Push: Library doesn’t have either book. I’m down to buy one of them on Amazon. Which would you prefer I read?
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Push: Library doesn’t have either book.[/quote]
You need to go in the “Fiction” section.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Since I know we have at least one MD who participates in this thread I thought he and maybe some others might find this article interesting:
Mutations: The Raw Material for Evolution?
by Barney Maddox, M.D.
…
Dr. Barney Maddox is a urology specialist in Cleburne, Texas, and author of the biological sciences course material for the Creationist Worldview distance education program offered by ICR.[/quote]
…and who, by misattributing Lamarkian notions to Darwin, so misunderstands Darwin and evolutionary theory, that he reveals himself to be utterly unqualified to take crayon in hand and scribble such nonesense.
These articles are hilarious, even though the levels of dishonesty are quite appalling.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[Now waiting for Doc Skep to rip Ben Carson, another dumb fuck, a new asshole][/quote]
Not at all…he is an extraordinarily talented and dedicated person!
But where does he speak against evolution, or against the scientific method? He can doubt, he can question, and still not endorse the concept that apples could as well rise tomorrow at dawn.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
DrSkeptix wrote:
pushharder wrote:
Since I know we have at least one MD who participates in this thread I thought he and maybe some others might find this article interesting:
Mutations: The Raw Material for Evolution?
by Barney Maddox, M.D.
…
Dr. Barney Maddox is a urology specialist in Cleburne, Texas, and author of the biological sciences course material for the Creationist Worldview distance education program offered by ICR.
…and who, by misattributing Lamarkian notions to Darwin, so misunderstands Darwin and evolutionary theory, that he reveals himself to be utterly unqualified to take crayon in hand and scribble such nonesense.
I should’ve known he was a dummy. Sorry. You want me to post a T & A pic to make it up to you? A “created” T and A pic not an “evolved” one.
Maybe from now on I’ll have to vette every scientist or MD through you so I can find out beforehand whether they pass muster so they may express an opinion via this forum.[/quote]
Maybe so.
But what does this say about this “ICR,” for which he is author of “the biological sciences course material for the Creationist Worldview blahblahblah?” Seems like they have mighty low standards of inquiry and honesty.
May I have my T & A photo now, sir?
[quote]pushharder wrote:
DrSkeptix wrote:
pushharder wrote:
[Now waiting for Doc Skep to rip Ben Carson, another dumb fuck, a new asshole]
Not at all…he is an extraordinarily talented and dedicated person!
But where does he speak against evolution…
I guess you might want to click on the link I provided. Google might help you as well.[/quote]
Oh, well, even an extraordinarily talented and dedicated person might be limited in his imagination.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
DrSkeptix wrote:
pushharder wrote:
DrSkeptix wrote:
pushharder wrote:
Since I know we have at least one MD who participates in this thread I thought he and maybe some others might find this article interesting:
Mutations: The Raw Material for Evolution?
by Barney Maddox, M.D.
…
Dr. Barney Maddox is a urology specialist in Cleburne, Texas, and author of the biological sciences course material for the Creationist Worldview distance education program offered by ICR.
…and who, by misattributing Lamarkian notions to Darwin, so misunderstands Darwin and evolutionary theory, that he reveals himself to be utterly unqualified to take crayon in hand and scribble such nonesense.
I should’ve known he was a dummy. Sorry. You want me to post a T & A pic to make it up to you? A “created” T and A pic not an “evolved” one.
Maybe from now on I’ll have to vette every scientist or MD through you so I can find out beforehand whether they pass muster so they may express an opinion via this forum.
Maybe so.
But what does this say about this “ICR,” for which he is author of “the biological sciences course material for the Creationist Worldview blahblahblah?” Seems like they have mighty low standards of inquiry and honesty.
Like I said before, Santee is what, maybe a 15 minute drive from you? Spend a few hours over there putting ‘em in their place and report back here. I think it would make for interesting sidelight to this thread. Tell you what, I’ll even send you the gas money and a gift certificate at Denny’s. So there, ol’ Flushy is willing to pay for your expenses for a day at the zoo.
May I have my T & A photo now, sir?
You betcha!!
Here’s your T:
[photo]22738[/photo]
Here’s your A:
[photo]22739[/photo]
[/quote]
OK…That’s it! I’m gassing up the Chevy and gettin’ myself an education!
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Since I know we have at least one MD who participates in this thread I thought he and maybe some others might find this article interesting:
Mutations: The Raw Material for Evolution?
by Barney Maddox, M.D.
“Positive” Mutations
Biology textbooks in theory present positive and negative mutations to students as though these were commonplace and roughly equal in number. However, these books fail to inform students that unequivocally positive mutations are unknown to genetics, since they have never been observed (or are so rare as to be irrelevant).[/quote]
There are prostitutes in some of the most AIDS-ridden parts of Africa that despite being regularly exposed to HIV don’t get infected. This is due to a mutation in a protein on their white blood cells that means the virus can’t get in. In this situation it can be described as a positive mutation.
It’s the premier example of a point mutation disease and as a disease it can hardly be positive (unless you happen to also have the worse disease malaria).
Hogwash, frankly. Genetic diseases often cast more light on how genes work than normal versions so are always discussed in textbooks.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Remember the peppered moth controversy way back yonder in this thread? How the creationist’s claim was “debunked?”
http://creation.com/more-about-moths[/quote]
That article appears to be suggesting that there is some difference between change in allele frequencies over time and evolution. The author seems to be quite confused. There is also more bullshit talk about “kinds”; oh dear.
No one in the scientific community cares that the photographs were staged; as noted before it’s quite difficult to take good photos of moths and there’s never been any evidence of fraud. And anyway as also mentioned before repeated studies have been conducted which confirmed the original findings. I like how you’ve conveniently forgotten all of this.