in that SEQUENCE in nature!

I.e. ON to a NEW Story!! Said the true believers in evolutionism. "SO say we ALL!"

#2. My second point is was that this BLUNDER that is admitted to EVEN by atheist darwinists SHOWS the pathetic METHODS used to create this story telling doctrine on behalf of atheist darwinism. THIS is not SIMPSON's argument - rather it is simply the obvious conclusion from allowing the objective mind to SEE Simpson ADMIT to the blunder!

Having only said this a zillion times I can see how your blind devotion to evolutionism "anyway" would leave you stuck back at square one still whining that Bible Believing Christians should not be allowed to quote Atheist Darwinists like Simpson AS THEY admit to the blunders found in the evolutionism's checkered past. And then in that complaining state you leave yourself in - going on to slander those Christians accusing them of lying "for after all did they not QUOTE Simpson!!". The mere fact of the quote from Simpson seems to drive you to extreme lengths in "imagination" UTEOTW!

#3. In these zillion exchange scenarios with you I then WENT ON to point out that the level of objectivity in my actually finding YOUR OWN Atheist darwinists admitting to these blunders in their OWN story-telling checkered past -- I was using far more objective methods than you - for I DID not simply resort to MY OWN sources - but I found YOURS to make my case!

At that point you "predictably" denied that objectivity in that regard "is a good thing". not totally unnexpeted in view of the "antiknowledge" principle of atheist darwinism but still - you did do it.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

UTEOTW digging the hole "even deeper" as if that was possible!

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=785007&postcount=86

Wow, all those words and you never told us just what it is that you were trying to suggest that Simpson was saying.

Tell us, please. Tell us what you were suggesting that Simpson was getting at. Because if you were not trying to tell us that "Simpson does not believe in evolution any more nor does Simpson think that horses evolved" then please tell us what you were trying to argue. Because now I don't know what you were getting at.

Here is the quote again, for reference.

The points have been numbered for you in the post above "for the zillionth time".

Your confession that you slander me repeatedly for QUOTING Simpson when in fact you find NO QUOTE from ME saying that I think Simpson "gave up evolutionism" or that "Simpson does not think horses evolved" speaks volumes!!

Consider your posted confession "linked" for future reference.

 

[BobRyan]

UTEOTW - since "you keep asking for it" -- here is more.

#1. First the objective thinking mind NOTES that Simpson (atheist darwinist icon for evolutionists) is HIMSELF admitting that what they spewed out to the public was false when it comes to the exact fossil series they published!! He ADMITS that the "Series" the "SEQUENCE" did not HAPPEN in nature"

He does not claim that all of the fossils were "faked" just that the SEQUENCE - the ORDER they were placed in was a fake and then the STORY wrapped around that FAKED order (the story of smooth orthogenic transitional sequence) was also WRONG!

#2. In that confession from Simpson the objective thinking mind begins to investigate DEEPER just HOW such an imaginary SEQUENCE could be presented as FACT when it was NEVER FOUND TO START WITH!! Because if they are doing that as "a matter of policy" then WHAT OTHER THINGS are also fraudulent.

It is THERE that the quote I provided about the "great secret of paleontology" comes in. Surely you remember it? It is quoted right here on this thread!

Anyone?

Hint: Click on this link http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=784217&postcount=67

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Going back to POST 14!! We find that I START this response SHOWING this group EXACTLY where UTEOTW and those aligning with his argument are going! I SHOW the blunder that UTEOTW just admitted too making as the STARTING argument in my post on this thread!

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=778493&postcount=14

..
The Atheist evolutionist wants you to "pretend" that you think that the ONLY argument against evolutionism (i.e. the only time you may quote an evilutionist) is when you find them "Being a creationist". But in fact nothing is FARTHER from the truth!!

The point of the quote above by AIG is NOT to "show an evolutionist BEING a creationist" (obviously).

The "salient" point is to show that they ADMIT to "aprior bias" -- PERIOD!

This point is so patently obvious that the true devotee to evolutionism only "survives it" by "revisionism" by "pretending" that the ONLY VALID quote useful by creationists SHOULD be in the totally illogical and nonsensical form of an "Evolutionist CLAIMING to be a Creationist"!!


A more rediculous position can hardly be imagined - yet this is "all that is left" to the hapless evolutionist confronted with clear objective points raisted against evolutionism and enforced by THEIR OWN sources!!

Basically UTEOTW has fallen into this transparent antic to get to the point of accusing Bible believing Christians of dishonesty -- so many times I now START out pointing out this failing of UTEOTW from the beginning.

What is NEW (and the reason I keep attaching links to UTEOTW's posts) is that he is now admitting to his blunder "in text" form in the post itself.

This is a huge step forward.

 

[Charles Meadows]

Bob, Bob, Bob, Bob...

Just where do you get your information on "evolutionists"?

True there are many holes and many unproved assertions. But you grossly misrepresent the facts. As a Bible-believing Christian believe me I wish the facts 100% supported a young earth. I really do. It would make a lot of things easier.

But you are either quite misinformed or you are dishonest. I suspect it is the former.

We must be honest and accurate!! What good does it do for us to tell our Sunday School kids that evolutionist theories are all bankrupt and built on lies? When they go off to college and encounter professors who actually do know this subject well they will be in for trouble!! Doesn't that bother you?? Ij the long run I think the whole "Answers in Genesis" movement will have hurt more believers than it ever "helps".

Secondly - neither Ute, nor I nor anyone here has asserted that Bible believing Christians are liars - only those Christians who lie about the facts to discredit scientific theories because they are afraid of evolution.

Two important points must be made here:

1. If we as Christians believe that God is God and that the Bible is true we should not NEED to prove that true - and with what would we prove it if the Bible is the final standard?

2. We must be honest. Science makes the earth look old. Maybe that will be seen as wrong years from now. But we must be honest with what we see. We help no one by misrepresenting the facts.

 

[BobRyan]

CM

But you grossly misrepresent the facts.

But you are either quite misinformed or you are dishonest. I suspect it is the former.

Here we have "agian" the slanderous charge - but where is the "QUOTE FROM ME" that you are referencing?? After claiming to honestly believe UTEOTW's failed charges and after SEEING that I PROVIDE HERE the quotes that he so opposes (from Simpson for example) why in the world you do not SHOW the quote from me that you FIND to be in error??!!!

Still following blindly behind UTEOTW's failed policy? did you not SEE UTEOTW ADMIT that this was pure imagination and that he had NO QUOTE from me saying ANY of the things he was only INFERRING??



Do you claim to take INFERENCE and use your own imagination to then slander others?

Why in the world are you following that failed tactic here?

Why not SHOW your work? DO the MATH - I have given the quotes AND NOW UTEOTW is ALSO on record as admitting HE HAD NOTHING since He could find NO QUOTE from me saying what he slandered me to say.

Why would you come in AT THIS Point and jump off the cliff "again"???

Surely this is so clear that even you can see it!

 

[BobRyan]

CM said

Secondly - neither Ute, nor I nor anyone here has asserted that Bible believing Christians are liars - only those Christians who lie about the facts

After checking out your self conflicted statement - check out the title of this thread. THEN SHOW that your assertions that I have lied in quoting these Atheist Darwinist sources -- "you know" the actual discussion we are having here!!

(Evolutionists are always such a trip as they seek to dodge and weave the point of the discussion) Why be so married to avoiding facts?

 

[Charles Meadows]

Bob,

It's only slander if it's not true!

Your statements about all evolutionist theories being "junk science" are just wrong. It's as simple as that. I never said you were lying - I just said you were wrong! Again I suspect it is a lack of knowledge of the subject and not dishonesty.

I am not sure who your "atheist Darwinists" are. Darwin was not right about everything, nor were many of his followers, some of whom have been a bit more confident than the evidence would allow.

But you are stating that evolution is a big farce - and the fact is there is a lot to commend it, even if in the end one chooses not to believe it. And I have no problem with someone who rejects evolution (in fact I do not consider myself an true "evolutionist").

I will continue to to oppose your misrepresentation of the facts. Why?

Because we should not and must not fear the truth and because we must not mislead our children with untrue statements, even if they are well-meant ones.

NOTE TO ALL OTHERS READING THIS POST: Please note I am not trying to further the cause of evolution - I am simply stating that we must be honest in our reporting. If evidence suggests the earth is old we can simply state that without agreeing to it. Our desire to "prove the scriptures right" does not justify making false statements. Bob may mean well - but his reporting of the scientific evidence (which you may take or leave) is inaccurate

 

[BobRyan]

Bob,

It's only slander if it's not true!

Your statements about all evolutionist theories being "junk science" are just wrong. It's as simple as that. I never said you were lying - I just said you were wrong! Again I suspect it is a lack of knowledge of the subject and not dishonesty.

Feel free to provide the quote from me.

IN Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Bob,

I am not sure who your "atheist Darwinists" are.

See the quotes I provide on this thread. Link to follow.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=784211&postcount=65

At that link on this thread I provide the quotes that are perfect examples of the SUBJECT MATTER of the thread. They are quotes I have given to UTEOTW a zillion times in the past - quotes that he whines about each time. So I offer them for you to fully build your case to support your accusations. Please "show your work" -- i.e. "do the math" don't simply issue empty accusation after accusation.

Recall that the subject is the question of whether Bible believing Genesis accepting Christians are "misquoting" these atheist darwinist sources.

CM said Bob may mean well - but his reporting of the scientific evidence (which you may take or leave) is inaccurate

Again another baseless charge "without a quote from me". you simply hurl charges and accusations without actually pointing to some quote from me - some link -- SOMETHING and then sayhing here is an incorrect statement and here is the proof that it is wrong.

Without actually having some substance to your accusation after accusation approach - how do you expect to be taken seriously? Is it simply the "exercise of making accusations" that you are interested rather than "actual facts"??

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

CM
I will continue to to oppose your misrepresentation of the facts. Why?

Hint: start by actually QUOTING ONE!

Then show in detail that "I have misrepresented the facts" - in this case - the facts of the quote I give when I quote atheist darwinists.

 

[BobRyan]

Charles I would like to extend the offer on the previous page to you as part of the "anyone" statement.

Since you are not responding to the points being raised here - this might be a good place to start to support your accusations regarding my use of quotes.

UTEOTW - since "you keep asking for it" -- here is more.

#1. First the objective thinking mind NOTES that Simpson (atheist darwinist icon for evolutionists) is HIMSELF admitting that what they spewed out to the public was false when it comes to the exact fossil series they published!! He ADMITS that the "Series" the "SEQUENCE" did not HAPPEN in nature"

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=784214&postcount=66


He does not claim that all of the fossils were "faked" just that the SEQUENCE - the ORDER they were placed in was a fake and then the STORY wrapped around that FAKED order (the story of smooth orthogenic transitional sequence) was also WRONG!

#2. In that confession from Simpson the objective thinking mind begins to investigate DEEPER just HOW such an imaginary SEQUENCE could be presented as FACT when it was NEVER FOUND TO START WITH!! Because if they are doing that as "a matter of policy" then WHAT OTHER THINGS are also fraudulent.

It is THERE that the quote I provided about the "great secret of paleontology" comes in. Surely you remember it? It is quoted right here on this thread!

Anyone?

Hint: Click on this link http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost...7&postcount=67

 

[Charles Meadows]

Bob,

I've been reading your posts for over 2 years now. The "quotes" are fairly numerous. But here's one:

Here we have a classic blunder where believers in atheist darwinism are seen to cling to their "orthodoxy" so blatantly that they are willing to "tell story after story" just to prop up their orthodox faith in evolutionism - presenting them as if they are "science".

This statement may (and probably does) apply to a few mean-spirited professors with a grudge against Christianity. But it is a misrepresentation of the scientific community as a whole. I have a degree in biology fro UVa, where I helped teach some undergrad classes. I do know the subject fairly well. I also, in having met and talked with hundreds of biology professors and researchers, not found this to in any way be representative of their thinking. Most are agnostic men who are concerned with their own experiments and who do not give much thought (pro or con) to religion or to the biblical creation account.

You have given several examples of statements from "atheist Darwinists" regarding the veracity of the whole Darwinian scheme. The links in your last post were from 1979 and 1953. These "confessions" demonstrate that some biologists are presumptious in their statements, perhaps persumptious beyond proof anyway. But these statements do not address the mountains of scientific evidence suggesting the earth is old.

You are right that there are still holes in the whole evolutionist theory. But that is about all on which you are right. The vast majority of evidence suggests that earth is old. And much evidence suggests that evolution happened to some degree.

My main criticism is that your above quote, if you substitute "creationism" for "atheist Darwinism" would quite accurately describe your approach to the whole issue.

Once again I do not have a problem with creationism, only those who misrepresent the facts to try to support it.

 

[BobRyan]

The title of this thread is Are creationists purposely misquoting evolutionists?. you have AGREED with UTEOTW diatribes against Christians saying that they are purposely misquoting the atheist darwinists.

I then provided several examples where I HAVE quoted atheist darwinists and where UTEOTW as whined bitterly about those quotes in the past AND HERE. UTEOTW even provided his own link to MY quotes of atheist darwinists and whined about it as well.

There is ample material here for you to make your case as to your agreement with UTEOTW on this matter.

But your recent post above takes NONE OF THEM and simply chooses instead to describe that fact that you object to my BEING a Bible believing Christians that accepts the Genesis account in God's Word and that I see atheist darwinist doctrine as being as completely opposed to the Gospel AS DO atheist darwinists admit it to be - those like Richard Dawkins for example, and that I see its religious orthodoxy practiced in the form of pseudo-science "story telling" that Patterson admits to existing among evolutionism's faithful devotees.

CM
You have given several examples of statements from "atheist Darwinists" regarding the veracity of the whole Darwinian scheme. The links in your last post were from 1979 and 1953. These "confessions" demonstrate that some biologists are presumptious in their statements, perhaps persumptious beyond proof anyway. But these statements do not address the mountains of scientific evidence suggesting the earth is old.

It is true that I am NOT debating evolutionism in general on this thread - I am merely showing that the quotes provided are accurate. If the point is for me to address and debunk the little evidence that is bent to prop up the religion of atheist darwinism -- and then for you to defend it, we would need another thread entirely.

As for your statements on how enthusiastic I am about exposing the faith of atheist darwinism -- I will also grant you that that is a great topic and maybe we should start a thread on that subject. But as it is - I am asking you to "Show the math" for your agreement with UTEOTW on the QUOTES I gave of atheist darwinists and the claim that these are "misquotes" just because they do not flatter the doctrines of evolutionism and they expose the blunders in evolutionism.

In other words "back on topic"

In Christ,

Bob