Josiah Avraham Ben Morgan HaNasi II and Charles Darwin

[chris.fo...@gmail.com]

One of the many topics that Josiah Avraham Ben Morgan HaNasi II
attacks, through his many sock puppets, is evolution. Like many of
the more vocal conservative theists, Josiah Avraham Ben Morgan HaNasi
II is a creationist and he vehemently dislikes evolution. He has
claimed that there were things that Darwin didn't know that, by
association, cause evolution to be false. He has referred to
evolution as pseudoscience. These have been some of his less
vociferous comments on the subject.

This thread will be used to examine the specific claims that have been
made with regard to evolution and creationism issues.

[Voice of Reason]

The comments of this sock puppet at YouTube are not worthy of rebuttal
on the subject of Darwin. He never posts anything other than
assertions and never addresses any of the evidence of specific tenets
of natural selection. He posts the same nonsense and then reposts it
later.

What is there to rebut?

Here is one rather silly collection of assertions: "Darwin was a
charlatanic, plagiaristic, Pick 'n' mix socioeconomic philosophiser;
one taken for granted by supposed "free-thinkers". Even the National
Academy of Sciences concedes that, While the mechanisms of evolution
are still under investigation, scientists universally accept that the
cosmos, our planet, and life evolved and continue to evolve."

Aside from the obvious hyperbole and the poor and inconsistent use of
upper-case that is characteristic of the sock puppets of
TurnerDiaries, there's really nothing to run with. Outide of
ignorant, religious cirlces, no one views Darinw as a charlatan. His
repuation in the sciences as a meticulous, detail-oriented researcher,
dedicated to using the trail down which the evidence goes is well-
earned. There is no evidence provided to indicate that he plagiarized
anyone. There is no evidence of any "Pick'n'mix" socioeconomics other
than a vague reference to Malthus, and that is not supported by any
specifics.

There is a non sequitur. While the NAS concedes nothing of the sort
that is claimed, the idea that evolution is almost universally
accepted as continuing does not seem all that relevant to the anti-
Darwin rant that constitutes the nonsense that ExposingCondell sock
puppets have posted.

So I guess I'm wondering if there is enough to merit an entire
thread.

VoR