Hi Russ T

How ironic it is that none of my posts about the mathematical absurdity have been properly refuted, neither have any of my statements about the roulette wheel (probability) from many months ago, or symmetry.
Well I pointed out that your claim was based on a straw man and so had no substance to it here.
http://herballure.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=42073#Post42073
You have failed to refute this refutation of your position to date, how ironic! I addressed your claim in more detail here
http://herballure.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=42148#Post42148
and some more details here
http://herballure.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=42431#Post42431
And yet again here
http://herballure.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=42431#Post42431
There’s more but I think that’s enough for now.

One of the most obvious examples of evolutionists lying about what evolution really is relates to the attempt to convert evolution into natural selection. Statements have been made that abiogenesis has never been taught as evolution.
I have no idea if someone has ever taught abiogenesis as part of evolution, Darwin specifically explained that it was not part of the theory and that’s certainly the main stream position today but I can’t speak for everyone in the middle. The only people I’ve heard suggesting this idea, ad nauseum as it happens, are creationists who speak as if this is part of the standard definition of evolutionary theory. This was clearly false when Darwin penned Origins and it is false today. If some have gotten it wrong and taught otherwise in the mean time then they need to learn their subject properly before they start spruking about it.
Quote
“There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.”
The Origin of Species, Chapter 14: Recapitulation and Conclusion - by Charles Darwin

I believe Russell's and/or Mordred's question about his bogus "Darwin" quotation has also been unresponded to

How ironic.

Do you follow the threads?

I have responded and asked that it be pointed out to me. When I checked back a week later, no response was made.

Unbelievable.

I responded to you here
http://herballure.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=42417#Post42417
the false quote in question was this one
Quote
"The over-riding supremacy of the myth [of evolution] has created a widespread illusion that the theory of evolution was all but proved one hundred years ago and that all subsequent biological research—paleontological, zoological and in the newer branches of genetics and molecular biology—has provided ever-increasing evidence for Darwinian ideas. Nothing could be further from the truth."
—Charles Darwin, quoted in *N.C. Gillespie, Charles Darwin and the Problem of Creation (1979), p. 2 [University of Chicago book].
It was, fraudulently or in error, attributed to Charles Darwin, actually it was N.C. Gillespie who said these words, Darwin’s words have been dropped after this quote was lifted from the book.
I also pointed it out to you here
http://herballure.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=41548#Post41548
and here
http://herballure.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=42040#Post42040
and Mordred raised it again here
http://herballure.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=42068#Post42068

You seem to like this quote, you’ve used it here
http://herballure.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=42031#Post42031
and here
http://herballure.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=41467#Post41467
and here
http://herballure.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=33730#Post33730
and here
http://herballure.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=30391#Post30391
and here
http://herballure.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=30385#Post30385
and here
http://herballure.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=29148#Post29148
and here
http://herballure.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=27159#Post27159

I am considering cracking down on those who make blatantly false arguments as well as strawman arguments from this forum. The spinning (which is lying) is out of control.
That sounds like a great idea if it can be done fairly and impartially.

My position on evolution is that the science is as fraudulent as amalgam, vaccine safety, autism, herbal-dangers, and so on-and-on.
Now this is getting really scary, I hadn’t thought of this before but there are probably lots of people here who believe Russ T is an authority on amalgam fillings, vaccine safety etc etc yet he has shown that he has virtually no idea of how science works and how biological sciences work in these threads. Does it scare anyone else that Russ T speaks as an authority to people while showing his profound ignorance of science here?

There are a group of powerful people who control nearly all of the information in the world today, including scientific information. All of these lies, such as about mercury and amalgam fillings, are promoted to achieve a social agenda.
I have a hard time swallowing mega conspiracy theories without evidence and I cant’ see how fillings are a means of social control. Can you explain that one to me?

(1) I've done my homework very well and know what is going on in these fields and in politics, and
Then how come you don’t even seem to realise that Natural Selection is a crucial part of ToE, that it is occurring at every single stage, in every single generation and to every single individual, it doesn’t wait till the end as you have repeatedly suggested. How can someone who claims to know anything at all about ToE make such blunders Russ T? and not just once or twice but over and over again? You don’t understand how the HOX gene’s and their like explain symmetry, you don’t seem to realize that Natural Selection works on every single generation and you don’t show any signs that you understand how ToE explains the accumulation of beneficial traits. I’m not asking you to believe these things, that’s up to you, but can you at least try to show us that you understand what it is that ToE says, that would make these conversations far more interesting and productive I think.

(2) I know how many other people try to act like they've done their homework but have not (many).
There are a few here who seem to have at least a grasp of Evolutionary theory 101. Even that level of understanding from the creationists would improve the level of the conversations here.

My arguments against evolution are fundamental because evolution is fundamentally flawed.
Fundamental arguments are the best but they must at least show that the maker of such arguments understands the basics of what they are discussing or it’s a futile effort. If you talk about Natural Selection as if it has to wait in the wings until natural selection has invented something new and novel, as you have Russ T, then you have failed in a most profound way to understand even what Darwin said.

In Reason

Russell