Jesus is God.
God is omniscient.
Evolution is a fact.
Jesus is an evolutionist. QED
Wow, the chump (johndcal) doesn’t even have the decency to change the phrasing of his various spams. Just shameful, I say.
Being a conservative christian myself, I also have some serious problems with his website/ministry, but that’s another story entirely.
From his website:
Ah, the age old tactic of stating unequivocally that which is still debated in order to support of one’s viewpoint. This guy’s really pulling out all the stops! 
johndcal has nine posts and seven threads that he started on the SDMB.
So that makes 1 and a fraction posts per thread that he starts.
[url=http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/search.php?s=&action=showresults&searchid=614524&sortby=lastpost&sortorder=descending]Here[/url are the threads that he has started.
Did dinosaurs have souls?
Hope I’m not getting whooshed here. Evolution is fact?!? Last time I checked, it was still properly billed as the Theory of Evolution. I’ve been following the debate, and I’m still not convinced. Especially since it seems like there are more “missing links” than there are intact ones.
No offense El Marko, but as you can clearly read, Johndcal has already told you the truth.
Surely you aren’t questioning his authority are you?
Um…Gravities a theory…Evolution will always be a theory. I think you are confusing science’s use of theory with the layman’s use.
EM, it all depends on how you define fact and theory.
If you throw a ball into the air, is it a fact or a theory that it will come down?
Both answers are correct.
Scientific method cannot prove that the ball will come down every time you throw it up. In that sense, it is a theory.
However, it’s pretty much a fact that it’ll come back down.
try it yourself.
There really is no scientific debate over evolution. Evolution is unequivocally true. Any challenges to evolution come purely from religion and not from science. Spammer johndcal may be but the statement that you quoted is factually accurate.
Meatros:
Thanks for the cite. I purposely used “fact” since as soon as you say “theory” the creationists take that to mean it’s a matter of faith whether or not you accept it.
I’m surprised, though, that no one has question my first 2 assumptions. I’d have difficulty defending those.
It only takes one “link” to prove evolution true, and as you admit, there are more than one.
El Marco:
The term “missing link” is really a layman’s term. Even the terms “transitional form” ior “intermediate form” imply that evolution is going in some direction. At any rate, there are hundreds of these “intermediate forms” out there for anyone who takes the time to read the scientific liturature. And remember that fossils are very, very rare when compared to the number of organisms that have existed.
Evolution is as much a fact as is gravity, nuclear fission, cell division, or photosynthesis.
Yes- “evolution” itself is a fact. But how it works, the process of evolution, the mechanism- that requires a Theory. Thus “Darwin’s Theory of Evolution”. Already Darwin’s version of theory has been changed & refined so much by modern discoveries, that you could say that Darwin’s theory is no longer accepted.
Thus, there is MUCH “scientific debate over evolution”- as in what is the mechanism for evolution, and how does it work. It is equally possibly that God sends out a angel everytime evolution occurs- and that is the mechanism. I doubt it, but, it COULD BE- and it wouldn’t disprove “evolution” as a FACT, although it would shoot to hell Darwins theory as the the mechanism.
Just like Gravity. Gravity, and the laws thereof is not a “theory”, but how gravity works (are there “gravitons”?) needs a theory to explain it.
Not really so much though. Darwin lacked a great deal of very important stuff for fleshing out exactly how things worked (like, for instance, a theory of how traits got passed down though generations, which is absolutely crucial), but there’s still very little wrong with his basic idea or even most of his evidence (though it looks fairly unsophisticated compared to what we use today).
Quite the reverse, actually. Although it required the understanding of Mendelian genetics to provide a solid mechanism for Darwin’s theory (with the resulting synthesis now referred to as the neo-Darwinian theory), his theory, itself, has held up remarkably well. None of the refinements that have been provided have done any damage to the actual theory that he proposed.
I agree with you about evolution/scientific debate; that being said I think Johndcal isn’t doing his cause any good by omitting evidence. It seems like to me that his primary target is YEC, Literalists, and for a lack of a better term ‘science deniers’. With that it mind I think the omitting of sufficient links/papers/cites/etc is just going to promote scorn among those he seeks to convert.
Then again, I dunno…
Drdeth-Thank you for summing it up for me. I find myself sometimes amazed at how others can summarize things that take me massive amounts of paragraphs to summarize.
Now if only I could keep a reasonable comparison to what you said in my head…
:begins to shove out basic algebra to make room:
Darwin is in the same category as Einstein. For heavens sake, he even predicted that humans had evolved in Africa! It took generations for archeologists to prove that. Seems obvious to us, but only because he figured it out first. His accomplishments are measured in miles, while the refinements are in inches.
newcrasher said:
Uh…yes. We aren’t debating that the earth was created – but how.
EEEHHHH!! Sorry. But thank you for playing.
The correct answer IS
Jesus is God.
God is omniscient.
Evolution is a fact.
God Created evolution
Jesus is a Creationist. QED
Just thought I’d note that, in very elaborate technical terms, a poster who habitually posts an OP and then runs away never to be heard from again would be best termed an albatross, not a troll. Trolls stick around to disrupt boards and irritate people: which is a much more serious chrage.