Who's spreading falsehoods?

[Aron-Ra]

Index to Creationist Claims, Claim CB910: "No new species have been observed."

...this statement made by Dr. Henry Morris is about 20 years old, we now know it to be false,

Yet many many creationists regularly continue to make this claim even when they know better. And many creationists still today complain about things said by the late Stephen J. Gould back thirty years ago, as if that were still current. They also still complain about Piltdown man and Ernst Haeckel's exaggurated embryo drawings from a century ago, even though it has always been the evolutionists themselves who route and expose every fraud in their own ranks; while creationism has always relied on fraud entirely for all of its own support!

please stop spreading falsehoods about creationism in general.

Now this was funny! Creationism can only survive by spreading falsehoods; it is falsehood! It is based on a series of foundational fibs perpetuated by 'professional' creationists who know their own claims are false and often even admit as much, in addition to many other claims which they won't admit to, but which we can still prove they know are lies: Evolution doesn't include the origin of life, nor the origin of the universe; It isn't 'anti-theistic', or 'damnable' if believed. It isn't "just a theory", and it doesn't promote "godless humanism", nor any other philosophy, nor sexual orientation either. It has nothing to do with promiscuity or racism, or abortion, or any other moral or criminal issue. Evolution isn't a religion or a political position. The Nazis didn't know squat about how evolution worked, and never even tried to employ it; and Darwin never 'recanted' it either. Evolution never implies one thing giving birth to another, fundamentally different thing, and it doesn't say God didn't do it. It isn't losing support among scientists, and you don't have to reject evolution to be a 'true' Christian. In fact, most Christians are evolutionists, and most evolutionists are Christian! Even macro-evolution has been directly-observed many times over. We have myriad transitional intermediates from an abundant fossil record to show for just about any lineage you'd care to talk about, and there are no more significant links still "missing" from the human evolutionary chain. Yet creationists commonly -even regularly claim otherwise in every case, and they continue to say these things even after they've been shown proof that each of their claims are wrong. Creationism isn't about truth by any stretch, and it interested in knowledge either. Its about believing what they wanna believe even when they know that's not what the truth really is.

Many times now I have challenged others to present even one credible proponant of evangelical creationism because I maintain that there has never been a single tenable advocate of creation science anywhere ever. Every last one of them who has ever published antievolutionary rhetoric has revealed inexcuseable ignorance of the very topics where they claim expertise, as well as demonstrating a gross misunderstanding of the form and function of science itself, and even theology too! All of them have distorted data, relied on logical fallacies, emotional pleas, parody, and sensationalist propaganda, and/or purposefully misrepresented the arguments they pretend to refute. Creationism has naught but the lies of confidence men seeking to promote themselves, and to sell their videos and receive their "prayer gifts" from a manipulated audience whom they'd rather keep as gullible as possible. If you can think of one exception to this rule, name him, and give me a relevant citation from him to prove it. Show me one actual factual argument for creationism which you think you can defend as such on scientific grounds.

I'm betting that the best you could ever list will amount to no more than empty criticisms of evolution; criticisms which were either fallatious from the start, or otherwise known to be false (probably even before they were claimed) and are at least by now already-disproved beyond hope of resuscitation here; But I'm certain you can produce nothing which offers positive support for the notion of intelligent design creationism, nor even anything which legitimately implies that as a general conclusion over the scientific perspective. Why? Because evolution is evidently at least basically true, while creationism is not only profoundly (if not entirely) false, but necessarily deliberately dishonest to boot.

 

[thaumaturgy]

Bravo!

Personally I am offended when I hear creationists on this and other boards make broad sweeping generalizations about the "motives" of scientists who support evolution.

Yet none of them personally seem to know any paleontologists or biologists.

I have tried on numerous occasions to point out that I have worked aroud paleontologists since the early 80's and I never met one who believed in evolution in order to push some anti-God agenda. They believe it because the data leads to that conclusion.

I hear others complain that peer-review keeps valid creationist literature out, but none of them have ever done peer-review themselves and won't listen when people who have done it correct them on the topic.

The gross misrepresentation of science in general is frustrating as well. And virtually none of those leveling the charges against science will ever pony up their own bonafides on the topic.

But most interesting is the fact that the only part of science creationists seem to dislike the most is that which they think is easy to understand. None of them really ever take on the in-depth chemistry/physics underlying radiometric dating.

I am not here to slag creationism, because I actually hope someone in the creationist camp will step up to the plate and talk science like a scientist.

Science is tough on its players. It has to be. Just because someone doesn't buy a creationist's "hypothesis" doesn't mean that the person is under attack. Just the hypothesis. And creationists need to know that merely pointing to data outliers or possible problems does not make Creationism de facto correct.

 

[LittleNipper]

In all due respect, the creationist is only demonstrating that evolution has had one error and one problem after another and the Bible has never been shown to be in error. OH, there are those who will not accept what the Bible has to say, but the Bible remains faithful and evolution changes again and again and again.....

 

[RealityCheck]

In all due respect, the creationist is only demonstrating that evolution has had one error and one problem after another and the Bible has never been shown to be in error. OH, there are those who will not accept what the Bible has to say, but the Bible remains faithful and evolution changes again and again and again.....

Oh please - you simply won't accept that you've been shown numerous times that the Bible is in error, many times over. You will simply say that people are interpreting the Bible wrong, and that only through correct interpretation can you see that the Bible is not in error.

 

[FishFace]

In all due respect, the creationist is only demonstrating that evolution has had one error and one problem after another and the Bible has never been shown to be in error.

Can you demonstrate that the Iliad is in error, or the Qu'ran?

OH, there are those who will not accept what the Bible has to say, but the Bible remains faithful and evolution changes again and again and again.....

Yes, the Bible remains the same (wrong) while science continually betters itself.

 

[tocis]

Some people will never understand that repeating a false claim a gazillion times doesn't make it true...

 

[thaumaturgy]

In all due respect, the creationist is only demonstrating

...a lack of understanding science? A lack of appreciation for logic? A lack of insight? A lack of appreciation for the countless philosophers who have come before? A surplus of hubris and pride in their own flawed misunderstanding?

the Bible has never been shown to be in error.

Yeah, sure if it doesn't actually say what it says.

OH, there are those who will not accept what the Bible has to say, but the Bible remains faithful and evolution changes again and again and again.....

Are you a protestant? Or do you cleave to Catholic church as it was originally founded. Are you justified by faith or works? Are you a trinitarian or a adoptionist? Are you a Docetist?

Are you an albigensian?

In case you aren't following these are all competing interpretations that hit at the fundamentals of your faith. Let's look at how the reasoned "faith" dealt with Albigensians. Since clearly a heresy, the faith need only point out the obvious error. Guess that's why it took a 20 year military campaign and a lot of people being killed and burned.

Yes the faith is ever constant. Unchanging and never altered. That's why everyone today is a Catholic.




(I wish along with science classes, creationists would also take some history classes)

 

[LittleNipper]

Oh please - you simply won't accept that you've been shown numerous times that the Bible is in error, many times over. You will simply say that people are interpreting the Bible wrong, and that only through correct interpretation can you see that the Bible is not in error.

Prove to me that GOD didn't create the entire Universe. If you cannot, then I submit that evolution (NOT MEDICINE) is worthless and undemonstratable. You cannot demonstrate that humanity is progressing physiologially and yet you wish (by way of evolution) to prove that man originated from the worm and has become more complex an entity..... I say that People are not allowing the Bible to interpret the Bible. The Bible doesn't contradict itself, so its understanding is found in accepting all of it and not select parts. The evening and the morning WERE the day.

 

[LittleNipper]

...a lack of understanding science? A lack of appreciation for logic? A lack of insight? A lack of appreciation for the countless philosophers who have come before? A surplus of hubris and pride in their own flawed misunderstanding?



Yeah, sure if it doesn't actually say what it says.



Are you a protestant? Or do you cleave to Catholic church as it was originally founded. Are you justified by faith or works? Are you a trinitarian or a adoptionist? Are you a Docetist?

Are you an albigensian?

In case you aren't following these are all competing interpretations that hit at the fundamentals of your faith. Let's look at how the reasoned "faith" dealt with Albigensians. Since clearly a heresy, the faith need only point out the obvious error. Guess that's why it took a 20 year military campaign and a lot of people being killed and burned.

Yes the faith is ever constant. Unchanging and never altered. That's why everyone today is a Catholic.




(I wish along with science classes, creationists would also take some history classes)

ALL believers are a part of the UNIVERSAL BODY OF CHRIST. That has not changed since Pentecost---though man made organizations and their "traditions" have.

 

[JohnR7]

And many creationists still today complain about things said by the late Stephen J. Gould back thirty years ago, as if that were still current.

Why not? Moses goes back 3500 years and he is not only still current, Science still has not caught up to where he was at 3500 years ago.

Creationism can only survive by spreading falsehoods; it is falsehood!

Sense you can only judge yourself and try to project that out on others. Are you then admiting that Evolutionists can only survive by spreading falsehoods?

 

[MrGoodBytes]

Prove to me that GOD didn't create the entire Universe. If you cannot, then I submit that evolution (NOT MEDICINE) is worthless and undemonstratable.

Prove to me that ZEUS didn't create it. If you cannot, I submit that creationism is worthless. Anyway....

 

[LittleNipper]

Some people will never understand that repeating a false claim a gazillion times doesn't make it true...

Calling people liars never built anyone's character either....

 

[RealityCheck]

..... I say that People are not allowing the Bible to interpret the Bible.

That's because a book, which is an inanimate object, cannot perform an action on itself. To think otherwise is delusional.

 

[JohnR7]

Yes, the Bible remains the same (wrong) while science continually betters itself.

So you admit then that the Bible continues to be consistant for 3500 years and that Science after all this time still is still not consistant?

The truth is always the truth. You can catch people at a lie, because they are not consistant.

 

[Edx]

So you admit then that the Bible continues to be consistant for 3500 years and that Science after all this time still is still not consistant?

The truth is always the truth. You can catch people at a lie, because they are not consistant.

Strawman much?

 

[LittleNipper]

Prove to me that ZEUS didn't create it. If you cannot, I submit that creationism is worthless. Anyway....

Zeus had a wife. GOD does not. If Zeus had a wife that means that there is more than just him and he didn't create everything which exists. CHRIST created everything and without HIM there was nothing. He didn't need a wife.

 

[Aron-Ra]

Moses goes back 3500 years and he is not only still current, Science still has not caught up to where he was at 3500 years ago.

Not only are the ravings attributed to Moses still grotesquely wrong, and already out of date by his own time, but now it seems he himself never really existed, and was fabricated out of as many as four other characters.

Sense you can only judge yourself and try to project that out on others. Are you then admiting that Evolutionists can only survive by spreading falsehoods?

Since you obviously couldn't address any of the challenges in the OP, then it seems you're forced to try and change the subject to conceal that fact, and to further obfuscate your failure by trying to put words in my mouth that aren't anything like what I really said or meant, and which can't make any sense.

 

[Aron-Ra]

Zeus had a wife. GOD does not. If Zeus had a wife that means that there is more than just him and he didn't create everything which exists. CHRIST created everything and without HIM there was nothing. He didn't need a wife.

Your lack of logic in your assumptions is astounding, as is your strange interpretation that Jesus created -anything- when in your own mythos Jesus said he did not; he only said he was there to witness YHWH the father-god of Jewish mythos do it.

Oh, and the Jewish god is at least partially-based on Amen-Ra, who did have a wife at one time in the earliest versions of those myths.

 

[thaumaturgy]

The Bible clearly shows that evolutionists are ignorant.

Chapter and verse please.

ALL believers are a part of the UNIVERSAL BODY OF CHRIST. That has not changed since Pentecost---though man made organizations and their "traditions" have.

How wonderfully ecumenical of you! But I suppose that only extends to those who carry your particular interpretation of the Bible?

Or are you going to tell me Universalist-Unitarians are exactly the same as your congregation? Are you a UU?

Why stop there?

Too bad the early church so viciously sought out to destroy heretics. So, are you a docetist? An adoptionist? What is your heresy?

Are heretics going to heaven even if they don't repent of their heresies?

Sadly, like the Bible itself, the faith itself is part and parcel of human organization of it.

There was no Church that came from the sky and materialized on earth. The very bible you read was cobbled together by committees throughout time.

There are countless gnostic and alternative gospels about Jesus that are not included in the Bible. Why do you think that is? Did Jesus sit down and say "Look dudes, there's only gonna be 4 sometimes mutually contradictory stories of my life in the New Testament, and then I'm going to let Paul write some stuff and then a few folks writing as if they were Paul and then we'll wrap it up with an allegory for Roman corruption that people will read as a story of the end of the world. Now get to work. But wait at least 40 years after I die before anyone starts working on these things."

If the Torah itself doesn't get mention as a canon until the Babylonian Exile and Deuteronomy may not have been written until it was "mysteriously found" as the lost book of the Law during Josiah's reign as a means of supporting Josiah's sweeping religious reforms, and ultimately the earliest manuscripts we have for any of the Old Testament date to about 21BC, how do you know the authority and provenance of the Bible?

Go ahead and just say it: "Because we just know!"

That's science.

 

[thaumaturgy]

Zeus had a wife. GOD does not..

Correction: "Yahweh and his Asherah"

http://www.yahwehism.com/html/yahweh-samaria.html