[MD] Oneness, Dualism & Intellect

[Case]

[Platt]
Well, it made for a nice story. But did it actually happen? I thought
science depended on observation and experiment, not on mythical tales. 

[Case]
It wasn't my story so I can't say. My point was mainly the foolishness of
your assertion that the fact at animal breeders do it makes it somehow
irrelevant or uninteresting.

[Platt]
Yes, but still finches. Not bluebirds.

[Case]
So what? The story of the finches covers relatively recent events. Over a
longer period Finches and Bluebirds originate from common stock.

[Platt]
Are you saying once a fruitfly always a fruitfly?

[Case]
No Platt I used to live farther north and routinely transmorgraphied fruit
flies into wooly mammoths. But the neighbors got annoyed and I had to stop
or leave town. I did both.
 
[Platt]
Being stranded on an island doesn't prove evolution does it?

[Case]
In the case of Madagascar, Galapagos and Australia yes. Ok Australia is a
continent, barely.
 
[Platt]
Yes, I've read some of those authors. Also, critiques of their works,
especially "Darwin on Trial" by Phillip Johnson. I try to be "fair and
balanced." :-)

[Case]
If Johnson is the source of your misunderstandings that explains a lot. Next
you will be citing Lee Strobel and Josh McDowell. These guys present bald
faced gibberish to the intellectually challenged. 

>From the Phillip Johnson Wiki: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillip_E._Johnson

"In fact-checking Johnson's books Darwin on Trial and Defeating Darwinism,
one reviewer has argued that almost every scientific source Johnson cited
had been misused or distorted, from simple misinterpretations and innuendos
to outright fabrications. The reviewer, Brian Spitzer, a professor of
Biology, described Darwin on Trial as the most deceptive book he had ever
read."

Or this from Johnson himself.

"So the question is: "How to win?" That's when I began to develop what you
now see full-fledged in the "wedge" strategy: "Stick with the most important
thing" -the mechanism and the building up of information. Get the Bible and
the Book of Genesis out of the debate because you do not want to raise the
so-called Bible-science dichotomy. Phrase the argument in such a way that
you can get it heard in the secular academy and in a way that tends to unify
the religious dissenters. That means concentrating on, "Do you need a
Creator to do the creating, or can nature do it on its own?" and refusing to
get sidetracked onto other issues, which people are always trying to do." 

This is calculated claptrap. 

If you really want to have an open mind you will need to resolve to do more
frequent dusting.