Creationists

[UltimateReality]

Predictive power of ID. ID would predict the following:

From poster Pav...

(1) As already mentioned, “junk-DNA” would completely undermine ID if it turned out to really be “junk”. But, of course it isn’t.

(2) A fair-level of “front-loading” would be expected. When they find genes for the expression of digits in sea anemones (sea squirts?), this throws Darwinism for a loop, but is almost an expectation for ID.

(3) A complicated level/levels of regulation. If “junk-DNA” is not junk—as ID fully expected—then, concomitantly, it should have a function. The most likely function is that of regulation. When you consider that the ratio of non-coding to coding DNA is 48 to 1, then you must also expect an incredible level of regulation.

(4) Since we’re dealing with “information”, ID would expect “error-correction” for DNA (let’s remember that the Darwinists would be hoping for the opposite—gotta have lots of variation, you know).

(5) Again, because we’re dealing with “information systems”, one would expect high levels of redundancy built into the genome.

(6) Lots of environmental triggers: if you’re designing life that must deal with huge temperature and climatic changes, then there must be a way for the genome and the environment to interact.

ID’s “predictive prowess” | Uncommon Descent

 

[Youwerecreated]

Reasons To Believe : "The Age of Earth"

Reasons to dismiss the old earth views.

Counterexamples to an Old Earth - Conservapedia

Reason 8043 and counting as to why people point and laugh at creationists.

Yes arguments you have no rebuttal for,who really is doing the laughing

 

[Youwerecreated]

Predictive power of ID. ID would predict the following:

From poster Pav...

(1) As already mentioned, “junk-DNA” would completely undermine ID if it turned out to really be “junk”. But, of course it isn’t.

(2) A fair-level of “front-loading” would be expected. When they find genes for the expression of digits in sea anemones (sea squirts?), this throws Darwinism for a loop, but is almost an expectation for ID.

(3) A complicated level/levels of regulation. If “junk-DNA” is not junk—as ID fully expected—then, concomitantly, it should have a function. The most likely function is that of regulation. When you consider that the ratio of non-coding to coding DNA is 48 to 1, then you must also expect an incredible level of regulation.

(4) Since we’re dealing with “information”, ID would expect “error-correction” for DNA (let’s remember that the Darwinists would be hoping for the opposite—gotta have lots of variation, you know).

(5) Again, because we’re dealing with “information systems”, one would expect high levels of redundancy built into the genome.

(6) Lots of environmental triggers: if you’re designing life that must deal with huge temperature and climatic changes, then there must be a way for the genome and the environment to interact.

ID’s “predictive prowess” | Uncommon Descent

Great post UR.

 

[Hollie]

Reasons to dismiss the old earth views.

Counterexamples to an Old Earth - Conservapedia

Reason 8043 and counting as to why people point and laugh at creationists.

Yes arguments you have no rebuttal for,who really is doing the laughing

Those silly claims have been thoroughly trashed as ridiculous.

 

[Bill Angel]

Here is a paper from a Creation Ministries website that is of interest because it appears to be a scientific critique of research in evolutionary biology.
Human chimp dna similarity re-evaluated
The authors' conclusion is that "The human–chimp common ancestor paradigm is clearly based more on myth and propaganda than fact."

Not so closely related after all.​

 

[Hollie]

Predictive power of ID. ID would predict the following:

From poster Pav...

Your pal Pav commits the same fallacy common to ID'iots / Christian creationists in that he has a preconceived notion that " the gawds did it", and then seeks out bad analogies and false comparisons to "prove" his bias.

ID'iosy makes no predictions that are not understood by the processes of biological evolution. What is truly comical from "Pav" is that he/she uses biological processes explored by science in failed attempts to retroactively support ID.

It's so silly.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Reason 8043 and counting as to why people point and laugh at creationists.

Yes arguments you have no rebuttal for,who really is doing the laughing

Those silly claims have been thoroughly trashed as ridiculous.

Hollie you're a dreamer.

 

[ima]

Counterexamples to an Old Earth - Conservapedia

From your link: "The oldest direct evidence of life -- written documents, clothing, remnants of civilizations, tree rings, etc. -- is no older than about 3000 B.C."

If they don't accept carbon dating, how do they calculate the 3000 years? Because some civilizations are older then 3000 years.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Here is a paper from a Creation Ministries website that is of interest because it appears to be a scientific critique of research in evolutionary biology.
Human chimp dna similarity re-evaluated
The authors' conclusion is that "The human–chimp common ancestor paradigm is clearly based more on myth and propaganda than fact."

The mapping of the Genome shows there is still alot of genetic data that has not been compared between human and chimp DNA as well.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Predictive power of ID. ID would predict the following:

From poster Pav...

Your pal Pav commits the same fallacy common to ID'iots / Christian creationists in that he has a preconceived notion that " the gawds did it", and then seeks out bad analogies and false comparisons to "prove" his bias.

ID'iosy makes no predictions that are not understood by the processes of biological evolution. What is truly comical from "Pav" is that he/she uses biological processes explored by science in failed attempts to retroactively support ID.

It's so silly.

What precitions do evolutionist make that we can keep our eyes open for ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Counterexamples to an Old Earth - Conservapedia

From your link: "The oldest direct evidence of life -- written documents, clothing, remnants of civilizations, tree rings, etc. -- is no older than about 3000 B.C."

If they don't accept carbon dating, how do they calculate the 3000 years? Because some civilizations are older then 3000 years.

If they use carbon dating they're wrong. I don't trust any dating method other then historical dating where someone was there to record it or the object was from a particular era.

 

[ima]

Counterexamples to an Old Earth - Conservapedia

From your link: "The oldest direct evidence of life -- written documents, clothing, remnants of civilizations, tree rings, etc. -- is no older than about 3000 B.C."

If they don't accept carbon dating, how do they calculate the 3000 years? Because some civilizations are older then 3000 years.

If they use carbon dating they're wrong. I don't trust any dating method other then historical dating where someone was there to record it or the object was from a particular era.

So how old are the dinosaurs? They dig up skeletons to put in museums that were embedded in rock. Surely they must be really old or else how did they get there since no humans witnessed their demise?

 

[Youwerecreated]

From your link: "The oldest direct evidence of life -- written documents, clothing, remnants of civilizations, tree rings, etc. -- is no older than about 3000 B.C."

If they don't accept carbon dating, how do they calculate the 3000 years? Because some civilizations are older then 3000 years.

If they use carbon dating they're wrong. I don't trust any dating method other then historical dating where someone was there to record it or the object was from a particular era.

So how old are the dinosaurs? They dig up skeletons to put in museums that were embedded in rock. Surely they must be really old or else how did they get there since no humans witnessed their demise?

They use the assumption that rock srtata takes millions of year to form it is simply not true. You need rapid burial to preserve the fossils then you need water for the strata to form.

Most fossils would be the age of when the flood happened don't know for sure when that happened.

According to chronological order of the bible could be between 4,500 to 6,000 maybe a little longer. I think most fossils found come from the flood not after the flood.

 

[ima]

If they use carbon dating they're wrong. I don't trust any dating method other then historical dating where someone was there to record it or the object was from a particular era.

So how old are the dinosaurs? They dig up skeletons to put in museums that were embedded in rock. Surely they must be really old or else how did they get there since no humans witnessed their demise?

They use the assumption that rock srtata takes millions of year to form it is simply not true. You need rapid burial to preserve the fossils then you need water for the strata to form.

Most fossils would be the age of when the flood happened don't know for sure when that happened.

According to chronological order of the bible could be between 4,500 to 6,000 maybe a little longer. I think most fossils found come from the flood not after the flood.

Have any proof to back up this nonsense? You had just said that unless someone is there to witness it, the theory isn't provable. So who was there to see this?

 

[Youwerecreated]

So how old are the dinosaurs? They dig up skeletons to put in museums that were embedded in rock. Surely they must be really old or else how did they get there since no humans witnessed their demise?

They use the assumption that rock srtata takes millions of year to form it is simply not true. You need rapid burial to preserve the fossils then you need water for the strata to form.

Most fossils would be the age of when the flood happened don't know for sure when that happened.

According to chronological order of the bible could be between 4,500 to 6,000 maybe a little longer. I think most fossils found come from the flood not after the flood.

Have any proof to back up this nonsense? You had just said that unless someone is there to witness it, the theory isn't provable. So who was there to see this?

Be more specific.

 

[Youwerecreated]

So how old are the dinosaurs? They dig up skeletons to put in museums that were embedded in rock. Surely they must be really old or else how did they get there since no humans witnessed their demise?

They use the assumption that rock srtata takes millions of year to form it is simply not true. You need rapid burial to preserve the fossils then you need water for the strata to form.

Most fossils would be the age of when the flood happened don't know for sure when that happened.

According to chronological order of the bible could be between 4,500 to 6,000 maybe a little longer. I think most fossils found come from the flood not after the flood.

Have any proof to back up this nonsense? You had just said that unless someone is there to witness it, the theory isn't provable. So who was there to see this?

Why do diverse cultures share a strikingly similar story concerning the global flood that was recorded in the book of genesis ? there are more then 270 of these flood legends.

God was a witness and the survivors of the flood were witnesses of the flood. How did it get passed to so m,any diffferent cultures if no one witnessed it ?

Geologic Evidences For Very Rapid Strata Formation In The Grand Canyon - CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science

 

[ima]

They use the assumption that rock srtata takes millions of year to form it is simply not true. You need rapid burial to preserve the fossils then you need water for the strata to form.

Most fossils would be the age of when the flood happened don't know for sure when that happened.

According to chronological order of the bible could be between 4,500 to 6,000 maybe a little longer. I think most fossils found come from the flood not after the flood.

Have any proof to back up this nonsense? You had just said that unless someone is there to witness it, the theory isn't provable. So who was there to see this?

Why do diverse cultures share a strikingly similar story concerning the global flood that was recorded in the book of genesis ? there are more then 270 of these flood legends.

God was a witness and the survivors of the flood were witnesses of the flood. How did it get passed to so m,any diffferent cultures if no one witnessed it ?

Geologic Evidences For Very Rapid Strata Formation In The Grand Canyon - CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science

There's no proof in your link that the grand canyon was carved by the flood. What's the point of that link?

How could there be different cultures if Noah and his gang were the only survivors of the flood? Did he also have 2 humans from every culture on his boat? Where there other boats? Do you just make shit up as you go along?

 

[Hollie]

They use the assumption that rock srtata takes millions of year to form it is simply not true. You need rapid burial to preserve the fossils then you need water for the strata to form.

Most fossils would be the age of when the flood happened don't know for sure when that happened.

According to chronological order of the bible could be between 4,500 to 6,000 maybe a little longer. I think most fossils found come from the flood not after the flood.

Have any proof to back up this nonsense? You had just said that unless someone is there to witness it, the theory isn't provable. So who was there to see this?

Why do diverse cultures share a strikingly similar story concerning the global flood that was recorded in the book of genesis ? there are more then 270 of these flood legends.

God was a witness and the survivors of the flood were witnesses of the flood. How did it get passed to so m,any diffferent cultures if no one witnessed it ?

Geologic Evidences For Very Rapid Strata Formation In The Grand Canyon - CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science

Diverse cultures absolutely do not share "a strikingly similar story concerning the global flood". This is just nonsense and more demonstration of your inability to reconcile reality with the fantasy world you dwell in.


Flood Stories from Around the World

Flood Stories from Around the World

 

[Big_D2]

Reasons To Believe : "The Age of Earth"

The Age of the Earth

Potassium Argon dating, uranium lead dating, and Helioseismic verification gives us around 4.5 Billion years old. That is quite the coincidence if this figure is incorrect.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Have any proof to back up this nonsense? You had just said that unless someone is there to witness it, the theory isn't provable. So who was there to see this?

Why do diverse cultures share a strikingly similar story concerning the global flood that was recorded in the book of genesis ? there are more then 270 of these flood legends.

God was a witness and the survivors of the flood were witnesses of the flood. How did it get passed to so m,any diffferent cultures if no one witnessed it ?

Geologic Evidences For Very Rapid Strata Formation In The Grand Canyon - CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science

There's no proof in your link that the grand canyon was carved by the flood. What's the point of that link?

How could there be different cultures if Noah and his gang were the only survivors of the flood? Did he also have 2 humans from every culture on his boat? Where there other boats? Do you just make shit up as you go along?

Do you suffer from selective reading ? No they repopoulated the earth. New communities were always being developed just like we see today. How do you think this country went from a few people to many on this land ? how did we get so many different cultures here in this country all in a few hundred years ?

Can you people think for yourselves ? when you're hit with something you don't understand you just lob insults ?