Search results

Perhaps we should also teach Alchemy along side Chemistry and let the kids decide which one to believe.

If the Lochness Monster disproves Evolution then the Flying Spaghetti Monster disproves Creationism. Not if it's creationist babies.

Can you please show me where in evolutionary theory does it say that "nonliving things evolved over time into living things.?" Or was that your personal strawman? I'd much rather have come from bacteria than "dust." ^_^ And science trumps the bible any day of the week.

That must be why there are many theistic evolutionists who believe that the first living cell was placed on earth by God right?

Creationists not only insist that evolution includes abiogenesis, they insist that it should include the big bang theory, the origin of the earth, radiometric dating and just about everything else in science that they don't like.

One of those reproduces, the other does not. Can you figure out which one?

And any example we give you, you'll just respond with "But it's still a [insert taxonomic clade here]!!!" ^_^

And that's precisely why there's no such thing as "blind-faith evolutionism."

Can you please show me the poster who has said that neurosurgeons don't study science? I've looked through this entire thread and do not see it. :confused:

Sorry but it is the creationists who are desperate since you guys have almost no actual scientists on your side. And since there is such a lacking number of creation scientists, the talking-snake cultists would do anything to try and convince us otherwise. This is exaclty why you so desperately...

Actually people are saying he doesn't know science. He didn't even know that the Earth's distance from the Sun changes. This qualifies as "not knowing science." In order to be a neuroscientist you have to have a PhD in neuroscience which this man does not have.

Okay let's forget whether surgeons are scientists or not. That is completely besides the point. The fact is that this said surgeon is not qualified to teach science because he lacks the most basic understanding of science; thus rendering his opinions on evolution invalid. How about we stick...

And how much creationism do you have to know in order to be a cutting edge neurosurgeon? Looks like your "theory" is a whole lot less useful. Thanks for shooting yourself in the foot.

Why don't actually READ the thread instead of spamming since this has already been addressed SEVERAL times already?

Last time I checked psychology was a "social science" which is about as much science as "political science." Once again you have demonstrated that you have no idea what science is. No wonder you consider people like Kent Hovind, Ray Comfort, and Ben Carson to be scientists. ^_^

And I know of car mechanics who has over 20+ years of education have have Phds so what's your point? And how does the amount of education you get make you a scientist? Guess what genius, lawyers have to go to college for as long as if not longer than surgeons. Does that make lawyers...

So is a car mechanic a scientist? What about a physical therpist or a message therapist? I guess they must be scientists too right? And you still haven't shown any proof how this surgeon is qualified to teach science.

So where's your proof that this surgeon is qualified to teach science or understands science at all? Right....that's like saying a car mechanic is a scientist because they need to understand "car science" LOL!!! What a joke! Any grown adult with a brain should be able to teach any 5th...

People also have to realise that the talking-snake cultists have a completely different concept of a scientist is. To them people like Kent Hovind, Ray Comfort, and Ken Ham are "scientists." ^_^

Surgeons/Physicians technically aren't scientists. A transparent response to a transparent question. What exactly is a "man of science" anyway? A scientist? Surgeons aren't scientists, I don't know how much simpler it can get. How come creationists never mention Michael Behe who is an ACTUAL...