Why do evolutionists feel the need to insult those who do not agree with them?

When people resort to personnel attacks it is usually an indication that they have NO FACTS to argue with. They prefer only to shut off debate.....NO CRITICAL THINKING. This is called INDOCTRINATION and many are not even aware that they have been indoctrinated nor are they aware of all the disagreement among scientists regarding evolution.

Here are a few quotes from well known scientists.....

"Nine-tenths of the talk of evolutionists is sheer nonsense, not founded on observation and wholly unsupported by facts. This museum is full of proofs of the utter falsity of their views. In all this great museum, there is not a particle of evidence of the transmutation of species." (Dr. Niles Etheridge, Paleontologist of the British Museum)

________________________________________

"I reject evolution because I deem it obsolete; because the knowledge, hard won since 1830, of anatomy, histology, cytology, and embryology, cannot be made to accord with its basic idea. The foundationless, fantastic edifice of the evolution doctrine would long ago have met with its long- deserved fate were it not that the love of fairy tales is so deep-rooted in the hearts of man." (Dr. Albert Fleischmann, University of Erlangen)

________________________________________

"By the late 1970s, debates on university campuses throughout the free world were being held on the subject of origins with increasing frequency. Hundreds of scientists, who once accepted the theory of evolution as fact, were abandoning ship and claiming that the scientific evidence was in total support of the theory of creation. Well-known evolutionists, such as Isaac Asimov and Stephen Jay Gould, were stating that, since the creationist scientists had won all of the more than one hundred debates, the evolutionists should not debate them." (Luther Sunderland, "Darwin's Enigma", p.10)

________________________________________

"The more one studies paleontology, the more certain one becomes that evolution is based on faith alone; exactly the same sort of faith which is necessary to have when one encounters the great mysteries of religion... The only alternative is the doctrine of special creation, which may be true, but is irrational." (Dr. L.T. More)

________________________________________

"I have come to the conclusion that Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical research programme... (Dr. Karl Popper, German-born philosopher of science, called by Nobel Prize-winner Peter Medawar, "incomparably the greatest philosopher of science who has ever lived.")

________________________________________

"The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory -- is it then a science or faith? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation..." (Dr. L. Harrison Matthews, in the introduction to the 1971 edition of Darwin's "Origin of Species")

________________________________________

"What is so frustrating for our present purpose is that it seems almost impossible to give any numerical value to the probability of what seems a rather unlikely sequence of events... An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle... (Dr. Francis Crick, Nobel Prize-winner, codiscoverer of DNA)

________________________________________

"Once we see, however, that the probability of life originating at random is so utterly minuscule as to make it absurd, it becomes sensible to think that the favorable properties of physics, on which life depends, are in every respect DELIBERATE... It is therefore, almost inevitable that our own measure of intelligence must reflect higher intelligences.. even to the limit of God." (Sir Fred Hoyle, British mathematician and astronomer, and Chandra Wickramasinghe, co-authors of "Evolution from Space," after acknowledging that they had been atheists all their lives)

The morons on here (many of whom probably don't hold a degree, or even a GED) want to just sling insults.

Seven and a half years university level education.

there are scientists which do not agree with the theory of evolution, and the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life.

There are scientists who will insist that the world is flat. You have to look for them, but they exist. It is the million other scientists and the facts they discover that support evolution.

"Some defenders of Darwinism," says Schaefer, "embrace standards of evidence for evolution that as scientists they would never accept in other circumstances."

You and he are correct, but the operative word is "some". That does not invalidate the million proven facts of evolution only that "some" people do not use good scientific methods. and since fundies only jump on the ONE exception rather than the million that support it, we consider you idiots.

So when I quote one, it is just to show someone with far more knowledge than myself (and you also) disagrees with evolution as presented to the public.

And when they or you have more than an unsupported "opinion" and allow peer review of your hypothesis then you or they will get the credit deserved. Until then all you, collectively, do it spout "opinions" however credited, with nothing to support them.

Obviously there are many like myself that want to hear both sides, and objectively look at the evidence.

And of you actually read the article in the site you posted it says, the support for evolution and the information that is controversial. It does not in any manner talk about creationism.

You're treading on some grounds of logical fallacies. Just because a majority of people believe something does not mean that it is true, it's called the argumentum ad populum, and it is something that children often use.

Also, qualified scientists in the field of biology (not chemistry) are almost in a full consensus (over 99%) of Evolution actually taking place, and Creationism being something believed by the religious since they don't understand evolution. Look at the court case history, in most states in the US (the deep South excluded), the teaching of evolution has almost always won since they have the facts to back up their theory. Creationists don't have facts, they have faith, and a short walk through a lunatic asylum can show anyone that faith doesn't prove anything.

Pointing out that evolution is an observed fact is not an "insult."

"...there are scientists who do not agree with the theory of evolution..."

So? Rational people don't decide things on people's opinions, no matter how much of an "authority" they may or may not be -- that's a fallacious appeal to authority. Evidence decides things -- and evolution is an observed fact, the theory that explains it is shown correct by hundreds of millions of pieces of evidence. That some people don't accept that is their problem, and it's irrational.

Your appeal to "Schaefer" is just a fallacious appeal to authority, and worthless. Does he have *evidence* evolution is "false?" No, he doesn't. End of story.

"...favor teaching both sides of evolution..."

There aren't any "sides" of evolution. There are facts and evidence, and there are those who irrationally reject them -- the irrational rejections are not a "side" of evolution.

Science encourages looking at the evidence objectively -- that's not what evolution deniers do. They use fallacious methods (such as your appeals to authority), appeal to emotion, and pretend magical "gods" are real. That's why their "opinions" are worthless, because they are fallacious and have no supporting evidence.

Evolution is a fact. No matter how much it upsets you. Deal with it.

Peace.

And you can find scientists who say the world is flat. You just have to look hard enough. Check out the Flat Earth Society. Just because you can find a scientist who disagrees with evolution does not mean that evolution is wrong. There are way more scientists who agree with evolution that disagree with it. Ever hear of the Steve Project?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Steve

In response to the group of scientists that said they did not believe in evolution, another group of scientists were formed to oppose it. Their qualifications were: they be scientists, they believe in evolution, and their name was Steve or some derivative of. There are over 1000 Steves on that list now. The point here is that sure you can scrap together a few scientists and they claim that they do not believe in evolution but they are vastly outnumbered by other scientists. Unless someone can provide a different theory that is backed by evidence and research (like evolution has) then evolution is here to stay.

As for forcing creationism into the classrooms, which creation stories do you want to add to the science classes? I bet you have just one in mind. The one you subscribe to. However, there are hundreds of different creation stories and not one of them have any more evidence than the other to support them. They are all contradicted by modern science though.

Henry "Fritz" Schaefer was first and foremost a religious nut who was involved with the Discovery Institute and the discredited Intelligent Design fiasco.

Also he was not a Nobel prize nominee.

It remains a fact that opponents to evolution only oppose it because they feel their religion tells them to, not for any rational reasons.

"If someone posts a quote which disagrees with evolution they are called an 'imbecile', or told to take biology class again"

And for good reason. "Disagreeing" with evolution is tantamount to "disagreeing" with mathematics.

"The morons on here (many of whom probably don't hold a degree, or even a GED) want to just sling insults."

You could not have posted a more hypocritical sentence if you tried. Bravo, sir.

"Face the facts, there are scientists which do not agree with the theory of evolution, "

Over 99% of biologists agree with evolution. To pretend as if there is "controversy" is to blatantly lie.

EDIT: @Believer

That's called quote mining. For example, Francis Crick was an avid supporter of the fact of evolution till the day he died. You're picking quotes out of context to make it seem as though he doubted the theory of evolution. Dishonest and despicable, just like most creationists.

I was intending typing a long a full response to your question, but I really can't be bothered. Please just read and digest Well Travelled's reply - he says it all.

And above all else, please understand that there are NOT two sides to evolution. Evolution is a fact. Please deal with it, or get used to being called an imbecile (and worse) until you do. And when that happens, don't friggin' whinge about it - it is the only rational conclusion to draw.

Why do you find it ok to RAM religious beliefs down others throats. However It's not ok for others to push real knowledgeable information that is actually fact not fallacy.

Calling someone an ignorant retard is only an insult if they're not an ignorant retard.