Creation vs. Evolution

[6days]

am not aware that we know who perpetrated the fraud known as Piltdown man. Do you? Some scientists were probably remiss in not detecting the fraud earlier than they did, but the deception was against the scientific community, not by science. It is far more likely that someone like you, with a pathological hatred of the success that science has had when compared with religion, who was the one that perpetrated the deception.

The hoax was swallowed by most of the evolutionary community and promoted as a proof of common ancestry in textbooks and scientific journals for many years. Unfortunately evolutionists often are so eager to believe something that scientific investigation is shoddy. After all.... it should have been noticed that filing marks were on the bones to make a chimp jaw fit in a human skull.

Sadly evolutionists are still the same today. They often are eager to believe and forgo investigation promoting false conclusions. Recent examples include "Sediba" and "Ida" and last years announcement "confirming cosmic inflation". *Ida was promoted as a missing link *with a news conference carried around the world. Likewise the announcement from the South Pole telling the world they had evidence of primordial waves...a smoking gun of the Big Bang.*

The pattern is as typical now as *back in Haeckels day .... grand announcements for evolutionism. ...science proves it wrong.... slow reluctant and quiet retractions.*

 

[Cross Reference]

You have no respect for honest courageous people, then in your adolescent addled mind you have the audacity to call them "pinheads".

As the commercial exclaimed, "Show me the meat", I ask, "Show me the honesty and the courage" by being wilfully ignorant when the "facts" in my opening comments go unanswered by you and your crowd?

 

[6days]

Clearly as a creationist advocate Dr John Sanford, geneticist, is probably not your typical clever scientist.

Agree... He is more clever than your average scientist. He*has published over 80 scientific publications...has over 30 patents, including the gene gun which has helped feed billions of people.*

As a creationist, for him a literal Genesis will always trump whatever science is presented however rigorous and honest, even his own.

And at one time, evolutionism trumped science for him. He says "I was totally sold on evolution. It was my religion; it defined how I saw everything, it was my value system and my reason for being."

We totally agree that the boundary*between*geological strata *does not indicate a sudden *change

Read peer reviewed "Defining the Flood/post-Flood boundary in sedimentary rocks"

http://creation.mobi/defining-the-fl...imentary-rocks

Then spread the news to Michael and a few other creationists around these here parts.

The supposed Biblical flood was however imagined to be a single relatively short mass extinction event, but what we see in geology however is anything but that.

The boundary between geological strata does not indicate sudden change but instead is consistent with stages of a single event flood over a short period of time...perhaps as little as 1 year.*

Yes...that is the Biblical creationist model. God has given organisms a genome allowing rapid adaptation and the ability to survive in various environments.

Please cite your factual evidence that God gives anything.

1. His Word

2. Factual evidence is that anything which begins to exist has a cause. Evidence is that our universe began to exist. Evidence is that our universe appears designed.....fine tuned...operates according to laws such as gravity. Those are factual evidences that an uncaused intelligent Creator gave us everything.

3. That uncaused Cause gave us something else besides our universe, and our existence. He gave us Himself on the cross... Our Creator*gave up his divine privileges; he took the humble position of a slave and was born as a human being. When he appeared in human form,*he humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal's death on a cross. Philippians 2:7,8

If you'd care to watch the PZ Myers video that noguro posted earlier you would perhaps understand the extraordinary amount of exhaustive work that scientists put into understanding how evolution works and of how genetic changes come about.

That really has nothing to do with your lack of "helpful transitional fossils".*

(And, yes... of course scientists work hard at understanding how genetic change happens)

He also explains how when creationists are presented with all kinds of transitional facts, often exactly what they were previously demanding, that they then wave it all away and trivialise it.*
Do watch it, but I suspect you won't:

I likely won't but have watched other P.Z. Meyers videos before. *He is knowledgeable and entertaining. But he always starts with his beliefs then interprets evidence to fit his a priori belief system.

I will make a deal with you..... you read a book I specify written by an agnostic about the lack of transitionals inspite of a remarkably complete fossil record ( about 85% of all current vertebrates are in the fossil record even when birds are included. ▪birds don't fossilized easy▪).... And I will watch your video.*

 

[Jose Fly]

Sorry to inform you but, true science fully supports the facts of creation. On the other hand, pseudo science, upon which the theory of evolution rests it's case, can be made to support any idea that originates in the imagination of man. [imagination obviously being something else 'birthed' by evolution ].

I'm always amazed at how many creationists think their mere say-so is sufficient to establish reality, and that everyone else should take their word as unquestioned gospel.

""Cross Reference" at ToL says science fully supports creationism and evolution is pseudoscience? Well then, since he said it, it must be so!"

This is why creationists are laughed at.

 

[noguru]

I'm always amazed at how many creationists think their mere say-so is sufficient to establish reality, and that everyone else should take their word as unquestioned gospel.

""Cross Reference" at ToL says science fully supports creationism and evolution is pseudoscience? Well then, since he said it, it must be so!"

This is why creationists are laughed at.

That is exactly why they adopt the specific theology they choose. It is an attempt to compensate for their incompetence and it allows them the delusion that they are granted some special authority over others.

 

[alwight]

Originally Posted by alwight Clearly as a creationist advocate Dr John Sanford, geneticist, is probably not your typical clever scientist.

Agree... He is more clever than your average scientist. He*has published over 80 scientific publications...has over 30 patents, including the gene gun which has helped feed billions of people.*

I'm not as sure as you that writing many books is a measure of scientific "cleverness" nor that a book in itself will actually feed anyone other than himself perhaps.

As a creationist, for him a literal Genesis will always trump whatever science is presented however rigorous and honest, even his own.

And at one time, evolutionism trumped science for him. He says "I was totally sold on evolution. It was my religion; it defined how I saw everything, it was my value system and my reason for being."

He may be your hero 6days but I don't know him from Adam. His apparent shift to YECism and the supernatural from secular science is indeed somewhat difficult to understand on face value, but I suspect that all is not quite that simple in reality, but then this isn't about individuals who may have stopped a brick with their head.

We totally agree that the boundary*between*geological strata *does not indicate a sudden *change
Read peer reviewed "Defining the Flood/post-Flood boundary in sedimentary rocks"
http://creation.mobi/defining-the-fl...imentary-rocks

Then spread the news to Michael and a few other creationists around these here parts.The supposed Biblical flood was however imagined to be a single relatively short mass extinction event, but what we see in geology however is anything but that.

The boundary between geological strata does not indicate sudden change but instead is consistent with stages of a single event flood over a short period of time...perhaps as little as 1 year.*

Don't get me wrong 6days, I'm not claiming it is absolutely impossible for a single flood event to have organised and sorted so many different and distinct sedimentary layers of different substances, with just a sprinkling of specific fossils here and there, rather than the remains of all the creatures mixed up that presumably would have all perished at the same time, oh no.
However I do tend to believe what I think is more reasonable and rational to believe rather than to perhaps feel compelled to presuppose that Genesis is a literal historic account regardless of what in practice anyway seems to be far more likely to be the case. I.e. one calamitous event will produce one end result, not the neatly organised, segregated and group sorted multi-layered geological reality we observe today.

Yes...that is the Biblical creationist model. God has given organisms a genome allowing rapid adaptation and the ability to survive in various environments.

Please cite your factual evidence that God gives anything.

1. His Word

2. Factual evidence is that anything which begins to exist has a cause. Evidence is that our universe began to exist. Evidence is that our universe appears designed.....fine tuned...operates according to laws such as gravity. Those are factual evidences that an uncaused intelligent Creator gave us everything.

3. That uncaused Cause gave us something else besides our universe, and our existence. He gave us Himself on the cross... Our Creator*gave up his divine privileges; he took the humble position of a slave and was born as a human being. When he appeared in human form,*he humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal's death on a cross. Philippians 2:7,8

Nothing particularly God specific then.:yawn:

likelihood of finding "helpful transitional fossils" depends on a a persons belief system. That is why we see grand announcements of transitionals such as "Ida" and "Sediba". .. then slow quiet retractions as science shows it isn't transitional at all.

If you'd care to watch the PZ Myers video that noguro posted earlier you would perhaps understand the extraordinary amount of exhaustive work that scientists put into understanding how evolution works and of how genetic changes come about.

That really has nothing to do with your lack of "helpful transitional fossils".*

Actually if you watch the video PZ goes into some depth about the existence of many transitional fossils that actually are fact but are nevertheless denied to even exist by creationists. For example it was claimed by creationists that whales had no transitional fossil evidence and when he produced a long list of them they then wave it away as trivial.

[ (And, yes... of course scientists work hard at understanding how genetic change happens)

He also explains how when creationists are presented with all kinds of transitional facts, often exactly what they were previously demanding, that they then wave it all away and trivialise it.*
Do watch it, but I suspect you won't:

I likely won't but have watched other P.Z. Meyers videos before. *He is knowledgeable and entertaining. But he always starts with his beliefs then interprets evidence to fit his a priori belief system.

I will make a deal with you..... you read a book I specify written by an agnostic about the lack of transitionals inspite of a remarkably complete fossil record ( about 85% of all current vertebrates are in the fossil record even when birds are included. ▪birds don't fossilized easy▪).... And I will watch your video.

I don't willingly intend to waste my time reading anything by your so called "agnostic" 6days, which I doubt btw, but I will try to match the time and effort that you put in to watching that video.

 

[Cross Reference]

That is exactly why they adopt the specific theology they choose. It is an attempt to compensate for their incompetence and it allows them the delusion that they are granted some special authority over others.

And you worship who or what, that is not a god to you, a god that requires faith from you?

 

[Cross Reference]

You keep using that nomenclature "pseudo science". How do you determine that something is indeed "pseudo science"?

How can guess work science taken fact, be anything other than pseudo?

 

[seehigh]

How can guess work science be anything other than pseudo?

You better stop posting on that computer of yours which was built on science and a number of theories including physics, chemistry, and geology.

 

[seehigh]

How can guess work science taken fact, be anything other than pseudo?

And while you're at it you better go back to the medicine practiced at the bronze Age time of the desert tribes, you know the superstitions ones, as opposed to modern medicine which happens to use biology which happens to include development of medicines that use evolution.

 

[Cross Reference]

You better stop posting on that computer of yours which was built on science and a number of theories including physics, chemistry, and geology.

It was built on proven mathematics! <good grief>

OMT: True science can only work with what is put into its hands. Pseudo non-knowledge produces zilch to work with.

 

[Jose Fly]

How can guess work science taken fact, be anything other than pseudo?

Has it ever occurred to you that the problem isn't with the science, but with your understanding of it?

 

[seehigh]

It was built on proven mathematics! <good grief>

OMT: True science can only work with what is put into its hands. Pseudo non-knowledge produces zilch.

The rare earths used in the chips are found by geology. Same geology the use for evolution. You really don't understand science do you?

 

[Cross Reference]

And while you're at it you better go back to the medicine practiced at the bronze Age time of the desert tribes, you know the superstitions ones, as opposed to modern medicine which happens to use biology which happens to include development of medicines that use evolution.

Nonsense!

You declare it took billions of years for a man to evolve from <guesswork> who absolutely couldn't reproduce himself, what's with this bronze age nonsense that came and went in 'three weeks'?

And what do you mean "with its superstitions"?? What was the all about?

 

[Cross Reference]

Has it ever occurred to you that the problem isn't with the science, but with your understanding of it?

. . . no. Evolution is too easy to refute. The fact you don't want to is your own personal religious problem.

 

[Cross Reference]

The rare earths used in the chips are found by geology. Same geology the use for evolution. You really don't understand science do you?

So what is the correlation? The machinery? It would seem so to you.

 

[Jose Fly]

. . . no.

I suggest you reconsider.

Evolution is too easy to refute.

It is? Where can I read a manuscript that refutes it?

The fact you don't want to is a your own personal religious problem.

And what religion would that be?

 

[seehigh]

Nonsense!

You declare it took billions of years for a man to evolve from <guesswork> who absolutely couldn't reproduce himself, what's with this bronze age nonsense that came and went in 'three weeks'?

And what do you mean "with its superstitions"?? What was the all about?

By what process do you think that bacteria develop resistance to medications?

 

[Cross Reference]

The rare earths used in the chips are found by geology. Same geology the use for evolution. You really don't understand science do you?

It's also used as swimming poole filters.

 

[Cross Reference]

By what process do you think that bacteria develop resistance to medications?

By what means did bacteria come into existence?