"Talking to Monkey Men"
Jeff Magill (jmagill@sm1.gte.net)
Wed, 05 Mar 1997 03:35:29 -0800
>
> Mr. Fisher, I too can be sarcastic but I am not one to discredit an
> argument simply because it is not printed yesterday? How many arguments
> in history still stand today that are hundreds of years old or even
> thousands? I imagine you are learning some right now in law school. Try
> learning the 10 commandments. They will do you well. If they were
> followed there would be no need for lawyers or law enforcement or any
> other criminal agency. Getting back to the point, What must be assessed
> is not "when" but what is being said and does it still hold true? If so
> -keep it. If not - discard it. The fact is that no advances in the
> fossil record have proven these creation scientists statements false
> since the 70's. Lucy still is an ape and she did not walk upright. I
> know your propensity for fantasy is great but you haven't a leg to stand
> on when it comes to transitional forms in the fossil record. Nice try on
> your appeal to the galley tactic concerning my argument but it is of no
> consequence to me. Australopithecus or Ramapitecus or any other
> pitifulicus are not missing links. If they truly were there would be no
> controversy. Everyone would come forward creationist or otherwise and
> say yah, they are - OK. The fact is they are not.
>
> To date, and this is February of 1997 when I last checked, there are no
> missing links that can be used to argue that man or any other species
> evolved from anything. All the evidence, and there are thousands of
> sites and millions of fossils, points to the fact that man has always
> been man and cats have always been cats and monkeys have always been
> monkeys just like God said in Genesis.
>
> If you want modern proof to confirm what I am saying and what
> creationists have said all along whether it be in the 70's, 80's, or
> 90's, then your best place to look is to the evolutionists themselves.
>
> They, by their own abandonment of the "gradual darwinian evolution
> notion for missing links" in the fossil record, have switched gears big
> time because their own "religious blind faith" theory wasn't holding
> water and they knew it. So blatant is the fossil record in confirming
> what creationists have said all along that evoutionary scientists have
> had to rewrite their fairy tale to conform to the evidence as it
> actually exists - meaning no transitional forms but rather just an
> abundance of life in all forms appearing simultaneously.
>
> Instead of admitiing that their theory is in crisis and their longly
> held biases are in error though, due to the lack of no transitional
> forms, they say now that evolution happened in shooooooorrrrrrrrrrrrrt
> buuuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrts and rapid evolvement which left no transitional
> forms in its wake..... Convienient Isn't it? It's also Absurd!
>
> So our first science fiction fairy tale just no longer can be defended
> any longer- people are wise and we have become fools. Instead of
> admitting that we are wrong, we'll just change the fairy tale. We'll
> make some adjustments and just hope, that maybe, nobody will notice the
> fact that our new, imaginative, little, story has more holes in it than
> its predicessor. Let's even give it a new scientific sounding name. I
> know, let's call it punctuated equilibrium. That ought to hold em for
> another 100 years or so and by then we'll be long gone.
>
> "Science has taken another giant step back for man and another giant
> leap backward for mankind..."
>
> Furthermore, Mr. Fisher,
> If you want to look to history in terms of academic dishonesty and
> fraudulent missing link hoaxes, evolutionary scientists are the most
> guilty of perpetual fraud and lack of scientific objectivity and
> integrity of any members of the scientific community. Repeatedly they
> have lied, distorted, and falsified evidence concerning missing links...
>
> Mr. Fisher, you've been fishing up the wrong stream for to long. Did you
> leave your brain back at the birth canal? That might help some of your
> ancestral fish heads swim to the fantasy waters of their next quantum
> leap where they become birds. You know scales and feathers are so much
> alike they could literally evolve right before your eyes...
>
> I'm sorry that my one quote wasn't recent enough for you. I guess I can
> go back though also to where your thinking on the subject orignates in
> scientific humanistic terms. How about darwin in the 1800's or how about
> the scopes trial in 1925? Are those recent enough for you because their
> arguments are the only things that have undergone the process of
> transitional forms. Actually, the theory of evolution can be traced and
> dates back to Babylon as recorded in Genesis 11. It is very religious in
> origin. Ancient pagan religions have always believed in this
> unsubstaniated mystical view of their beginnings. In fact today, new
> agers are saying that man is about to undergo his next quantum leap of
> punctuated equilibrium, if you will, only this short burst will cause
> him to not become a lizard or a monkey or even an evolved alien being
> but a god...Very interesting position you hold Mr. Fisher.
>
> Professing to be wise they became fools...(Romans 1)
>
> In His Love,
>
> Jeff Magill
>
> P.S. You guys should change your fish with legs, because in keeping with
> your tail, it already had become a lizard before it came out of the
> water.
====================================================================
For help, send a message to errancy-request@infidels.org with the word
"help" in the subject or body of your message. To unsubscribe from
ERRANCY, send a message to errancy-request@infidels.org with the word
"unsubscribe" in the subject or body of your message.