quote/aj=link..<<Claim CB102:Mutations/are random noise;..they do not add information...

Evolution cannot-cause..an increase/in information.
quoterd/Source:AIG,..n.d./Creation-Education..Center.>> http://www.answersingenesis.org/cec/docs/CvE_report.asp

so visited..the link

couldnt find..the random-noise..
but loosly..this might relate

<<..If you are assigned..a specific topic,..
please be sure to/stick to..the topic given.>>...good-advice

<<For example,..if your set/topic..is..“antibiotics,”..then it is worth explaining..antibiotic resistance..
and why/this..is not*..an example-of..*particles-to-people*..evolution..because no/new information..is ever generated.>>

so again...YOU quote..out/of context..
simply by quoting a deceptive-link

here goes..what the refered/to link ...is saying

anti-biotic..resistance=micro-evolution...within..the genus

particles-to-people=macro-evolution..exta...OUT_OF..genus

PLEASWE_NOTE..allthe referances...OF YOUR LINK
refer..to vairiation/mutation...IN THE SAME SPECIES

so your/link..then-rebuts..its own miss-definition's

BY selectivly..quoting..what it DOES have evidence...FOR
to/wit...MICRO-evolution..within species/within genus

studiously/ignoring..that it dont..cant..have evidence for
to/wit...mutation..OUT OF GENUS..[macro-evolution]

this type-of/point..scoring..only fools idiots

but thanks for the link to the link
i learned..from-it
you lot even need to change..the definition..of theory

<<Do not say “evolution..is just a theory.”>>
MAINLY BECAUSE>>>THERE IS TWO FORMS>>OF EVOLUTION
one valid[micro-evolution]

the other fraud...macro-evolution

<<While you/probably mean..“evolution is unproven,”>>
to wit particle/people[macro-evolution]

<<..the problem/with calling evolution..“a theory”..is that scientists..use the word differently..from laymen...A..“theory”/in science means..a well-substantiated explanation of data.>>

that should be written//more closely..to the reality..[using the macro/micro...forms of differentiuated evolutions...and that ANY-data..relates only to the micro/evolving..within its genus/specie

thus this MACRO-evolution..called..<<The evolution/conjecture..should not-be..called a..“theory,”..because this gives/it..unwarranted respectability/by association..with the Theory/of Relativity,/Newton’s-Theory of Gravity,..the Debye-Hückel/theory of electrolytes, etc.>>

<<All these/..theories..have strong experimental-support..(although Newton’s theory..has been augmented/by Einstein’s)...In contrast, evolution...of life/from* non*-living*/matter>>

<<..and from..one-basic/type*..of organism..*to a different*-type..has not/the slightest..experimental/observational support.>>>

AND THAT_IS TRUE
because your link...ONLY talks of..micro-evolution[WITHIN..genus/within..species]

but retards...kept..DELIBERATLY..ignorant..of the full-facts...
DONT know any-better

and look so foolish..re quoting..the same ignorantly/deceptive referances/lol...as rebuttal[while ignoring the whole/context]

so easilly refuted..by those knowing the truth of the deceptions...is pure/LIES...

also note[re-your/link]...he dont give many..references...
ACCES-ABLE on the web...because the tryuth..is deliberatly..hidden

sure he quotes/studies
but you just try accesing them...lol

thats the joke

you want believability[let alone..claim..to science-fact...lol
PRESENT..working links..to those youlot..referance/out of context

clearly/oliver...dosnt read/replies..

aj...has..answerd/..his/questions..
in his-post/..before oliver-posted

as..aj has/..no come-back..

i will quote..<<So then,..lol..what/about people..like myself..who don’t need/to..accept the factuality/of evolution..based/on trust>>

thing/is..you still-do...
you didnt/..do..the reasearch..
more-likely..just read..[poorly/unquestion-ingly]...some book

<<because/they took..the initiative..to investigate/the evidence..(deleted)?>>..

yes..i question..that/too

<<And there-was..no Google/for me..back-then..either.>>

so what..spin/propaganda...book..was/it..then?

<<We/accept..many-things..on-trust..in/our society.>>

I DONT

aj/reply..

<<True that...lol..In many..cases/we can’t avoid it.>>>..on/trust...lol
straight from the..donkies/mouth

then...lol..<<Evolution,..on the other-hand,..is a/different-story...I’m walking-proof..of/this...>>lol

so give..SOME REAL PROOF/
not lies...missrepresenting..actual evolution/true-claim
..as per..the'particle/to..human'..THEORY...lol

as a/creationist..
i will take/this...his own-goal

he/quoted..<<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.>>

then/replied...
<<As a former/creationist..myself,..I can concur.>>>..lol

talk about..walking both-sides..of a barbed-wire..fence...lol

repeat davids/quote
[man can/rationalise..believing...anything..]..!

then/to add..to his..confusion..

<<Creationists investigate/why-they believe..what they/do..by looking..>>>...at the PROOF...and finding..its lie

not..like-you...believing..<<into their hearts/and praying to god..that he reveal himself..to them.>>..

this is where/so many..claiming-faith..get/it-all wrong..

<<By convincing/themselves>>...poorly..or by..faulse-hope

<<that..they/will..only see god..if they believe/he will show himself,..they can’t possibly..go wrong.>>>

this is how disbelievers..believe..in hope...
not faith...not even attempting..to affirm..by works/deeds

over-egsaguration..is worse..amoung those of weak-faith..
who then become..rabid..A-thiests...

typically over-stating..the why..of their own...weak-faith..

<<they NEVER dare-to..look outside/..[NON}..creationist resources.>>>..by they../he mean...he..didnt/then...and darent/now

<<..the arguments..I present..to George..are enough/to blow..religion out of/the..water altogether>>>

sadly...bro...it just/aint..so

“your EVOLUTION..[arguments/are..simplistic,..naive,..unsophisticated]
..to use your own/words..yet again

and worse...remembering...rebutting evolution..STILL DONT REBUT/god...

<<..there is no justification/as-to..why..a god>>
..is only revealing..you never/had..what you-make..claim..you/had..lol

by/what right..your..claim..
god needs..<<would require/such sophistication..and presuppositions..to know...>>

you/may know/him..via his creation...
just..see its not as science-claims...ie by accident..lol.

then/oliver..[the cheer-squad...lol

<<You are/eminently logical,..and your arguments/are irrefutable.>>>lol..says/he..mindlessly

simply because..he needs to believe-so

its the same...as rusty..lol

now he/has..a new idol

why?
because..he finds/words....he can agree/with..!

repeat/davids..quote

words/that agree..with his hopes...not reality..

<<I also/think-that..Dan and OUG..are both/wrong.>>>lol..at least..aj..presented..facts..even-if..wrong..

its..so easy-to rebutt..obvious-error...lol

then he hope/to take..the..[in his eyes]..win..and run..

with that/delusion...

quote..<<We differ/..in that..I see/no point..in continuing to argue/with them...>>ha-ha..that aint half/obvious..lol

<<If either/were..on a school-board..
I would/try-to..have them removed....>>

there is the same...ignorances..revealed..in mob-behaviour...
fools..not getting wiser..only seeking to kill..that they/cant explain

but even a dea/clock/..is right twice..a day

<<Why do you..think/you..can enlighten them?>>

i have-to...try..here/now
or be tied..to/fools..for eternity

thats why..

one/less..to wake..up..
one-less..to resque..from hell

oh/well

believe/if you have it
rebutt..if you can...lol

Using references appropriately has nothing wrong with it. Typical creationist quote mining does.

Your sentence is ambiguous. What quote from Sagan is uncontroversial? Yours, or mine correcting the false impression you gave?

Your "hostile witness" idea only works if the Sagan quote you used actually represents the truth of sagan's considered views.
So, do you think your quote of Sagan was a true reflection of his views of mutation as it relates to evolution, or do you think the quotes I offered, including the one from very nearby yours are a better and more accurate reflection of Sagan's opinion?

As a trained educator, is your response to objection from children as dismissive? Do you only sulkily capitulate after a schoolchild does university library work to show that you are not being truthful?
Is that indicative of peak practice in your workplace?

Moving on:

I think it is "cute" that you now think you can tell me, someone who has done extensive genomic, protein and expression analysis, what is important to evolution when you couldn't acknowledge a basic finding just a few days ago.

Come on Dan, tell us about the information content of genomes. Tell us how the gene for a beta-lactamase selected for amoxycillin resistance from random mutatnts of beta-lactamase previously selected for penicillin differs in "information content", and how you could tell.

Tell us how the "information content" could be measured, and the context.

Tell us how actual molecular interactions are not important to the information content of something that has it's being and exerts all interesting properties through such molecular interactions.

Your use of the term is an attempt to snow the ignorant.

It is possible you are just one of the ignorant so snowed by others, but you claim higher degrees, so as far as I am concerned, you should display the competance they imply, rather than merely using it to add glitter to something lacking such imprimatur. To do otherwise is in my opinion as dishonest as the Carl Sagan quote, something you have not resolved to my satisfaction. Are creationists just habitually dishonest?

Rusty

Dear OUG,

"clearly/oliver...dosnt read/replies.."

I have interacted here many times: In sum, you do believe in micro-evolution (as you call it) but not macro-evolution and that there has never been a new genus. I have provided examples and links across several thread as readers here know. Dan even acknowledges the evidence, or, at the existence of evidence, but choices not to believe it, which is his right.

All,

It would appears some theists (some Christians included)hold the less likely true against a clear mountain of evidence as proving their faith. I would not agree that most Christians I know take the Bible literature despite any claims to be "infallible" in the preface.

Dan,

What are the sentences around Carl Sagan's 1977 quote. As I siad above, the fundamentalist sites always start mid-sentence with an elipsis. What did he say in context?

All,

What concerns me is OUG and Dan are fed diagolue by other parties and that there is little inclination to test claims against twenty-first century understanding of the World,even though even many/most Christians accept the findings as true: e.g., findings in biology and physics.

oh-heck..no rebuttals...lol

ol-liver..referes..to.."a mountain..of evi-dense"
and so there/is..LOL
[for micro-evolution..within..the genus]

he can/deney genus..is relitive...
but lets use..his star's..OMMISIONS..to slap/him..with

here's..[rusty-star]..
to rebut..this ol-liver/non-genus..DELUSION..

lets use..ol rust/buchett's...bacteria...lol

from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bookshelf/br.fcgi?book=hp&part=A432

<<The genus...>>...GET_IT..GENIOUS..?

GENUS..<<..Helicobacter/presently..comprises 18..validly named species..and two Candidatus species,..a designation adopted/by..the International-Committee>>..of scientists

so...ol-liver...
ArgUE..that out with..ol-rusty..buchett

here/is..the links..i used/to track-down ol/rusties..bacteria

that he hasnt..BOTHERD..naming by genus...!...lol
NOR..named..SPECIFIC/..SPECIES...lol...wonder-WHY?

because..he would/rebut..
HIS NUMBER..1..fan...man..!

[only]...fan...lol

this/explains..bacteria/genus/species
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Helicobacteria%2Fgenus+species&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

this/names..ol/rust/buchettes...bacteria
Helicobacter/beta-lactamase..selected for amoxicillin resistance

a thing...he couldnt*/do...lol

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&q=Helicobacteria%2Fbeta-lactamase+selected+for+amoxycillin+resistance&btnG=Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

so two/QUICK..searches
and your lie..is rebutted

and rusty-buchette..ex-posed

i wont/get..into name calling
so..re-call..

the fav/quote

illogic..has its..own..logic..!

REPEAT...davids-maxum

“There is no/absurdity...that a thinking-person..cannot rationalise.”

to/be scientific..
the..'principle'...MUST/have..its faulsifyables

or it aint..science..!
.
thus-MACRO-evilootion..is/only..a theory..
or principle/..not science]

*"It is important/to distinguish/between.;..
the amount of/information
and..the quality..of that information"*

as/well..as who-is..saying..what
[and who pays..their bills]

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

which..HAS...NEVER..been 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*..!

THINK/why...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/..YOU..into believing..LIES

they dont got/..
what..you think..they got..!

they just made...you believe/..they do...lol

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

he know's...he dont..!

he has SPIN....thats..it..!

he can fool/kids..fans/believers..decieved..
but not those/..who studied..the stuff..

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

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

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

MICRO_EVOLVING..within..species/genud..yes
BUT NEVER..MACRO_EVOLVING..out/of genus

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

*THE LIE..is macro*-evolution*..!*!*!*!*!

OUT-OF*...GENUS..creating new*-genus*...

thats/the lie...!

MACRO_ECVIL-loot/lotion..has..NEVER-BEEN..observed/RECORDED..EVER

nor/is provable..
nor replicatable...!*!*!*!

thus..not science/..
nor fact..!*!

thus..theory/spin..!

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

SCIENCE...demands evidence...faulsifications..me-too..!

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

you got...some-MOUNTAIN?...lol..of-fact..
for MICRO-evolution/..lol

is..irrelivant..to the case-in-point
...you got/NO_proof..of the lie..[macro-evil-lotion]

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


live/with-it

no-one..should care...what fools...think
[we can rationalise/the most absurd things]

a fool/says;
'in his heart..there is/..no god'

revelations/says..
behold..the tabernacle..of god..is with-[in]..men
and he will dwell...with-[in]..them

gods/throne..is/in..the hearts..of men

satan/shall..go out and decieve
[or maybe..just..satans-spawn]...pro-fessors..pro=fessing...for $

but who cares/of fables..

lets/have the science..!

the facts/..of science..
not...its MOUNTAIN/of....evolving-fictions

OUG,

What do you think about Dan not believing in micro-evolution, I am representing him correcly? Or George who s happy to believe in God and accept science?

O.