|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 01/11/2005 : 20:01:08 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by verlch
quote:
Originally posted by Peptide
What saddens me is that, if creation "science" is in fact better than real science, why this money is not used for research instead of gaudy museums.
Just one example. In a discussion on another forum a creationist claimed that the results of radiometric dating are random. That is, scientists actually cherry pick dates from a random set in order to conform to dates already accepted within science. I asked this creationist a simple question, "Why don't creationists test those same rocks and publish their results". The answer was that it takes too much money. Well, I guess we know where that money is spent, on propoganda.
Because no matter how much fact we have to back up the bible evolutionists are not impressed by any of it. They would rather believe in an uproved theory than submit to the Authority of God.
What fact? The stories of nomad shepards are fact?
Where is the independant conformation?
 |
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
 |
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 01/11/2005 : 22:27:09 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Because no matter how much fact we have to back up the bible evolutionists are not impressed by any of it.
It's because you don't have any facts or evidence to support your nonsense that causes us to be unimpressed by it.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Starman
SFN Regular
Sweden
1613 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2005 : 00:40:39 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by verlch
Because no matter how much fact we have to back up the bible evolutionists are not impressed by any of it.
You have to show the facts for someone to be impressed by it.
If you and other creationists have access to impressive facts, why do you keep touting lies and ignorance instead?
"Of course like every other man of intelligence and education I do believe in organic evolution. It surprises me that at this late date such questions should be raised."
-- Woodrow Wilson, 1922 |
|
|
|
verlch
SFN Regular
781 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2005 : 02:08:04 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
quote:
Originally posted by verlch
quote:
Originally posted by Peptide
What saddens me is that, if creation "science" is in fact better than real science, why this money is not used for research instead of gaudy museums.
Just one example. In a discussion on another forum a creationist claimed that the results of radiometric dating are random. That is, scientists actually cherry pick dates from a random set in order to conform to dates already accepted within science. I asked this creationist a simple question, "Why don't creationists test those same rocks and publish their results". The answer was that it takes too much money. Well, I guess we know where that money is spent, on propoganda.
Because no matter how much fact we have to back up the bible evolutionists are not impressed by any of it. They would rather believe in an uproved theory than submit to the Authority of God.
What fact? The stories of nomad shepards are fact?
Where is the independant conformation?
Any peice of evidence pointing to the authority of the bible you men regard with distain. You don't even look at with more than a passing glance. No maybe's no nothings, just a pure evilish distain at any information that might say evilution is anything more than fact. |
What came first the chicken or the egg?
How do plants exist without bugs in the soil, and bugs in the soil without plants producing oxygen?
There are no atheists in foxholes
Underlying the evolutionary theory is not just the classic "stuff" of science — conclusions arrived at through prolonged observation and experimentation. Evolution is first an atheistic, materialistic world view. In other words, the primary reason for its acceptance has little to do with the evidence for or against it. Evolution is accepted because men are atheists by faith and thus interpret the evidence to cor-respond to their naturalistic philosophy.
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. II Timothy 4:3,4
II Thess. 2:11 And for this cause God shall
send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
You can not see the 'wind', but you can see its effect!!!!
Evolution was caused by genetic mistakes at each stage?
Radical Evolution has 500 million years to find fossils of fictional drawings of (hard core)missing links, yet they find none.
We have not seen such moral darkness since the dark ages, coencides with
teaching evolution in schools. (Moral darkness)
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places, EPH 6:12.
"Thus, many scientists embracing naturalism find themselves in the seeming dilemma recently articulated by biochemist Franklin Harold: "We should reject, as a matter of principle, the substitution of intelligent design for the dialogue of chance and necessity [i.e., Darwinian evolution]; but we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical system, only a variety of wishful speculations."
|
|
|
|
verlch
SFN Regular
781 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2005 : 02:10:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
quote:
Because no matter how much fact we have to back up the bible evolutionists are not impressed by any of it.
It's because you don't have any facts or evidence to support your nonsense that causes us to be unimpressed by it.
No facts, I have plenty of things. I've gone over them and they fall on ears linked to Darwinism that have no heart for any theory other than a godless existance, void of any design. |
What came first the chicken or the egg?
How do plants exist without bugs in the soil, and bugs in the soil without plants producing oxygen?
There are no atheists in foxholes
Underlying the evolutionary theory is not just the classic "stuff" of science — conclusions arrived at through prolonged observation and experimentation. Evolution is first an atheistic, materialistic world view. In other words, the primary reason for its acceptance has little to do with the evidence for or against it. Evolution is accepted because men are atheists by faith and thus interpret the evidence to cor-respond to their naturalistic philosophy.
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. II Timothy 4:3,4
II Thess. 2:11 And for this cause God shall
send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
You can not see the 'wind', but you can see its effect!!!!
Evolution was caused by genetic mistakes at each stage?
Radical Evolution has 500 million years to find fossils of fictional drawings of (hard core)missing links, yet they find none.
We have not seen such moral darkness since the dark ages, coencides with
teaching evolution in schools. (Moral darkness)
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places, EPH 6:12.
"Thus, many scientists embracing naturalism find themselves in the seeming dilemma recently articulated by biochemist Franklin Harold: "We should reject, as a matter of principle, the substitution of intelligent design for the dialogue of chance and necessity [i.e., Darwinian evolution]; but we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical system, only a variety of wishful speculations."
|
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2005 : 03:10:57 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Peptide
What saddens me is that, if creation "science" is in fact better than real science, why this money is not used for research instead of gaudy museums.
Just one example. In a discussion on another forum a creationist claimed that the results of radiometric dating are random. That is, scientists actually cherry pick dates from a random set in order to conform to dates already accepted within science. I asked this creationist a simple question, "Why don't creationists test those same rocks and publish their results". The answer was that it takes too much money. Well, I guess we know where that money is spent, on propoganda.
quote:
Because no matter how much fact we have to back up the bible evolutionists are not impressed by any of it. They would rather believe in an uproved theory than submit to the Authority of God.
quote:
What fact? The stories of nomad sheperds are fact?
Where is the independant conformation?
quote:
Any peice of evidence pointing to the authority of the bible you men regard with distain. You don't even look at with more than a passing glance. No maybe's no nothings, just a pure evilish distain at any information that might say evilution is anything more than fact.
Oh but verlch, I do open your links and study them. They are untimatly met with disdain, evilish and otherwise, simply because they are worthy of little more.
You, on the other hand, apparently refuse to even open links, let alone give them any sort of consideration. Further, you make no argument in support of you're claims; all you do is make more claims. It's not only a poor debating practice, but has become redundant to the point where we can almost predict what you'll say next. It will probably have something to do with monkey ancestory.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
| Edited by - filthy on 01/12/2005 03:12:19 |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2005 : 06:21:31 [Permalink]
|
Whilst stumbling about looking for something else, and not finding it, I happened across this amusing bit of doggerel. Here's an exerpt:
quote:
KENTUCKY HAM SONG
May be sung to sorta a combination of "Davy Crockett" and "The Beverly Hillbillies"
Hear the story of Kenneth Ham
Australian huckster slick as jam
Left the creationists at El Cajon
To try to make a fortune out at old Big Bone.
Kentucky has a state park called Big Bone Lick
Where Ken planned something really sick
Tried to teach "creation science" near those fossil finds
To get little children not to use their minds.
Ya want a couple of eggs and some red-eye gravy with that Ham?
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
Wendy
SFN Regular
USA
614 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2005 : 06:32:45 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by verlch
Any peice of evidence pointing to the authority of the bible you men regard with distain. You don't even look at with more than a passing glance. No maybe's no nothings, just a pure evilish distain at any information that might say evilution is anything more than fact.
I too read your "evidence", verlch. It's not just the men who regard it with distain.  |
Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do on a rainy afternoon.
-- Susan Ertz
|
|
|
|
astropin
SFN Regular
USA
970 Posts |
Posted - 01/12/2005 : 10:21:51 [Permalink]
|
The bible has no authority because it offers no evidence to back up what it says.
In order to NOT regard it with distain.
Facts, backed by evidence, it must contain.
Evidence that can be tested and confirmed.
Otherwise, little there is, to be learned.
|
I would rather face a cold reality than delude myself with comforting fantasies.
You are free to believe what you want to believe and I am free to ridicule you for it.
Atheism:
The result of an unbiased and rational search for the truth.
Infinitus est numerus stultorum |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
