Creationists

[Hollie]

Conjecture daws ? It's nonsense because he is saying this mutation has allowed a space for our brains to grow larger and thus make us more intelligent. Hmm the neanderthals had bigger brains then modern day humans are we devolving ? why are neanderthals extinct ? were neanderthals more intelligent ? You tried slipping this through before. Clearly that gene is different in humans because the creator wanted it that way.

I still believe the creator used our genes to make sure his punishment for sin is met.

The neanderthals likely did not go extinct it is likely that they interbred with modern humans. Neanderthals were highly intelligent they lived in complex social groups, used tools, created structures, and used language. The primary advantage that homo sapiens had were the much larger social groups and the communication between them.

It's possible they did not go extinct I believe they did in the global flood. I really find it hard to believe that DNA could survive 70,000 years as evolutionist claim.

The global flood is a Christian creationist claim thoroughly debunked.

Neanderthals have also been identified as having existed much more than 6,000 years ego.
So there you have it, yet another biblical myth debunked.

 

[Youwerecreated]

The neanderthals likely did not go extinct it is likely that they interbred with modern humans. Neanderthals were highly intelligent they lived in complex social groups, used tools, created structures, and used language. The primary advantage that homo sapiens had were the much larger social groups and the communication between them.

It's possible they did not go extinct I believe they did in the global flood. I really find it hard to believe that DNA could survive 70,000 years as evolutionist claim.

The global flood is a Christian creationist claim thoroughly debunked.

Neanderthals have also been identified as having existed much more than 6,000 years ego.
So there you have it, yet another biblical myth debunked.

Once again showing your ignorance.

 

[Hollie]

You have comprehension issues.

You're just embarrassed at being unable to understand the context of the article you cut and pasted.

Please provide proof of your accusation and we will discuss it.

Your lack of ability to bring forth any relevant commentary regarding the article is proof enough.

 

[Hollie]

It's possible they did not go extinct I believe they did in the global flood. I really find it hard to believe that DNA could survive 70,000 years as evolutionist claim.

The global flood is a Christian creationist claim thoroughly debunked.

Neanderthals have also been identified as having existed much more than 6,000 years ego.
So there you have it, yet another biblical myth debunked.

Once again showing your ignorance.

Once again showing your biblical tales and fables are easily dismantled and lacking validation when confronted with fact.

 

[Youwerecreated]

The global flood is a Christian creationist claim thoroughly debunked.

Neanderthals have also been identified as having existed much more than 6,000 years ego.
So there you have it, yet another biblical myth debunked.

Once again showing your ignorance.

Once again showing your biblical tales and fables are easily dismantled and lacking validation when confronted with fact.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXH5lwMBNiE]Global Flood: Evidence for Rocks and Fossils - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Youwerecreated]

You're just embarrassed at being unable to understand the context of the article you cut and pasted.

Please provide proof of your accusation and we will discuss it.

Your lack of ability to bring forth any relevant commentary regarding the article is proof enough.

You made the accusation

 

[Hollie]

Once again showing your ignorance.

Once again showing your biblical tales and fables are easily dismantled and lacking validation when confronted with fact.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXH5lwMBNiE]Global Flood: Evidence for Rocks and Fossils - YouTube[/ame]

As noted, the tale of your gawds mass murdering the bulk of humanity via a global flood is a myth.

 

[Hollie]

Please provide proof of your accusation and we will discuss it.

Your lack of ability to bring forth any relevant commentary regarding the article is proof enough.

You made the accusation

And you can't defend your position.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Your lack of ability to bring forth any relevant commentary regarding the article is proof enough.

You made the accusation

And you can't defend your position.

I already did, JUNK DNA is not JUNK DNA !

 

[Hollie]

You made the accusation

And you can't defend your position.

I already did, JUNK DNA is not JUNK DNA !

Wow. Insightful, compelling and lucid.

Are you at all curious as to why real scientists are doing research and christian creationist charlatans are faking their credentials and and faking creationist "labs"?

 

[UltimateReality]

Scandal! Gauger Filmed in Front of Green Screen
David Klinghoffer December 19, 2012 12:23 AM | Permalink

Here's the most ludicrous criticism of intelligent design that I've come across so far this week. Richard B. Hoppe at Panda's Thumb is echoed by Casey Johnston at Ars Technica in jeering that a video I highlighted -- Biologic Institute's Ann Gauger speaking about population genetics -- was filmed in front of a green screen. In a post-production effect Ann was given a more relevant backdrop, a stock photo of a lab.

Shock! Horror! Yes, it's true. I confess.

Gauger, a PhD in developmental biology who was a post-doctoral fellow at Harvard, has the science on her side. It's a typical Darwinist feint: When you don't have the arguments and you don't have the science, change the subject and pile on the red herrings. Casey Johnson, who dismisses our little video as a "nonsensical rant," can't reply to Dr. Gauger on the merits. If she could, she would.

Scandal! Gauger Filmed in Front of Green Screen - Evolution News & Views

 

[UltimateReality]

His remarkable paper is important for two reasons: (1) It undermines 50 years of dogma on the origin of life by pointing out the general failure to account for the top-down, holistic information flow in living systems. (2) It emphasizes abstractions like algorithms, information flow and information control that defy materialistic capabilities. If all Davies and Walker can say in conclusion is that somehow, in some way they cannot describe realistically or in detail, causation flipped from bottom-up to top-down, leading to the most elegant and sophisticated systems known to man, you know evolutionists are in big trouble.

A third way this paper is important is in the way it re-emphasizes how well-designed -- stunningly so -- life is. The authors are profuse on this point, saying that life appears to the beholder to work as if by magic. Their observation poses a problem for materialism but not for intelligent design, which comes equipped with a toolkit to explain top-down systems.

A useful summary of life's superb informational design can be found in the only chart in the paper, "Table 1: Hallmarks of Life," which offers some points to ponder. We end with that:

Hallmarks of Life
-Global organization
-Information as a causal agency
-Top-down causation
-Analog and digital information processing
-Laws and states co-evolve
-Logical structure of a universal constructor
-Dual hardware and software roles of genetic material
-Non-trivial replication
-Physical separation of instructions (algorithms)
from the mechanism that implements them

Assessing the "Algorithmic Origin of Life" - Evolution News & Views

 

[Hollie]

Scandal! Gauger Filmed in Front of Green Screen
David Klinghoffer December 19, 2012 12:23 AM | Permalink

Here's the most ludicrous criticism of intelligent design that I've come across so far this week. Richard B. Hoppe at Panda's Thumb is echoed by Casey Johnston at Ars Technica in jeering that a video I highlighted -- Biologic Institute's Ann Gauger speaking about population genetics -- was filmed in front of a green screen. In a post-production effect Ann was given a more relevant backdrop, a stock photo of a lab.

Shock! Horror! Yes, it's true. I confess.

Gauger, a PhD in developmental biology who was a post-doctoral fellow at Harvard, has the science on her side. It's a typical Darwinist feint: When you don't have the arguments and you don't have the science, change the subject and pile on the red herrings. Casey Johnson, who dismisses our little video as a "nonsensical rant," can't reply to Dr. Gauger on the merits. If she could, she would.

Scandal! Gauger Filmed in Front of Green Screen - Evolution News & Views

It's really the state of the art for Christian creationist "science". Fake science, phony claims, fake "research" and phony imposters posing in phony labs.

 

[Hollie]

His remarkable paper is important for two reasons: (1) It undermines 50 years of dogma on the origin of life by pointing out the general failure to account for the top-down, holistic information flow in living systems. (2) It emphasizes abstractions like algorithms, information flow and information control that defy materialistic capabilities. If all Davies and Walker can say in conclusion is that somehow, in some way they cannot describe realistically or in detail, causation flipped from bottom-up to top-down, leading to the most elegant and sophisticated systems known to man, you know evolutionists are in big trouble.

A third way this paper is important is in the way it re-emphasizes how well-designed -- stunningly so -- life is. The authors are profuse on this point, saying that life appears to the beholder to work as if by magic. Their observation poses a problem for materialism but not for intelligent design, which comes equipped with a toolkit to explain top-down systems.

A useful summary of life's superb informational design can be found in the only chart in the paper, "Table 1: Hallmarks of Life," which offers some points to ponder. We end with that:

Hallmarks of Life
-Global organization
-Information as a causal agency
-Top-down causation
-Analog and digital information processing
-Laws and states co-evolve
-Logical structure of a universal constructor
-Dual hardware and software roles of genetic material
-Non-trivial replication
-Physical separation of instructions (algorithms)
from the mechanism that implements them

Assessing the "Algorithmic Origin of Life" - Evolution News & Views

Christian creationist charlatans are paper shuffling. How cute.

 

[Hollie]

She Must Be a Scientist; She Works in Front of a Green Screen

She Must Be a Scientist; She Works in Front of a Green Screen

This is Dr. Ann Gauger, a “Senior Research Scientist at Biologic Institute” (which is funded by the Intelligent Design-promoting Discovery Institute), talking about what she thinks is population genetics:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tuZIxDxkxI&feature=player_embedded]Science & Human Origins: How accurate are current models used in population genetics? - YouTube[/ame]

The commenters at Sandwalk have already dismantled everything she said… (Sandwalk: Ann Gauger Describes the Intelligent Design Creationist Version of Population Genetics) but a lot of viewers noticed something else even more interesting:

She’s not really in a lab.

She’s in front of a green screen.

The lab is a lie.

Did you expect anything else? She’s an ID proponent. It’s not like they do any actual science — they just make things up and spread their lies to people gullible enough to believe them because they look professional, sound authoritative, and pretend to be scientists.

 

[Hollie]

Not surprisingly, real scientists are taking issue with the charlatans at the christian creationist Discovery Institute for their fake "lab" and their fake "research".

This is one of the many reasons why creationist charlatans don't submit for peer review. Fake science, phony labs and christian creationist charlatans caught yet again in an embarassing lie.



Behold! The Legendary Intelligent Design Creationism Research Laboratory!

Behold! The Legendary Intelligent Design Creationism Research Laboratory! » Pharyngula

The Discovery Institute released a video of one of their stars, Ann Gauger, explaining the flaws in “population genetics” (I put it in quotes because it wasn’t a description of the field of population genetics that any competent biologist would recognize). Larry Moran points out the errors. (Sandwalk: Ann Gauger Describes the Intelligent Design Creationist Version of Population Genetics)

But then, someone noticed something else: the video was fake. It was Ann Gauger, all right, talking in a “lab”. Again, the quotes are because she was actually talking in front of a green screen, and a stock photo of a lab was spliced in behind her. Oops. It adds comic absurdity on top of the egregious errors in her babbling.

But of course that’s exactly what the DI wants. They can’t answer for the stupidity of her comments, but they can wave their hands and shout, “We do too have a lab! A real lab! And it’s sciencey and everything!” Because, after all, when you’re doing cargo cult science, (Cargo cult science - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) the props are all important, and the substance doesn’t matter.

 

[UltimateReality]

The fact that the folks at Panda's Thumb are too stupid to figure out that many figures are photographed or interviewed in front of Green Screens just adds to the proof of their stupidity. I'm guessing they believe that Richard Dawkins is really floating in space with a view of London in this video. Can you imagine Panda Thumb's horror when they find out Dawkins is a "fake" to?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wF-yUYRo5AY#]Richard Dawkins on Bill Maher - YouTube[/ame]!

This is so typical of their attack techniques which attempt to camouflage their inability to respond to a scientific argument. Pathetic.

 

[Hollie]

The fact that the folks at Panda's Thumb are too stupid to figure out that many figures are photographed or interviewed in front of Green Screens just adds to the proof of their stupidity. I'm guessing they believe that Richard Dawkins is really floating in space with a view of London in this video. Can you imagine Panda Thumb's horror when they find out Dawkins is a "fake" to?

Richard Dawkins on Bill Maher - YouTube!

This is so typical of their attack techniques which attempt to camouflage their inability to respond to a scientific argument. Pathetic.

That was just pitiful. Yours is so typical of the apologetics for lies and deceit that christian creationists will further.

This was not just embarrassing; it shows a severe lack of understanding of this field of study. No true researcher in the field of phylogenetics would have made such a mistake. It's a rather glaring demonstration of Gauger’s incompetence.

What’s even more embarrassing for the hacks at the DI is that Gauger apparently doesn’t understand the difference between phylogenetics and population genetics. She was babbling on about population genetics when she should have said phylogenetics. What is worse is the fact that this wasn't noticed and addressed by the hacks at the various Christian creationist ministries.

It's difficult to respond to "scientific" argument made by a christian creationist hack when the creationist is clueless as to the science.

 

[Youwerecreated]

The fact that the folks at Panda's Thumb are too stupid to figure out that many figures are photographed or interviewed in front of Green Screens just adds to the proof of their stupidity. I'm guessing they believe that Richard Dawkins is really floating in space with a view of London in this video. Can you imagine Panda Thumb's horror when they find out Dawkins is a "fake" to?

Richard Dawkins on Bill Maher - YouTube!

This is so typical of their attack techniques which attempt to camouflage their inability to respond to a scientific argument. Pathetic.

That was just pitiful. Yours is so typical of the apologetics for lies and deceit that christian creationists will further.

This was not just embarrassing; it shows a severe lack of understanding of this field of study. No true researcher in the field of phylogenetics would have made such a mistake. It's a rather glaring demonstration of Gauger’s incompetence.

What’s even more embarrassing for the hacks at the DI is that Gauger apparently doesn’t understand the difference between phylogenetics and population genetics. She was babbling on about population genetics when she should have said phylogenetics. What is worse is the fact that this wasn't noticed and addressed by the hacks at the various Christian creationist ministries.

It's difficult to respond to "scientific" argument made by a christian creationist hack when the creationist is clueless as to the science.

People that are on the fence look at your posts I am positive you scare many of them away from your side. It was really funny when Ima called you out. You annoy people and you never provide arguments or respond to questions or even provide proof of your own accusations.

I hope when you are before the lamb's throne you do not act like you do in this thread.

 

[Hollie]

The fact that the folks at Panda's Thumb are too stupid to figure out that many figures are photographed or interviewed in front of Green Screens just adds to the proof of their stupidity. I'm guessing they believe that Richard Dawkins is really floating in space with a view of London in this video. Can you imagine Panda Thumb's horror when they find out Dawkins is a "fake" to?

Richard Dawkins on Bill Maher - YouTube!

This is so typical of their attack techniques which attempt to camouflage their inability to respond to a scientific argument. Pathetic.

That was just pitiful. Yours is so typical of the apologetics for lies and deceit that christian creationists will further.

This was not just embarrassing; it shows a severe lack of understanding of this field of study. No true researcher in the field of phylogenetics would have made such a mistake. It's a rather glaring demonstration of Gauger’s incompetence.

What’s even more embarrassing for the hacks at the DI is that Gauger apparently doesn’t understand the difference between phylogenetics and population genetics. She was babbling on about population genetics when she should have said phylogenetics. What is worse is the fact that this wasn't noticed and addressed by the hacks at the various Christian creationist ministries.

It's difficult to respond to "scientific" argument made by a christian creationist hack when the creationist is clueless as to the science.

People that are on the fence look at your posts I am positive you scare many of them away from your side. It was really funny when Ima called you out. You annoy people and you never provide arguments or respond to questions or even provide proof of your own accusations.

I hope when you are before the lamb's throne you do not act like you do in this thread.

Funny stuff, dude. Using your gawds to issue cheap threats.

Did you somehow miss that on this very page, I used sources articles, references and commentary of my own to show the sleazy tactics of lies and deceit used by Christian creationist ministries? How ironic that you attack me for exposing liars and cheats but you have nothing whatsoever to say regarding the Christian creationist industry using lies to further their agenda. I suppose that should not be terribly surprising as you have used the same methods as your ministries.