Creation Evidence

[Pete Harcoff]

nm

 

[TeddyKGB]

"I'll call it "standing up" when YECs are persecuted "

Part of the final solution there, Teddy?

This is shameful. You need to say some Hail Marys or engage in public self-flagellation for posting this rubbish.

 

[Gawron]

And you need to come across with something other than hate and vitriol. I have read a number of your post, and the only point you ever seem to make is how much you dispise what you term as 'YECs.'

A term, by the way, you seen to define as anyone who doesn't believe exactly as you do.

Got old real fast.

I do agree with one thing posted here however. The OP needs to re-enter the debate.

Or someone simply needs to close the thread. It is going no-where fast.

 

[Washington]

The theory of evolution at some juncture always requires spontaneous generation to occur.

Good grief, no sooner get out of the gate and you flop on your face, and B A D L Y ! But never fear, there is a cure: education. Please avail yourself of it.

 

[Nathan45]

And you need to come across with something other than hate and vitriol.

Friend, you just pulled Godwin's Law.
You have no standing at all to complain about this.

And you've also yet to post a constructive post in this thread.

anyway, I declare this thread over.
The original poster is long gone, two people have done a point by point refutation of the massive strawman that is the original post, and nazi's were invoked on page 2.

/thread

 

[Tenka]

Deana, I tried to give you some helpful advice in your other thread but you didn't want to listen and you kept on about something you had no knowledge about until the whole 'cabbit' thing.

Now, your lack of understand about science and evolution led you to believe cat/rabbit hybrids were possible, you have not improved your knowledge since then but you have launched another fallacy riddled attack on evolution.

Why?

"How much courage does it take..."

To stand up for one's beliefs? Particularly when they are surrounded by vipers?

A lot.

Rubbish, this is an internet forum, you might as well consider counterstike players war veterens.

 

[TeddyKGB]

And you need to come across with something other than hate and vitriol. I have read a number of your post, and the only point you ever seem to make is how much you dispise what you term as 'YECs.'

I despise the professionals - the Hams, Hovinds, Baughs. I merely pity the sheep who have been duped into believing that a physically impossible interpretation of Genesis is essential to one's salvation.

A term, by the way, you seen to define as anyone who doesn't believe exactly as you do.

Ah, right. It's me who's engaging in binary thinking while arguing with those who divide the scientific community into young-earth supporters and godless evolutionists.

You might as well go ahead and retract it because you'll never find any post of mine wherein I said anything resembling what you've accused me of.

 

[MoonLancer]

Cabbits anyone?

anyway I think that says it all.

The OPs points have been thoroughly Dashed and Smashed here. Its a long thread, but its clear who the victors were as the thread was closed at the request of the OP.

 

[TheOutsider]

Any hypothetical admiration I might muster for a YEC would at the least be limited to one who tackles the primary literature head-on; anyone can google "evidence for a young Earth" and paraphrase AiG.

Naw, this doesn't sound smart enough to be AiG. More than likely it is Ray Comfort.

Anyways, here is the Talk.Origins link on it: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/spontaneous-generation.html

What Louis Pasteur and the others who denied spontaneous generation demonstrated is that life does not currently spontaneously arise in complex form from nonlife in nature; he did not demonstrate the impossibility of life arising in simple form from nonlife by way of a long and propitious series of chemical steps/selections. In particular, they did not show that life cannot arise once, and then evolve. Neither Pasteur, nor any other post-Darwin researcher in this field, denied the age of the earth or the fact of evolution.

Eigen's hypothesis for abiogenesis is that self-replicating polymers started a hypercycle that formed RNA and eventually DNA. There are a few labs that are making a lot of progress in this area. I wouldn't be surprised if artificial life was created in the lab in the next 10 years.

 

[Morcova]

What are you theories on the jackalope?

 

[TheOutsider]

What are you theories on the jackalope?

Can we add unicorns to the list?
[bible]Job 39:9[/bible]
[bible]Psalm 92:10[/bible]

 

[Psudopod]

Deana, if you are going to argue against something, please take the time to understand what you are arguing against. Would you try and learn about Christianity from militant athiests? You think evolution is wrong and crazy, but you don't seem to understand what evolution is. You're beating down your own version and thinking that you're winning, but all you are doing is beating down a strawman. And this is because the websites you are getting your information from are lying to you. It's like coming here and annoucing Christianity is an awful religeon because it requires you to be a cannibal.

The theory of evolution at some juncture always requires spontaneous generation to occur. Not even from organic, previously alive material. Once the living DNA has been precipitated or disassembled by whatever means, heat, radiation, decay, new life does not form from the remains. There is a specific order to life ordained by the creator of life.

Evolution does not require spontaneous generation to occur. Spontaneous generation is the discredited idea that creature could appear fully formed, like maggots in meat. Evolution deals with imperfect replicators. You have to have a parent and a daughter organism.

I think you are trying to argue against abiogenesis here - the formation of living matter from non living matter. I'm not going to go into details because it's not my area of expertese and I wouldn't want to give you any wrong information. I'm sure someone else can give you a good run down. However, I will say that evolution does not require abiogenesis. Evolution requires imperfect replicators. It doesn't matter how the first lifeform arose, once it did, evolution takes place.

Additional genetic information is never gained in a DNA chain. When mutations occur, it's always a scrambling of information already present; a leg out of place, an additional head or some other abberation of existing DNA code.

You do understand there are only four "letters" in the DNA code. Of course mutations scramble what's there. If we found mutations creating extra letters we'd have to seriously rethink our understanding of things! What you're saying is like stating that all books are simply a rearrangement of Beowulf because they all use the same 26 letters.

Many kinds of animals have become extinct, we find their remains all the time. While we discover new varieties of life from time to time, no new kinds of life arise from other kinds, or from non-living material

Where do you think these new kinds of life come from then? Take a look at the list of new species that floats around. Have a look at the nylon eating bacteria. Study. Don't assume.

Consider this: people consider frogs becoming princes a fairy tale. But, if they tell you mankind came from a rock, it's evolution.

And this tells me you have never bothered to learn what evolution acutually is. At no point does the theory of evolution say we came from a rock. Mankind came from our parents, who came from their parents, who came from their parents and so on back through time. It's just that as you go back through time, our ancestors get less and less like the modern us.

 

[dad]

I despise the professionals - the Hams, Hovinds, Baughs. I merely pity the sheep who have been duped into believing that a physically impossible interpretation of Genesis is essential to one's salvation.

Let's not be pretentious here, or hypocritical. Do you think anything would give salvation? I doubt it, since you bear the atheist icon. I have never heard anyone say that creationism gives salvation anyhow. What a load.

 

[Baggins]

"How much courage does it take..."

To stand up for one's beliefs? Particularly when they are surrounded by vipers?

A lot.

She's not surrounded by vipers. Just people who are better educated than she is. We're not all vipers.

 

[Psudopod]

Me? I'm a corn snake. Small, harmless and stripy.

(It's been a long week).

 

[RealityCheck]

Since this thread is going nowhere and is following the traditional "creationist asserting garbage as fact" pattern, and the OP has abandoned it again apparently, I'm going to bring in the bunnies like Mr. Poe does.

Except I think a cabbit is more appropriate.

Photoshop is cool, ain't it?

 

[Psudopod]

I want a cabbit. Cutest spaceships ever.

(Apologies to non Tenshi fans who won't understand that comment.)

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

She's not surrounded by vipers. Just people who are better educated than she is. We're not all vipers.

Speak for yourself

Dreamt about a reefer 5 foot long.
Mighty Mezz but not too strong.
You'll be high, but not for long If you're a viper."

When your throat get's dry you know you're high
everything is dandy
Cruise on down to the candy store
bust your mouth on some pepperment candy

I am not sure I remembered all the lyrics correctly but there's a lot about the 60's I don't remember too precisely.

 

[RealityCheck]

I have never heard anyone say that creationism gives salvation anyhow. What a load.

Not quite. Although no one says "believing in creationism brings salvation" directly, they do chain it all together.

1) You have to believe in Christ's resurrection.
2) You have to believe that Christ = God, and
3) Therefore Christ authored the Bible.
4) Number 1 only means anything if Christ never lied.
5) Therefore, everything in the Bible must be fact and true.
6) Thus, if you don't believe in the literal creation account in Genesis, you believe Christ lied, which means you don't believe in the resurrection, which means no salvation.

 

[RealityCheck]

I want a cabbit. Cutest spaceships ever.

(Apologies to non Tenshi fans who won't understand that comment.)

Hehe, someone on fstdt made the same reference. And no, I still didn't get it (but I got the general idea I think).