oliver/quote..<<..Testing/whether or not bacteria.;.develop drug resistence..is falsifiable..(and confirmable).>>

oh/dear...oliver...so thats the point
of you googling-up..then you-tubes...

well mate...you should-know/by-now

IM FINE..WITH...micro-evolution..
[bacteria/mutating...drug-resistance]
...within their bacteria/SPECIES...fact/great...!

[thats one/of the biggest reasons..drugs/wont..work..for long]
we had the same thing..with ddt..

BUT...micro-evolution..WITHIN..species
provides..SQUAT/proof..of macro-eviloootion..INTO NEW* GENUS

which..HAS...NEVER..ben observed..
NOR recorded
and is the delusion...lie

is/the reason..why fools/professing..evi-dense
keep selling/their theory..
based on..the WRONG..EVIDENCE..!

just because man/can run
dont mean/men can run..faster than a jet

it would be/the same equivelent
it only makes...sense..to you..
cause you...need to believe..A LIE

it affirm's..to you..
your right/on the same side..as the..clever-guys
but mate..they..are so clever..they fooled/us..into believing..LIES

they dont got/..what..you think..they got
they just made...you believe/..they do

and..there you are clapping..on rusty
who you think..has proof

and he has gone silent...lol
cause he know's...he dont

he has SPIN....thats..it
he can fool/kids..fans/believers..decieved

but not those/who studied the stuff..
more than..he would have you believe,..,he ever could/did

why/you fail..to see the con..
is for you..to rectify..[or not]

when the debate slows down..
i will be highlighting/some of the more absurd...
and unreplied questions..

im/over the..proffesing-rusty/cathhaters..lying

..<<The sound was/fine on my computer.>>....that...is great
how many of them/computing/machinations..have you gone through

how much teqnoligy..you bought..that went obsolete

that was all..to sell you on the latest/fad
instead..of giving you..the true-facts..of life

<<Being busy..I just sampled..the content..here-and-there>>

i have..no doudt..you eventually..did

AFTER you cut/pasted..them
to seen..to/be making a point

but it was/is a point i conceeded..long-ago

MICRO-evolution..of species/
within..their genus..[is fact]

*THE LIE..is macro*-evolution*..
OUT-OF*...GENUS..creating new* genus*...thats/the lie

which has..NEVER-BEEN..RECORDED..EVER

nor is provable..nor replicatable
thus..not science/..nor fact..thus theory/spin

see..the difference/betwen...genus..
is more/than a few piddling..micro-evolutions

SCIENCE...demands evidence...faulsifications

faith..simply requires/
../gullible-believers..

you got...some-fact..irrelivant..to the case-in-point
but..its/not saying...you got/proof..of the lie

exta-genus..e-volution..is/a..fraud...con-cept

GET-it?

Rusty,
Firstly, there’s nothing inherently wrong with quoting people. Newspapers do it. Biblical writers did it. Academics do it. You do it. I do it. Everybody does it.

Here are the quotes you found so offensive:
Oliver - "Mutation and natural selection in natural schemata infuse direction. Good or bad are arbitrary terms in this context."
Sagan - "... mutations occur at random and are almost uniformly harmful - it is rare that a precision machine is improved by random change in the instructions for making it."

I compared them after noticing that they were roughly talking about the same thing, pointing out they were somewhat incongruous.

The quote by Sagan is not overly revealing. It’s a blunt observation that anyone could make. It’s not controversial. Who disagrees with it? I could have got a similar reference from other scientists. I could have referenced it at the ‘Festival of the Bleedin’ Obvious’.

I am perfectly aware that the very famous Carl Sagan was a strong proponent of the theory of evolution. This is one reason for selecting him. As David alluded when talking about lawyers, sometimes taking the testimony of one who is on the other side of a position, what they might call in a courtroom a hostile witness, makes the point stronger. For instance, If Kevin Rudd says that the Labor Party really are a bunch of no hopers, that quote becomes a lot stronger than if Tony Abbott said it.

Another reason I chose Sagan was that I knew he was respected by Oliver, as Oliver had mentioned him earlier.

Oliver recommended the book "Almost like a Whale" by Steve Jones. I will read it if I get the chance. To Oliver I would recommend the simple (read it in an hour or two) but insightful creationist book by Carl Weiland “Stones and Bones”. Weiland lists several ‘beneficial mutations’, which are not exactly the issue. What matters are mutations that increase the information content to the genome. If evolution was true, these should be everywhere and plentiful. Instead there are a few disputed examples.

Oliver, Thanks for your response.
You seem to go with the line that I’m in error but not lying.

I’m thankful for David for helping to clarify certain things. There is a world of difference between being in error and lying. For example, when my son does his primary school homework, if he says that seven times seven equals fourteen, I would correct him, but I wouldn’t castigate him for being a liar (not unless I want him to hate me in my old age).

Thanks, David, for taking the trouble to write and help throw some light on the power of words and the adversarial nature of argument.

Oliver,
You suggest I was the messenger not the source of the quote. On this you are correct. I am not the source. The source of the quote was Carl Sagan. He wrote what he wrote in that 1977 book of his.

You seem to be under the impression that creationists don’t accept evolution because they are ignorant of it. I don’t think that is true, and could give you many counter examples. E.g. Dr Gary Parker is one leading creationist who used to write text books on evolution before seeing the inadequacies of the theory.

You also talk about creationists accepting certain things on trust. This probably happens a lot, but I think it happens more on the evolution side. As evolution is the accepted theory, many would naturally assume that position, thinking that it must be done and dusted, proved, signed sealed and delivered by the people in the white coats who should really know what they’re doing. We accept many things on trust in our society. Creationists, on the whole, are more likely to investigate why they believe what they do, as they’ve had to swim against the stream in taking that position. For the great majority of those in our society who accept evolution, how many do you really think have read a book on it?

I’ve responded previously about those two supposed ‘flat earth’ verses of Scripture. If atheists want to say that the Bible teaches that the world is flat, they should try and find some other Scriptures. I suggest you read those verses again in their own context. They both describe dreams or supernatural visions. Neither is making comment about the world’s geology or topography.

Appealing to a tired old chestnut like ‘the Bible teaches the world is flat’ isn’t taking this discussion anywhere, even by your own criteria you gave the other day of what you thought was important.

You ask what I think of Christians who accept evolution. It’s a fair question. I’ll try and answer at a later date, sometime after I’ve got some sleep. It’s late.

Speaking of quotes, I'd be curious as to what the Christians here have to say about the fact that the Bible itself disproves god:

"There is no God." (Psalms 14:1)

well as time moves on
lets rebut another lie

that minour errors[mutations]..are benefitial

here is the latest[hot-off the press]
http://www.google.com/search?client=gmail&rls=gm&q=cohesin%20downs%20syndrome

ok you possably missed-it..aas most of the media...is going with hoorkins..and one of his delusions[re god]..not dorkins..this is that wheel-chair..bound guy..that talks with a computer[much like me i guess]

i will sumise/it in plain-speak...<<..The Newcastle/University-team saw..a fall in/levels..of proteins/called cohesins,..essential for chromosomes..to divide properly..for fertilisation.>>

ok get it[what you call mutation...lol
[micro-evolution]

<<Writing/in..Current Biology,..they said.''understanding this process..could help/develop ways..to prevent cohesin loss'.>>

<<Abnormal-eggs..are linked to infertility,..miscarriage and conditions..including Down's Syndrome>>.

<<It was already-known..that pregnancy-problems/in older-women..can be linked-to..eggs containing..the wrong number/of chromosomes,..but not/why..this occurred.>>

its likely..one/of you will say/chromosonal..increase=new genus..
but to rusty..i would note the fruit/here..is DOWNS-syndrome..not a/..any new*genus*/genious


continued..<<All/the cells..in the body,..except for sperm/and eggs, contain..two copies/of each chromosome.>>

<<Sperm/and eggs...must*..lose/one copy ..in readiness/for fertilisation,..a complex process>>...

that is how/god/nature/nurture/natural-selector...OVERCOMES..any..mutation..by matching..it..with another[non mutated]chromsonal-strand.

<<Cohesins...bind/..chromosomes-together..by entrapping them..in a ring...This is essential..for them to divide properly...If there/is too little..cohesin,..the structure..can be too.."floppy"..for division to happen..equally.>>..

result..mutant/chromsonal info...
[mutation/causing..ERROR...to/wit..bad...

<<In eggs,..the problem/is compounded..by the fact..that/the physical attachments..which hold chromosomes/together...are established before birth..

..and must*be..maintained..[by cohesins]..until the egg/divides..just before ovulation...which can be decades later.>>

<<The researchers/looked at..eggs from young/and old..[mice]..and found cohesin/levels..declined with age...

...By tracking/chromosomes..during division/in the egg,..the Newcastle-team..found that/the reduced cohesin..in eggs..from older females/resulted in/some..chromosomes..becoming trapped/and unable to divide properly>>>

mutation/by anyother name=FLUKE/chance...
is/not selective...completly natural..[physics/chemestry/physio-logical..ie declining/decendant[mortal/flesh]...temporal.

<<Lead/researcher..Dr Mary Herbert,..of the Centre/for Life..at Newcastle University,..said: "Reproductive-fitness..in women declines dramatically..from the mid-thirties onwards...Our findings/point to cohesin..being a major-culprit..in this.

"The aged mice/we used are/equivalent..to a woman in her early forties.

"Cohesin levels/were very much..reduced in eggs/from older mice..and the chromosomes/underwent a very messy division...>>mutation...lol..<<resulting/in..the wrong number of chromosomes..being retained..in the egg.">>>

YET NO NEW GENUS
genious

next rebuttal

not dor-kins..but hoor-kins
who clearly..thinks*..he isnt beloved...of god
little realising..god gave him special-gifts...non-the-less

anyone got a text-link
or willing to open...the play?

LETS MAKE THIS A TEAM/EFFORT?
IF/NOT..i will do so

in my own time
after/i read..what..you think he said
or news/reports...what they THINK..he is saying