"Creationist are Liars"...? When they Steamroll Darwinian Evolution

[exchemist]

Can you prove that I am being dishonest?
How would you like if I said you are a lier?
Would that be nice of me?

I am not trying to be "nice" to you. You have forfeited the right to expect that. I am trying to get you to confront your dishonesty.

The proof is in numerous posts here, some from me, some from others, about what really happened in this case that you have misrepresented so grossly. The bottom line is that there is not a shred of scientific evidence against evolution in this dismal little story about a lab technician pretending to be a palaeobiologist.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes. I know this. A few of my brothers had the same experience.
Some were atheist and agnostic.
Anthony Flew had a similar experience.
The relationship between science and religion was never at odds.

Poor choice on your part. You appear to be conflating believing in a god with creationism. That is an insult to many Christians and members of other religions that accept science. Anthony Flew was not even a Christian. He would have told you that all of your beliefs were mythical. He became a deist at the end of his life. That is someone that believes in a god that set the universe running and that is about all.

 

[nPeace]

I am not trying to be "nice" to you. You have forfeited the right to expect that. I am trying to get you to confront your dishonesty.

The proof is in numerous posts here, some from me, some from others, about what really happened in this case that you have misrepresented so grossly. The bottom line is that there is not a shred of scientific evidence against evolution in this dismal little story about a lab technician pretending to be a palaeobiologist.

I looked at, and listened to a man being interviewed for a little over half of an hour. The man went through his experience at work, the proceedings of his days in court before a magistrate, etc.

On these forums, I hear people screaming that the man is a liar.
I haven't heard anyone say they witnessed these events, or the hearings, nor have anyone produced any information that can be verified to show that they are not just complaining because they are just angry Christian opposers.

What should I do?
I'll look out for that information, in case anyone has it. Do you?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I looked at, and listened to a man being interviewed for a little over half of an hour. The man went through his experience at work, the proceedings of his days in court before a magistrate, etc.

On these forums, I hear people screaming that the man is a liar.
I haven't heard anyone say they witnessed these events, or the hearings, nor have anyone produced any information that can be verified to show that they are not just complaining because they are just angry Christian opposers.

What should I do?
I'll look out for that information, in case anyone has it. Do you?

No one "screamed". And even you could see how he was dishonest it seemed.

 

[Skwim]

Looking into Mark Armitage a bit I found he:

Earned a BS in Education from Liberty University

Supposedly earned an MS in Biology (parasitology), under Richard Lumsden (Ph.D. Rice and Dean of Tulane University’s graduate program) at the Institute for Creation Research in San Diego, CA

Later graduated with an Ed.S. in Science Education from Liberty University
source​

Interestingly, the ICR Graduate School where Armitage supposedly got his MS in biology was forced to close its doors in June of 2010 on Federal Court orders. The only major then available was in science education, with minors in the fields of Astrophysics/Geophysics, Biology, Geology, and General Science.
source

So his MS degree was in education, with at most a minor in biology.
Interesting to note, Armitage's forte was in electron microscopy, which, of course, has nothing to do with paleontology or its related fields. So he was hardly in a position to evaluate the tissue sample he was looking at, much less use it as a tool to proselytize in class.

As for Liberty College itself where Armitage got his BS in education and Ed.S. in science education, In 2017, Forbes's list of America's Top Colleges ranked Liberty University 610 of 650 overall as a "Top College" That's in the bottom 6%. Hardly a stellar institution of learning.
source

.

 

[nPeace]

So the court case can be traced.

https://cbsla.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/armitage-complaint.pdf
LA Court

...and I am still digging.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So the court case can be traced.

https://cbsla.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/armitage-complaint.pdf
LA Court

...and I am still digging.

Why do you keep using bogus sources? You cannot expect people to be polite to you when you post videos made by idiots and liars.

 

[nPeace]

Why do you keep using bogus sources? You cannot expect people to be polite to you when you post videos made by idiots and liars.

That's your excuse?
You are impolite to posters because they post material from sources you don't like?
I would be ashamed to make a statement like that on a public debate forum.

You mean, you came on a debate forum, and justify yourself for being uncivilized, with the excuse that you don't like the source of the poster's content?
So what you are basically saying is that you will be impolite to those who belong to those groups - on a debate forum... with rules.

So a YEC should expect that Subduction Zone will be impolite to them - rules or no rules... because that's your rule - They are liars full stop.
I see.

Thank for admitting the reason for your behavior.
Personally, I believe that's just an excuse to detract from the real reason for your behavior, but I would not get into that.

If your best debating skill is to be uncouth, then there is nothing I can do about that, but I would think a good debating skill would be having the ability to counter argue a post with information that proves its lack, or utterly destroys it.

So the video is questionable.
If it's from idiots and liars - which I think is very insulting to those persons - what evidence do you have that can whitewash those lies?
What data do you have that can prove the accusations you make?

I think seeing that evidence would be more impactful than berating individuals. Don't you agree?

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's your excuse?
You are impolite to posters because they post material from sources you don't like?
I would be ashamed to make a statement like that on a public debate forum.

what do you mean by "your excuse"? I am not the one that has been rude here. Ignorance and denial are acts and attitudes that make you far tired than I have been.

You mean, you came on a debate forum, and justify yourself for being uncivilized, with the excuse that you don't like the source of the poster's content?
So what you are basically saying is that you will be impolite to those who belong to those groups - on a debate forum... with rules.

So a YEC should expect that Subduction Zone will be impolite to them - rules or no rules... because that's your rule - They are liars full stop.
I see.

I have never claimed that just being a YEC makes one a liar. Most YEC's are merely incredibly ignorant along with being cowardly. You have demonstrated that with your claims about evidence. I more than politely offered to help you understand the concept and you rudely ignored that offer. Now your panties are in a bunch and you falsely accuse me of being rude.

Thank for admitting the reason for your behavior.
Personally, I believe that's just an excuse to detract from the real reason for your behavior, but I would not get into that.

making dishonest and false claims is rude. Oh the irony. I merely ask that you debate properly. How is that rude?

If your best debating skill is to be uncouth, then there is nothing I can do about that, but I would think a good debating skill would be having the ability to counter argue a post with information that proves its lack, or utterly destroys it.

So the video is questionable.
If it's from idiots and liars - which I think is very insulting to those persons - what evidence do you have that can whitewash those lies?
What data do you have that can prove the accusations you make?

I think seeing that evidence would be more impactful than berating individuals. Don't you agree?

And more.projection. I am not the rude one.. Use of poor sources and demanding respect from them is ridiculous on your part. Is it that hard to find proper sources for your beliefs? That should tell you something.

 

[exchemist]

I looked at, and listened to a man being interviewed for a little over half of an hour. The man went through his experience at work, the proceedings of his days in court before a magistrate, etc.

On these forums, I hear people screaming that the man is a liar.
I haven't heard anyone say they witnessed these events, or the hearings, nor have anyone produced any information that can be verified to show that they are not just complaining because they are just angry Christian opposers.

What should I do?
I'll look out for that information, in case anyone has it. Do you?

Nobody needs to witness any events to be able to say that settling an employment dispute out of court does not constitute "steamroll"ing , i.e. crushing, Darwinian evolution.

Crushing Darwinian evolution requires corroborated scientific evidence that shows evolution by natural selection does not occur, contrary to Darwin's insight. Where is the evidence for this in this story? You are the one making the claim so you should either provide the evidence or withdraw the claim.

 

[nPeace]

Nobody needs to witness any events to be able to say that settling an employment dispute out of court does not constitute "steamroll"ing , i.e. crushing, Darwinian evolution.

Crushing Darwinian evolution requires corroborated scientific evidence that shows evolution by natural selection does not occur, contrary to Darwin's insight. Where is the evidence for this in this story? You are the one making the claim so you should either provide the evidence or withdraw the claim.

Crushing

Darwinian evolution requires corroborated scientific evidence that shows evolution by natural selection does not occur, contrary to Darwin's insight.

From your perspective.

From my perspective steamrolling evolution means showing up all the problems that prevent it from really being supported by conclusive or verifiable evidence.
To me, it gets steamrolled all the time.

The one mentioned here is just one of those.

Sure you can theorize as to how something might happen, but there is no way to show how that can happen over millions of years.
There are always other explanations.

Are you offended by this?
It it surely not my intention to offend you, but we have to face the fact that people will not agree with what we believe, no matter how much we love what we believe.

I understand science doesn't set out to prove anything, so I don't think you as a scientist would be trying to prove to me what really happened, but I understand you would try to demonstrate what happened, as these scientific test try to show.

Dinosaurian Soft Tissues Interpreted as Bacterial Biofilms
According to new research, iron in the dinosaur's body preserved the tissue before it could decay

I have nothing against scientists or science.
I think scientists like every one deserves respect.
Many Christians are scientist, as some are in my family of faith.

There are disagreements on both sides.
I guess that's why we are on a debate forum. Right?

So... what's argument would you like to put forth?
That evolution hasn't been steamrolled?

Um... No.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

*eyeroll*

 

[Subduction Zone]

Crushing
From your perspective.

From my perspective steamrolling evolution means showing up all the problems that prevent it from really being supported by conclusive or verifiable evidence.
To me, it gets steamrolled all the time.

The one mentioned here is just one of those.

Sure you can theorize as to how something might happen, but there is no way to show how that can happen over millions of years.
There are always other explanations.

Are you offended by this?
It it surely not my intention to offend you, but we have to face the fact that people will not agree with what we believe, no matter how much we love what we believe.

I understand science doesn't set out to prove anything, so I don't think you as a scientist would be trying to prove to me what really happened, but I understand you would try to demonstrate what happened, as these scientific test try to show.

Dinosaurian Soft Tissues Interpreted as Bacterial Biofilms
According to new research, iron in the dinosaur's body preserved the tissue before it could decay

I have nothing against scientists or science.
I think scientists like every one deserves respect.
Many Christians are scientist, as some are in my family of faith.

There are disagreements on both sides.
I guess that's why we are on a debate forum. Right?

So... what's argument would you like to put forth?
That evolution hasn't been steamrolled?

Um... No.

Many Christians are scientists. That is true. Most of them accept the theory of evolution. A few whackjobs don't. The reason why I call them whackjobs is that they join organizations that require them not to use the scientific method. The Christians that oppose evolution do not do or use science to oppose it.

 

[sayak83]

I looked at, and listened to a man being interviewed for a little over half of an hour. The man went through his experience at work, the proceedings of his days in court before a magistrate, etc.

On these forums, I hear people screaming that the man is a liar.
I haven't heard anyone say they witnessed these events, or the hearings, nor have anyone produced any information that can be verified to show that they are not just complaining because they are just angry Christian opposers.

What should I do?
I'll look out for that information, in case anyone has it. Do you?

It would be more fruitful if you spent this time learning the science rather than listening to random you tube videos.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It would be more fruitful if you spent this time learning the science rather than listening to random you tube videos.

Sadly creationists avoid learning. They seem to instinctively know that learning will force them to give up creationism.

 

[nPeace]

It would be more fruitful if you spent this time learning the science rather than listening to random you tube videos.

I totally agree with that.
I think it would be more beneficial for us not to assume what people know or don't know, do or don't do. That's just what I think.

Do you assume that I haven't learned the science, and why would you assume I look at random videos?
Assumptions are often wrong.
I made that point about what evolution is built on.

I am very specific in my studies, and my selections of videos. Trust me, I don't assume this. I know it... for sure.

Here is a video that I deliberately chose to watch - from a chemist that builds molecules.
I'll share it. I understand that some persons do ignore what they don't want to hear. I think that is something we all have the choice to make.

@Subduction Zone I think people who constantly resort to name-calling makes clear their level of reason.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I totally agree with that.
I think it would be more beneficial for us not to assume what people know or don't know, do or don't do. That's just what I think.

Do you assume that I haven't learned the science, and why would you assume I look at random videos?
Assumptions are often wrong.
I made that point about what evolution is built on.

I am very specific in my studies, and my selections of videos. Trust me, I don't assume this. I know it... for sure.

Here is a video that I deliberately chose to watch - from a chemist that builds molecules.
I'll share it. I understand that some persons do ignore what they don't want to hear. I think that is something we all have the choice to make.

@Subduction Zone I think people who constantly resort to name-calling makes clear their level of reason.

Your posts make your lack of education in the sciences obvious. People are not assuming when they make that statement about you. As a creationist you should drop the word "assume" from your vocabulary.

And why choose a chemist that is outside of his area of expertise? When he says something is not possible his word is almost worthless. This is another example of a poor video that only confirms your lack of education in the sciences.

You also made your lack of education obvious when you denied evidence for the theory of evolution. This in fact shows not even a high school level of science education, since I at least learned how one supported ideas in high school.

 

[Milton Platt]

Creationist receives six-figure legal settlement from public university
A creationist scholar recently received a six-figure settlement from California State University Northridge, a payout that resolved a 2-year-old lawsuit that alleged the scholar had been fired after discovering soft tissue on a triceratops horn and publishing his findings.

The plaintiff, Mark Armitage, had alleged religious discrimination and a violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act in his suit, claiming in court documents that after his discovery – which supports a young Earth theory – some professors went on a successful “witchhunt” against him.

Armitage’s attorney, Alan Reinach, called the settlement “groundbreaking,” noting that in his decades practicing law he is unaware of any other favorable settlement of this nature on behalf of a creationist.

‘We are not going to tolerate your religion in this department!’

Armitage, who has some 30 publications to his credit and is past-president of the Southern California Society for Microscopy, was hired by the university in early 2010 to manage a wide variety of oversight duties for the biology department’s array of state-of-the-art microscopes, court documents state. He also trained students on how to use the complicated equipment.

Spoiler: Read More

In the summer of 2012, while at the world-famous dinosaur dig at Hell Creek Formation in Montana, Armitage discovered the largest triceratops horn ever unearthed at the site — complete with soft fiber and bone tissues that were stretchy.

He published his findings, first in the November 2012 issue of American Laboratory magazine, which published images of the soft tissue on its cover, and then online in February 2013 in the peer-reviewed journal Acta Histochemica, according to court documents.

The lawsuit contends that’s why Armitage’s employment at Cal State Northridge was terminated, with one professor allegedly storming into his office and shouting: “We are not going to tolerate your religion in this department!”

Campus officials told Armitage his job was only a “temporary appointment,” and claimed a lack of funding for his position.

‘To have CSUN associated with the creation heresy — that was the capital offense’
“When it became published and the university was associated with this,” Reinach said, referring to Armitage’s article reporting on the soft tissue, “that was intolerable.”

“To have CSUN associated with the creation heresy — that was the capital offense,” Reinach said, noting Armitage was fired a few weeks after the article was published.

He said the article had not gone into the implications of the discovery, only stated the findings. Reinach added the scholarly editors stood behind the publication of Armitage’s work. But it was still enough to rile up some professors at CSUN.

Reinach is executive director of the Church State Council, a nonprofit California-based public interest legal organization dealing with religious freedom issues with a focus on religious discrimination and employment.
In a telephone interview Monday with The College Fix, Reinach declined to state the exact amount of Armitage’s settlement, only that it was a six-figure dollar amount, “a substantial settlement representing about 15 times his annual part-time salary.”

The university maintains Armitage was let go due to budgetary reasons, and that the public, Los Angeles-based university settled the case to avoid a costly, protracted legal battle.
In an emailed statement to The College Fix, campus spokesperson Carmen Ramos Chandler said California State University Northridge is “firmly committed to upholding academic freedom, free speech and a respect for all religious beliefs.”

As for the settlement, she stated: “The Superior Court did not rule on the merits of Mr. Armitage’s complaint, and this voluntary settlement is not an indication of any wrongdoing. The decision to not renew Mr. Armitage’s contract was based on budgetary considerations and a dwindling need for his services. The decision to settle was based on a desire to avoid the costs involved in a protracted legal battle, including manpower, time and state dollars.”

‘Vindication’
In response, Reinach said “technically they are right, the judge did not rule, in the settlement agreement there is no admission of guilt, and they have rehashed their claim that he was fired for budgetary reasons.”
dinasourSliderBut the attorney added that “in our view, they certainly would not have paid that kind of money if they did not recognize that we had them dead to rights. The state doesn’t put large, six-figure settlement money out unless they are really concerned they are going to lose.”

“The evidence was quite clear,” the attorney continued. “The stated reasons for saying they fired him were simply not true. There were lies and contradictions abounding from several of the key witnesses.”
One of the “smoking guns” was an email between campus officials suggesting they could ease Armitage out gracefully by making his part-time position full-time, Reinach said.
“Not only did it not support the notion that there was budgetary concerns, but in fact suggested to the contrary,” he told The Fix.

Reinach also pointed out that the settlement agreement was forged soon after Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Dalila Lyons issued in July a tentative ruling against the university’s request for summary judgment.
In an email to The College Fix, Armitage referred to a YouTube video he created about the settlement, which he called “vindication.”

He added he has been on two additional digs in Montana in recent years and “have found soft tissues at both of them.We are trying to get our papers published now. … I’m clearly being blackballed and that’s why I don’t want to give out too much information about our finds or the dinosaurs that we found them in.”

The interview is quite interesting.

Creationist Wins Lawsuit And Crushes Evolution.

I've never understood why creationists are so hell bent to disprove the theory of evolution. If it was disproved tomorrow beyond all shadow of a doubt, we would simply be left with no explanation of how the diversity of live arose. It would do virtually nothing to prove the existence of their god.

 

[Skwim]

@Subduction Zone I think people who constantly resort to name-calling makes clear their level of reason.

Good grief, before he's even three minutes into his talk dissing evolution he's going on about about origins. He may know his synthetic organic chemistry, but he knows zilch about evolution. As Subduction Zone asks, why choose a chemist that is outside of his area of expertise? My guess is that you simply don't know any better. That about it, or is it that don't you care?

.

 

[Skwim]

I've never understood why creationists are so hell bent to disprove the theory of evolution.

Because beside the Bible, which doesn't carry any weight in the debate, it's all they have. The notion being that; destroy evolution and creationism wins by default. To be sure, it would be a stupid tactic if it wasn't for the fact that the unwary don't know any better and fall for their poppycock. (To put it kindly.)

.