Evolution and the myth of "scientific consensus"

[Mr Strawberry]

Either that, or it was made FOR genuine giants.[VERSE=Genesis 6:4,KJV]There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.[/VERSE]

Genesis doesn't do you literalists a lot of favours does it.

 

[AV1611VET]

Genesis doesn't do you literalists a lot of favours does it.

Genesis?

If it was made in Genesis, then it would have been destroyed in the Flood.

 

[The Cadet]

Yep, check out this site:

https://deusnexus.wordpress.com/2014/04/23/massive-ruins-discovered-russia/

If the megalithic ruins a Baalbek weren't enough, they have found more in Russia. These ruins are very very old, too old to have tools to cut granite, immensely enormous (3,000 tons) cut with precision and stacked 40 meters high.

Tell me, who can do that today? They were confused about the pregnant woman stone at Baalbek. Yet these are twice as big, dragged up a mountain and then stacked.

The author states:

"Of course much more research needs to be done on this site. Nobody knows who cut these stones or how old they are. Jensen believes that they come from a time well back into the mists of pre-history…"

As time goes on each generation will care less and less about the coveted TOE. We are in an age where they have never had to deal with conflict between God and evolution. They have grown up with only one theory, the TOE. It has been hammered into them from the early grades. It is the quest of every generation to discover more, search more, dig deeper and progress more. They will delve into all the nooks and crannies. They will search for answers to questions that still are mysteries. Doing this, they will uncover things that have been hidden, dismissed and rejected.

They will be on a quest for truth and soon see that the "brotherhood" of men and women trying desperately to quell any evidence of anything that contradicts the golden calf of the TOE have overlooked many things that common sense will tell you was not by accident, through random changes, survival of the fittest, etc, etc, etc.

They may not be creationists but they will soon drop the curtain on the farce of evolution.

You really should check your sources.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gornaya_Shoria_megaliths

No reputable geologist thinks that these were carved by humans.

 

[Goonie]

You really should check your sources.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gornaya_Shoria_megaliths

No reputable geologist thinks that these were carved by humans.

Ah, so there's the wiki entry, thanks.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Genesis?

If it was made in Genesis, then it would have been destroyed in the Flood.

Another gust of wind ruffles AV's hair.

 

[JacksBratt]

Indeed many of the photos of this site are clearly pictures of natural granite formations, suchs as this one from dartmoor england.View attachment 160251

Really? Check the gaps between the rocks in you photo and the precision by which the rocks in others are put together. Also, the polygonal shapes of the rocks that are nesting so tight that you cannot put a credit card between them....

Explain why the American Stonehenge aligns perfectly, on summer solstice, with Stonehenge in England and then to Beirut Lebanon where the Canaanites came from. Canaanites were giants. Archaeologist believe that these structures were built around 2400 BC?
https://iamisatthedoors.wordpress.c...henge-england-connection-with-the-canaanites/

 

[Jan Volkes]

Interesting. What is the problem with Creation Science in your estimation?

The problem is there is no such thing as Creation Science, there are scientists who are creationists but those scientists do not use creationism when they do their science, Creation Science is like saying he's a married bachelor.

 

[Goonie]

Really? Check the gaps between the rocks in you photo and the precision by which the rocks in others are put together. Also, the polygonal shapes of the rocks that are nesting so tight that you cannot put a credit card between them....

Explain why the American Stonehenge aligns perfectly, on summer solstice, with Stonehenge in England and then to Beirut Lebanon where the Canaanites came from. Canaanites were giants. Archaeologist believe that these structures were built around 2400 BC?
https://iamisatthedoors.wordpress.c...henge-england-connection-with-the-canaanites/

And once again you rely on information gleaned from unreliable sources, I cannot help but notice the links to illuminati/harp/chem trails on the same website. Come back when you have something credible.

 

[The Cadet]

Really? Check the gaps between the rocks in you photo and the precision by which the rocks in others are put together. Also, the polygonal shapes of the rocks that are nesting so tight that you cannot put a credit card between them....

It's trivial to find confusing outcroppings of stone that seem to have been "formed". It's trivially easy to invoke bizarre explanations, like "aliens did it" or "humans were giant in the past" as just-so stories. What's hard is actually putting in the legwork to determine that such things actually happened. This same topic came up on another forum I frequent, SDMB, and the general response was "Yeah, rocks just form that way." As for your other photos, I have neither a sense of scale nor a clue where they're from, so they're not particularly useful to me.

 

[lifepsyop]

Really? Check the gaps between the rocks in you photo and the precision by which the rocks in others are put together. Also, the polygonal shapes of the rocks that are nesting so tight that you cannot put a credit card between them....

Explain why the American Stonehenge aligns perfectly, on summer solstice, with Stonehenge in England and then to Beirut Lebanon where the Canaanites came from. Canaanites were giants. Archaeologist believe that these structures were built around 2400 BC?
https://iamisatthedoors.wordpress.c...henge-england-connection-with-the-canaanites/

There were hundreds of discoveries of groups of giant human skeletons throughout the 19th century all over North America. Ranging from 7 to 12 feet tall. These discoveries were routinely reported in the mainstream news (all the original newspapers clipping are freely available online), and official archaeological teams and museums like the Smithsonian were even involved in some of the discoveries. Apparently some were even on display in museums at one time but have since been 'misplaced'. It's pretty amazing when you see all the historical evidence. A world of archaeological discovery that was considered relatively mundane and commonplace little more than a century or so ago just seemingly vaporized into thin air (coincidentally about the same time Evolution theory was rising to prominence) and is now talked about like it is Bigfoot or UFOs.

Richard Dewhurst did a good job of compiling all the information if anyone's interested.

 

[AV1611VET]

The problem is there is no such thing as Creation Science, there are scientists who are creationists but those scientists do not use creationism when they do their science, Creation Science is like saying he's a married bachelor.

I agree.

Creation science is a contradiction in terms.

 

[Goonie]

There were hundreds of discoveries of groups of giant human skeletons throughout the 19th century all over North America. Ranging from 7 to 12 feet tall. These discoveries were routinely reported in the mainstream news (all the original newspapers clipping are freely available online), and official archaeological teams and museums like the Smithsonian were even involved in some of the discoveries. Apparently some were even on display in museums at one time but have since been 'misplaced'. It's pretty amazing when you see all the historical evidence. A world of archaeological discovery that was considered relatively mundane and commonplace little more than a century or so ago just seemingly vaporized into thin air (coincidentally about the same time Evolution theory was rising to prominence) and is now talked about like it is Bigfoot or UFOs.

Richard Dewhurst did a good job of compiling all the information if anyone's interested.

More conspiracy
claptrap, this time coming from groups denying that the native Americans built the burial mounds, instead as Richard dewhurst and others claim the builders were blue eyed blonde/red haired white skinned giants.

Something smells.

An article to read http://www.jasoncolavito.com/blog/r...onian-of-covering-up-ancient-caucasian-giants

 

[The Cadet]

There were hundreds of discoveries of groups of giant human skeletons throughout the 19th century all over North America. Ranging from 7 to 12 feet tall. These discoveries were routinely reported in the mainstream news (all the original newspapers clipping are freely available online), and official archaeological teams and museums like the Smithsonian were even involved in some of the discoveries. Apparently some were even on display in museums at one time but have since been 'misplaced'. It's pretty amazing when you see all the historical evidence. A world of archaeological discovery that was considered relatively mundane and commonplace little more than a century or so ago just seemingly vaporized into thin air (coincidentally about the same time Evolution theory was rising to prominence) and is now talked about like it is Bigfoot or UFOs.

Richard Dewhurst did a good job of compiling all the information if anyone's interested.

So... Got good evidence? Let's see it.

 

[Oncedeceived]

The problem is there is no such thing as Creation Science, there are scientists who are creationists but those scientists do not use creationism when they do their science, Creation Science is like saying he's a married bachelor.

See the problem is that there is only Science. Science is science. "Creation Science" is not science "using" creationism. Science is a systemic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observations and experimentation. It uses a standard method. It is used in all Science and involves taking a hypothesis (whatever question needs to be answered) and testing that model.

Example: If Intelligent Design is correct we should see a beginning to our universe. If ID is correct we should see that nothing existed of our universe prior to its existence. How do we test this hypothesis and what experiments do we do to determine if this model is correct? The science of this is to do experiments not unlike those that have already been done. If this model is accurate with the data we discover by experimentation we can determine if ID is supported by the data.

 

[Oncedeceived]

I agree.

Creation science is a contradiction in terms.

See my response to this.

 

[AV1611VET]

See my response to this.

 

[Jan Volkes]

See my response to this.

I was too slow..........

 

[AV1611VET]

I was too slow..........

Post 875

 

[Atheos canadensis]

There were hundreds of discoveries of groups of giant human skeletons throughout the 19th century all over North America. Ranging from 7 to 12 feet tall. These discoveries were routinely reported in the mainstream news (all the original newspapers clipping are freely available online), and official archaeological teams and museums like the Smithsonian were even involved in some of the discoveries. Apparently some were even on display in museums at one time but have since been 'misplaced'. It's pretty amazing when you see all the historical evidence. A world of archaeological discovery that was considered relatively mundane and commonplace little more than a century or so ago just seemingly vaporized into thin air (coincidentally about the same time Evolution theory was rising to prominence) and is now talked about like it is Bigfoot or UFOs.

Richard Dewhurst did a good job of compiling all the information if anyone's interested.

Perhaps instead of this derailment you could address this more pertinent post:

http://www.christianforums.com/posts/68157893/

 

[Jan Volkes]

See the problem is that there is only Science. Science is science. "Creation Science" is not science "using" creationism. Science is a systemic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observations and experimentation. It uses a standard method. It is used in all Science and involves taking a hypothesis (whatever question needs to be answered) and testing that model.

Example: If Intelligent Design is correct we should see a beginning to our universe. If ID is correct we should see that nothing existed of our universe prior to its existence. How do we test this hypothesis and what experiments do we do to determine if this model is correct? The science of this is to do experiments not unlike those that have already been done. If this model is accurate with the data we discover by experimentation we can determine if ID is supported by the data.

Where does the word Creation come in then?