Creationists

[Youwerecreated]

Right, so 2 billion years is plenty of time, unless there's a theory of "Recreation" to explain where the next set of life came from after the major extictions.

No,if life had to start all over again from an extinction event and if it was that easy it would be contantly happening. It took over 2 billlion years for life to begin when the planet supposedly came into existence.

Life didn't have to come back into existence. While up to 95% died in some extinctions, that isn't 100% and it didn't have to start from scratch.

Your side knows how devastating extinction events are to your theory,they just can't bring themselves to admit if these events happened that it did not destroy all life.

Earth's Big Five Mass Extinction Events

But yet your side rejects the global flood theory from the bible that has evidence to support it over the entire earth. Notice how little they know of these supposed extinction events they want to believe happened.

 

[konradv]

No,if life had to start all over again from an extinction event and if it was that easy it would be contantly happening. It took over 2 billlion years for life to begin when the planet supposedly came into existence.

Life didn't have to come back into existence. While up to 95% died in some extinctions, that isn't 100% and it didn't have to start from scratch.

Your side knows how devastating extinction events are to your theory,they just can't bring themselves to admit if these events happened that it did not destroy all life.

Earth's Big Five Mass Extinction Events

But yet your side rejects the global flood theory from the bible that has evidence to support it over the entire earth. Notice how little they know of these supposed extinction events they want to believe happened.

There's no evidence a that a Global Flood caused even one of those extinctions, much less 5 seperated by 100s of millions of years. Don't get your first sentence. Could you rephrase it? It sounds like we're refusing to admit something, but I'm not clear as to exacly what.

 

[cooky]

Look it is clear there is a movement within the scienctific community to explain everything is a product of chance and a natural process absent of a creator,to deny this fact is to deny a fact. I'm Not saying all scientists deny a creator that simply is not true.

So if evolutionist have no idea when or how life started how is the evidence overwhelmingly supporting their theory ? Why do you think evolutionist have accurate knowledge and creationist and ID are wrong ?

Is not evidence explained in a way to support presuppositions ?

The more holes that get poked in the theories supporting macro-evolution the less credeibility the theory seems to possess. The same can be said for the ones who defend it ,atleast attempt it.

I do like your honesty admitting evolutionist don't know when or how life started and it also presents problems for their extinction events They use to explain away evidence contradictory to creation and design.

I disagree with your belief that scientists are trying to denude our culture of divinity. I would argue that in the context of god, science is neutral as there is no scientific evidence that either proves or disproves the existence of a creator. Im not sure what lead you to conclude that modern science is anti god but I strongly suspect that it is to some extent a result of the tremendous disconnect between what conclusions scientist are actually publishing and the way their conclusions are reported in popular media. Non scientific media sources blatantly distort the actual findingS of scientists to support non scientific agendas. Such distortions occur in every controversial scientific debate and are commites by all sides.

A common misconception about the TOE is that it covers the origin of life. It does not. The origin of life on earth can only be explained by several hypothesis that are based on woefully incomplete datasets. The most commonly accepted hypothesis-abiogenesis- is far from convincing. The link concerning the problems with this hypothesis in an RNA world eloquently explains some of the tremendous flaws inherent in that hypothesis

 

[koshergrl]

I don't think (most) scientists have an intent to do anything to the culture of divinity. Many scientists are Christian, in fact.

It's the bozos like Poki and JS who have just a smattering of knowledge (and most of it comes directly off cable television), who think they are "learned" in science, and then go off half-cocked, spouting idiocies and retardisms that they think make them appear intelligent and scholarly...

When really all they do is illustrate, over and over, their inability to grasp large concepts. It also illustrates, over and over, their bigotry and narrow mindedness...

In The Last Battle by CS Lewis there's a great description of non-believers. They are embodied in the Black Dwarves. The dwarves are taken with distrust after being bamboozled by an ass dressed in a lionskin, who pretends to be Aslan and instructs them to do all sorts of ungodly things. The dwarves find out they've been had, and instead of recognizing their own part in the situation, wash their hands of ALL belief and allegiance to the divine (Aslan = God). They appear throughout the book, chanting "The dwarves are for the dwarves!" and indiscriminately killing those of both evil and good forces (they singlehandedly wipe out whole battalion of talking horses)....

Anyway, at the end of the world (Narnia) when Aslan is raising people from the dead and judging each being, he comes to the dwarves, who before this time had been imprisoned in a dark barn.

He stands in front of them, he breathes on them, he puts a feast before them...but they continue to believe they're in a filthy, dark barn, eating moldy bread and filthy straw.

They come across as anything but learned, wise or intelligent. And that's what the most rabid of the non-believers remind me of. They think they're so clever...but they're just ignorant and blind. And not just about things of God. They're ignorant about the very things they profess to have all this knowledge about. But they can't see it. They're so enamored of themselves, they're completely blind to it.

 

[HUGGY]

I don't think (most) scientists have an intent to do anything to the culture of divinity. Many scientists are Christian, in fact.

It's the bozos like Poki and JS who have just a smattering of knowledge (and most of it comes directly off cable television), who think they are "learned" in science, and then go off half-cocked, spouting idiocies and retardisms that they think make them appear intelligent and scholarly...

When really all they do is illustrate, over and over, their inability to grasp large concepts. It also illustrates, over and over, their bigotry and narrow mindedness...

In The Last Battle by CS Lewis there's a great description of non-believers. They are embodied in the Black Dwarves. The dwarves are taken with distrust after being bamboozled by an ass dressed in a lionskin, who pretends to be Aslan and instructs them to do all sorts of ungodly things. The dwarves find out they've been had, and instead of recognizing their own part in the situation, wash their hands of ALL belief and allegiance to the divine (Aslan = God). They appear throughout the book, chanting "The dwarves are for the dwarves!" and indiscriminately killing those of both evil and good forces (they singlehandedly wipe out whole battalion of talking horses)....

Anyway, at the end of the world (Narnia) when Aslan is raising people from the dead and judging each being, he comes to the dwarves, who before this time had been imprisoned in a dark barn.

He stands in front of them, he breathes on them, he puts a feast before them...but they continue to believe they're in a filthy, dark barn, eating moldy bread and filthy straw.

They come across as anything but learned, wise or intelligent. And that's what the most rabid of the non-believers remind me of. They think they're so clever...but they're just ignorant and blind. And not just about things of God. They're ignorant about the very things they profess to have all this knowledge about. But they can't see it. They're so enamored of themselves, they're completely blind to it.

You REALLY ARE bat shit crazy. And your brain operates like this without LSD? Fascinating!

 

[koshergrl]

Are you admitting that you're an unread ignoramus now?

 

[HUGGY]

Are you admitting that you're an unread ignoramus now?

Hey twat! I watched the 700 Club this morning...That makes me at least as informed as you are.

 

[koshergrl]

I don't watch the 700 club. I spend my time reading, mostly.

I'm sorry you've never heard of one of the most popular and widely read works of literature ever penned. It makes me sad for you. I thought everybody had heard of the Chronicles of Narnia, and I honestly believed most English speaking people had at some point read them, or at least skimmed them..or at least HEARD of them...


#9 of a list of the 21 best selling books of all time:
http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/arts/literature/21-best-sellers9.htm

 

[HUGGY]

I don't watch the 700 club. I spend my time reading, mostly.

I'm sorry you've never heard of one of the most popular and wide-spread works of children literature ever penned. It makes me sad for you. I thought everybody had heard of the Chronicles of Narnia, and I honestly believed most English speaking people had at some point read them, or at least skimmed them..or at least HEARD of them...


#9 of a list of the 21 best selling books of all time:
HowStuffWorks "The 21 Best-selling Books of All Time"

The Chronicles of Narnia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nope... not really ever been a fantasy reader. I've always believed, and my parents encouraged my belief, that there was more to learn in the real world than in make believe.

Maybe my siblings dabbled ito it but they never mentioned that works. I was more of a back woods kid...exploring the "wonders" of nature up on my families 150 acre farm on Orcas Island. I read a lot but steered pretty clear of childish fantasy.

 

[koshergrl]

That's too bad. The humanities are invaluable in creating well rounded, sane, and free thinking people. Plus our ability to see beyond concrete reality is what separates us from other animals...i.e., it's what makes us "human".

I won a full ride college scholarship for a paper I wrote about the humanities. I encourage you to broaden your scope a bit.

 

[HUGGY]

That's too bad. The humanities are invaluable in creating well rounded, sane, and free thinking people. Plus our ability to see beyond concrete reality is what separates us from other animals...i.e., it's what makes us "human".

I won a full ride college scholarship for a paper I wrote about the humanities. I encourage you to broaden your scope a bit.

OK...I wrote a book called "The Pilot" about my exploits as a pilot in the world of International Drug Smuggling. Nobody offered me a scholarship for it. Maybe it was because the content was about lots of sex, drugs and international crime. I don't think they teach any courses in those subjects..

I'm 62. You have no idea how "broad" my scope has been.

Maybe some kid would be open to your way of seeing the world. Me... not so much.

 

[koshergrl]

Kids are just inexperienced. In older people, we call such willfull narrow mindedness "ignorance".

 

[daws101]

For those intellectually dishonest folks among us that keep claiming no peer reviewed papers (you know who you are)... Here you go so you can shut up once and for all..

CSC - Peer-Reviewed & Peer-Edited Scientific Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design (Annotated)

There are some great articles listed here. Loki seems convinced that we can't come up with objective criteria to detect design by an intelligent agent in the modern world. This is childish and foolish to believe that these criteria could not only be developed but also be tested. These criteria can then be used to detect design from the distant past. This methodology is totally scientific and testable.

The Discovery Institute is a non-profit public policy think tank based in Seattle, Washington, best known for its advocacy of intelligent design. Founded in 1990, the institute describes its purpose as promoting "ideas in the common sense tradition of representative government, the free market and individual liberty."[2] Its Teach the Controversy campaign aims to teach creationist anti-evolution beliefs in United States public high school science courses alongside accepted scientific theories, positing a scientific controversy exists over these subjects.[3][4][5][6][7]

A federal court, along with the majority of scientific organizations, including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, say the Institute has manufactured the controversy they want to teach by promoting a false perception that evolution is "a theory in crisis",[8] through incorrectly claiming that it is the subject of wide controversy and debate within the scientific community.[9][10][11] In 2005, a federal court ruled that the Discovery Institute pursues "demonstrably religious, cultural, and legal missions",[8][10][12] and the institute's manifesto, the Wedge strategy,[13] describes a religious goal: to "reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions".[14][15] It was the Federal Court's opinion that Intelligent Design was merely a redressing of Creationism and that, as such, it was not a scientific proposition.

Discovery Institute - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am well aware of who and what the Discovery Institute is. But I love the obvious bias for the "anyone can edit" Wiki comments!!! I regularly quote Wiki, but with the understanding it is relativism on steroids, and info can be manipulated with ease, unlike the old hard printed Britanica sets.

Is this the same Federal court that has shredded the Constitution and stripped American's of their CREATOR ENDOWED inalienable rights? Here are a few comments on Dover rover...

It's Time for Some Folks to Get Over Dover - Evolution News & Views

dodge

 

[daws101]

For those intellectually dishonest folks among us that keep claiming no peer reviewed papers (you know who you are)... Here you go so you can shut up once and for all..

CSC - Peer-Reviewed & Peer-Edited Scientific Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design (Annotated)

There are some great articles listed here. Loki seems convinced that we can't come up with objective criteria to detect design by an intelligent agent in the modern world. This is childish and foolish to believe that these criteria could not only be developed but also be tested. These criteria can then be used to detect design from the distant past. This methodology is totally scientific and testable.

it's a creationist site....therefore breaking the first rule of science objectivity .....so it pseudoscience.

pseudoscience is not practiced by the ones that are rational with their explanations.

megadodge!

 

[daws101]

Is that all you have junior,are you forgetting the theory of punctuated equilibrium ? Stasis is evidence agains't all of these so called variations that lead to macro-evolution. The rate of change would have had to been very fast to produce all the living organism's that once lived.

If life was evolving that fast we would see it happening before our eyes.

that's all I need..but you keep yammering.

You call it yammering because you chose not to believe evolutionist have it so wrong.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mA-57ZkL6Q]Bill Maher New Rules_03_02_12_Atheism and Unbapism of Edward Davies .flv - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Montrovant]

I don't watch the 700 club. I spend my time reading, mostly.

I'm sorry you've never heard of one of the most popular and widely read works of literature ever penned. It makes me sad for you. I thought everybody had heard of the Chronicles of Narnia, and I honestly believed most English speaking people had at some point read them, or at least skimmed them..or at least HEARD of them...


#9 of a list of the 21 best selling books of all time:
HowStuffWorks "The 21 Best-selling Books of All Time"

While I've heard of (and possibly read, I can't remember for certain as it would have been quite a few years ago) Narnia, I thought it would only be fair to point out that a number of the books on that list I had never heard of. Then again, there were quite a few foreign entries, so that would explain it to some extent.

I also find it strangely annoying that so many of the books on the list are from Harry Potter.

 

[daws101]

I don't watch the 700 club. I spend my time reading, mostly.

I'm sorry you've never heard of one of the most popular and widely read works of literature ever penned. It makes me sad for you. I thought everybody had heard of the Chronicles of Narnia, and I honestly believed most English speaking people had at some point read them, or at least skimmed them..or at least HEARD of them...


#9 of a list of the 21 best selling books of all time:
HowStuffWorks "The 21 Best-selling Books of All Time"

While I've heard of (and possibly read, I can't remember for certain as it would have been quite a few years ago) Narnia, I thought it would only be fair to point out that a number of the books on that list I had never heard of. Then again, there were quite a few foreign entries, so that would explain it to some extent.

I also find it strangely annoying that so many of the books on the list are from Harry Potter.

now that is scary!

 

[koshergrl]

It is scary, and sad.

A lot of the books you have never heard of are probably books that are popular in other highly-populated countries...Japan, China, etc.

 

[koshergrl]

When I was looking at lists of books, I ran across an interesting one that was a list of books that all men should read...it was a pretty good one too...

100 Must Read Books: The Man’s Essential Library | The Art of Manliness

 

[koshergrl]

In Harry Potter's defense, they are pretty riveting books. But sadly lacking in any underlying message that I could derive. I love the use of language in them, though. CS Lewis' books, besides being a fascinating dissertation on Christian romanticism, offers up some pretty stunning lessons in mannerly behavior, what constitutes goodness, and honor, and strength of character, and how to face up to situations that are perhaps difficult or ugly, in a way that will allow you to maintain your own sense of self while at the same time recognizing that everybody makes mistakes (a basic tenet of Christianity).

CS Lewis was just an incredible person all around. I read those books every few years, and every time I love them.