From: martinharran@gmail.com   
      
   On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 08:41:05 -0500, RonO    
   wrote:   
      
   >On 3/18/2025 3:02 AM, Martin Harran wrote:   
   >> rOn Mon, 17 Mar 2025 12:42:09 -0500, RonO    
   >> wrote:   
      
      
   [Mercy snip]   
   >>> What does this matter?  You were still lying.  They aren't literally   
   >>> denying natural mechanisms   
   >>   
   >> So you have kept insisting that they deny that natural mechanisms were   
   >> involved in evolution. Now you admit that they don't say that but you   
   >> claim that I am the one who is lying. It's perfectly clear that I have   
   >> been right all along, the claims you have been making about them are   
   >> all the products of your bullshit interpretation.   
   >   
   >I have never denied that, what I have always contended is that they deny   
   >that it was all natural.   
      
   Let's get this perfectly clear, do you now agree that the stuff you   
   are claiming about them is not what they actually say, it is what   
   think is the consequence of what they say?   
      
   > My example has always been Behe as a tweeker,   
   >and you know that for a fact.   
      
   You keep insisting that there is no difference between them and Behe.   
   He, however, gave three specific examples of what he regards as   
   tweaking - the bacterial flagellum, the blood clotting cascade and the   
   immune system.[1]  You have not been able to give even one example of   
   anything that Biologos regards as tweaking, all you can do is try to   
   change the goalposts by waving your hands about unspecified miracles   
   which are something completely outside of science, nothing to do with   
   denying science. For example, what *science* is contradicted or denied   
   by the belief in the supernatural Resurrection of Christ?   
      
   [1] Even in regard to Behe's three specific claims, I have already   
   given you a link to an article on the Biologos site that dismantles   
   those claims and shows they don't stand up to scrutiny. Here it is   
   again in case you missed it:   
      
   https://biologos.org/common-questions/how-can-evolution-account-   
   or-the-complexity-of-life-on-earth-today   
      
      
   >They are obviously claiming devine   
   >intervention.  Supernatural miracles are not natural mechanisms.  You   
   >have been deluding yourself and lying about what was claimed.  You know   
   >why you ran from the requoted material the first time and started lying.   
   >   
   >>   
   >> You really need to get a grip on yourself; your paranoid fear of   
   >> religious belief is on a par with the IDers' paranoid fear of science.   
   >   
   >You need stop lying about the situation when you know that you were   
   >wrong from the beginning of your denial of what I was claiming.  What do   
   >you think evolutionary creationism is?  They accept biological evolution   
   >a means of creation, but they are obviously tweekers like Behe, and deny   
   >that it was all natural just like Behe.  Making stupid claims that I was   
   >claiming that they denied natural mechanisms for evolution is just   
   >stupid   
      
   Here are your exact words that started this debate:   
      
   "They are trying to force biological evolution into conforming with   
   their Biblical interpretation.  As such what are they missing about   
   biological evolution?  Some of them are denying that natural   
   mechanisms were involved in some of that evolution.  That is exactly   
   what Saint Augustine warned against doing."   
      
   Feel free to explain how it is stupid of me to say you claimed they   
   denied natural mechanisms for evolution.   
      
   Note: You did originally say "some of them" but I asked you to provide   
   examples and you couldn't which meant your claim had to be taken as a   
   general one and you went on anyway to talk about 'they' and 'them' in   
   general terms (an example follows immediately below).   
      
      
   > when you know that I was always claiming that it was not all   
   >natural with their claim about taking the Bible literally, their belief   
   >in supernatural miracles, and their belief that their god was   
   >manipulating nature in the past and still is.  They deny natural   
   >mechanisms as much as Behe when he claims that his god was needed to   
   >evolve the flagellum, and these guys are claiming that their god made   
   >man in his own image, a claim that they make due to their literal   
   >interpretation of the Bible.  Behe has never claimed how his designer   
   >did it except for his off the cuff "puffs of smoke", but these guys are   
   >outright claiming supernatural miracles.  Your lies were never needed,   
   >and were only used because you couldn't deal with the reality that some   
   >of these guys are tweekers like an ID perp such as Behe.   
      
      
   [snip repetitive earlier posts]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)