I'm truly sorry that you seem to feel so upset about this Linda. I honestly don't think you're grasping the premise of my previous response to you. Let me boil this down a bit.
You said...
you are misrepresenting the ideas of evolution with strawman arguments (you seem to be particularly fond of the rocks-to-people rhetoric)
If evolutionists don't believe in rock-to-man processes (i.e. "abiogenesis"), then
just where did the raw material to make mankind come from (according to the evolution religion)?
This is a rhetorical question, but I think it is important for you to attempt to answer it so we can get to the truth regarding what evolution actually believes (i.e. - has a tremendous amount of faith in).
Here's a little help:
abio: Not Living ("a" prefixed to a word means "not")
genesis: Beginning or Source
You said...
) and distractions (talking about globalism, socialism, whatever other things you think are evil, and lumping evolution in with them)
I truly hope you eventually make the connection between socialism, communism, satanism, and evolution. The fact is, evolution is the fundamental premise for these three systems. Until you are able to make that connection, you will be unable to logically see the true destructiveness in believing in evolution.
This process of seeing involves looking within yourself. Here's a very revealing hint. You are both a socialist and an evolutionist. There is a reason for this. It would be tremendously beneficial for you to look inside yourself and see if you can find out why. Truly, give it a go.
You said...
No lessons learned from your conversations with RAZD then Russ?
The rebuttals that RAZD made are on the same level as Dawkins—when he was asked (on video) why be believed that God could not exist outside the "system".
Dawkins response took, perhaps, several minutes; And among all of the "smart-sounding" phrases and "intelligent-sounding" words he used, in essence, his answer was this:
[color:"red"]
"God is less likely to exist than man because He's more complicated".[/color]
I'm not kidding.
In watching this video, I am amazed at this response because
it is literally on the intellectual level of a preteen, yet, evolutionists remain glued to these adolescent ideas like a religion. The dynamics of self delusion are astounding and fascinatingly ironic (The God Delusion = The Dawkins self-Delusion).
Any argument that attempts to rebut my statements by stating that man and animals evolved from rocks is a fantastically silly argument. The real "distractions" (as you put it) are the attempts to add credibility to these illogical ideas by mixing in scientific-sounding phrases and big words. Again, these processes of debate are the true "distraction" and [color:"blue"]when we boil down the phrases (like abiogenesis) into their true from, we end up with the clear truth that they claim that rocks turn into men and animals[/color].
As I said before, there is no need to rebut these types of man-made religious ideas provided by RAZD because a person who is self-deluded to the point where they believe rocks can turn into men and animals is beyond simple reason and—like a madman—cannot be reasoned with.
I don't mean to be offensive, but I have to be truthful. Well does the Bible speak of the "darkened" intellect:
[color:"brown"]
"Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their [color:"blue"]foolish heart[/color] was darkened. ... And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind..."[/color]
—Romans 1:21, 28
The word "foolish" here is Strong's #801: "
unintelligent"
The word "heart" here is Strong's #2588: "
mind"
You said...
The bias here is clear and it is also clear that you intend to preach what you believe is the truth by posting locked lists and hoping to drown out the voice of the opposition with them.
I make no secret about my bias: It is toward true science and well-founded logic. It rejects junk science and as a person who loves science and loves people, I spend part of my day dispelling these myths that have been so ingrained into our society through endless mantra (schools, museums, magazines, television, etc.).
[color:"blue"]
"If you repeat something long enough, people will believe it."[/color]
Evolution is incessantly promoted as is the global warming myth. Those who promote it are not particularly inventive as the methods are the same. Take a look and learn from their methods:
Junk Science: Global Warming Myth Busted "Therefore, a grotesque account of a period some thousands of years ago is taken seriously though it be built by piling special assumptions on special assumptions, ad hoc hypothesis [invented for a purpose] on ad hoc hypothesis, and tearing apart the fabric of science whenever it appears convenient. The result is a fantasia which is neither history nor science."—James Conant, Chemist and former President, Harvard University, quoted in Origins Research, Vol. 5, No. 2, 1982, p. 2.
"Darwinism is a creed not only with scientists committed to document the all-purpose role of natural selection. It is a creed with masses of people who have, at best, a vague notion of the mechanism of evolution as proposed by Darwin, let alone as further complicated by his successors."—S. Jaki, Cosmos and Creator (1982).
[color:"blue"]
"Evolutionism is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless."[/color]
—Bounoure, Le Monde Et La Vie (October 1963), Director of Research at the National center of Scientific Research in France.
The Bar Code and the Mark of the BeastOur Solor SystemEvolution Disproved in 50 Arguments 
