Posted: Aug 07, 2010 12:41 pm
by CADman2300
While going through response messages that Stevie's Indoctrination article received, a user by the title of Henrik Jensen posted a long-winded explanation of where science really stands in the most polite manner he could muster.
What does Stevebee do? He responds with his usual blast of inanity and shows everyone his inability to grasp where his detractors are coming from.

(1) I should say “convinced” when I mean “indoctrinated”? I DO mean indoctrinated and that description sticks. Convinced people don’t communicate like indoctrinates, and I describe why very clearly.
(2) When I say “trite” I am describing very overused and tired arguments, which are typical of evolutionauts. And you. Saying I don’t “understand” evolution is absurd. Evo is not complex, and I was a fan for many years, and very well read on the subject. So that argument is TRITE as well as WRONG as can be. Can’t you be more original? Communicate from your head instead of using worn out over used defenses? Instead of actually thinking on your own and challenging my blog, you say “stevebee doesn’t understand evolution”. If you can’t see the absurdity, you should not comment.
(3) Overwhelming evidence? Sorry, but a horrible distortion. You have been fooled, and this blog is FULL of reasons why. You choose not to read any of it and STILL comment here, and to resort to the same boring stuff your evo-peers say. Which results in the same boring response from me. Try actually thinking on your own. You can’t, and won’t, which makes you an indoctrinate.
(4) You and “they” can’t come close to a plausible explanation of how the eye and vision were invented, designed, assembled, AKA evolved. Again they have fooled you.
(5) Your second to last paragraph shows how you have no idea what is on my blog, why you are indoctrinated and arguing from dogma. Read page 7 of this blog. You have no idea what my point and position is. Showing common ancestry is only one millionth of what evolution needs to prove to make it plausible. It needs to prove that an entity with zero intelligence can invent, design, assemble, and support incredible bio-systems. And since you have zero evidence that that is the case, your belief crashes horribly.


If reading this made you feel nauseous, there's no shame in throwing up.