Creation Evidence

TheManeki

Christian Humanist
Jun 5, 2007
3,376
544
Visit site
✟21,334.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I want a cabbit. Cutest spaceships ever.

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

ryoohki_sd.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Psudopod
Upvote 0

TheManeki

Christian Humanist
Jun 5, 2007
3,376
544
Visit site
✟21,334.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The theory of evolution at some juncture always requires spontaneous generation to occur. The pioneering work of Louis Pasteur paved the way for our canning and bottling industry today. Billions of experiments are performed each day as tuna fish, tomato soup and grape jelly are put into a controlled environment absent living DNA. The result is consistently the same, new life does not form spontaneously from non-living material. 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. All things reproduce according to their kind.

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.

Never does a wing form on a snake or a fin on a cat. The information is not present and cannot arise stochastically. It is not only improbable, it is impossible. The result, of course, is that 'all things reproduce according to their kind'. Dogs beget dogs, birds beget birds and so forth.

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.

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

This thread was entitled "Creation Evidence," but the OP did not present any evidence that indicates a creation. All I read was a bunch of PRATTS about evolution being wrong. No creation evidence.

IMHO, the OP is off-topic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USincognito
Upvote 0

uberd00b

The Emperor has no clothes.
Oct 14, 2006
5,642
244
46
Newcastle, UK
✟22,308.00
Faith
Taoist
Marital Status
Single
"How much courage does it take..."

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

A lot.
As somebody once said, intransigent belief is not a virtue but a sign of intellectual and moral weakness.

It takes more courage to question your beliefs than simply to stick with them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheManeki
Upvote 0
G

GoSeminoles!

Guest
The theory of evolution at some juncture always requires spontaneous generation to occur. The pioneering work of Louis Pasteur paved the way for our canning and bottling industry today. Billions of experiments are performed each day as tuna fish, tomato soup and grape jelly are put into a controlled environment absent living DNA. The result is consistently the same, new life does not form spontaneously from non-living material. 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. All things reproduce according to their kind.

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.

Never does a wing form on a snake or a fin on a cat. The information is not present and cannot arise stochastically. It is not only improbable, it is impossible. The result, of course, is that 'all things reproduce according to their kind'. Dogs beget dogs, birds beget birds and so forth.

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.

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

There are millions of evolutionary scientists all over the world -- every country, every religion, every economic background. They are highly intelligent, well educated, and hard working.

If evolutionary theory actually had the flaws you imagine it does, do you really think those scientists are so stupid as not to notice?

Here's a crazy thought -- maybe instead you don't actually know the first real thing about evolution.
 
Upvote 0

DrunkenWrestler

Eat your Wheaties and know your logical fallacies.
Dec 20, 2003
2,010
146
17
$1 reject store
✟10,355.00
Faith
Atheist
Here's a crazy thought -- maybe instead you don't actually know the first real thing about evolution.
I'm pretty sure she's just busy publishing her ideas in Nature and will be soon collecting her nobel prize. These errors are so flagrant, it's amazing scientists how scientists just seemed to have missed them.

Maybe it's more amazing that she's refuting claims that aren't even made by evolution.
 
Upvote 0

FishFace

Senior Veteran
Jan 12, 2007
4,535
169
35
✟13,130.00
Faith
Atheist
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.'

Hate? What hate? The only think I think anyone hates is the incessant repetition and rehashing of tired arguments that don't work, and never did the first thousand times they were used.

Seriously - Louis Pasteur disproved spontaneous generation - that's old news. It's somewhat insulting when someone clearly thinks you're so out of touch A) with science and B) with the discussion at hand that they bring up this nonsense.

Mutations only scramble existing mutation? Where did nylonase come from then?

This isn't hate; it's frustration that no creationist seems able to acknowledge the body of evidence and state of discussion.
 
Upvote 0

Gawron

Well-Known Member
Apr 24, 2008
3,152
473
✟5,109.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
"She's not surrounded by vipers. Just people who are better educated than she is."

Ah, yes, the patented response of the enlightened ones.

We have decided there is no god, therefore we are smarter than everyone who believes there is. Because anyone who actually studies the theory of evolution will automatically reject any belief in the notion of a god or creator, which is the only path to true enlightenment.

"As somebody once said, intransigent belief is not a virtue but a sign of intellectual and moral weakness."

How about intransigent non-belief?
 
Upvote 0

Gawron

Well-Known Member
Apr 24, 2008
3,152
473
✟5,109.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
"Hate? What hate? The only think I think anyone hates is the incessant repetition and rehashing of tired arguments that don't work, and never did the first thousand times they were used."


I was not the OP on this thread, I did not make the statements to which you refer in the OP.

In addition, my comments were not directed at you.
 
Upvote 0

DrunkenWrestler

Eat your Wheaties and know your logical fallacies.
Dec 20, 2003
2,010
146
17
$1 reject store
✟10,355.00
Faith
Atheist
Ah, yes, the patented response of the enlightened ones.

We have decided there is no god, therefore we are smarter than everyone who believes there is. Because anyone who actually studies the theory of evolution will automatically reject any belief in the notion of a god or creator, which is the only path to true enlightenment.
armchair_psychologist.jpg
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

dad

Undefeated!
Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,904
1,261
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
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.

Not bad so far.

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.
Christ did refer to the flood, and the time of Eden, so rejecting that is not believing Him on the matter.
Seems to me that the mark of one that believes in Jesus, and the bible, is that they believe in Jesus, and the bible. Many people are saved, that are not quite at that place yet, apparently, and may never be in this life. But, far as I can tell, the main thing is to simply believe Jesus, and accept His gift. The rest will follow eventually.

Therefore when I see Christians that do not believe Him, or the bible, I consider that an indication they have a long way to go in some departments.
 
Upvote 0

Morcova

Well-Known Member
Oct 30, 2006
7,493
523
48
✟10,470.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Libertarian
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.


Oh so then you and the other creationist who accuse other christians of not really being christian because they don't believe as you do is what.... a joke?
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,904
1,261
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Oh so then you and the other creationist who accuse other christians of not really being christian because they don't believe as you do is what.... a joke?
I accuse who of what, where?? No idea what you are talking about. I may cringe at the utter lack of belief in the bible of some, and realize they are not really bible believers, however.
 
Upvote 0

Baggins

Senior Veteran
Mar 8, 2006
4,789
474
At Sea
✟14,982.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Labour
"She's not surrounded by vipers. Just people who are better educated than she is."

Ah, yes, the patented response of the enlightened ones.

That is also true, I certainly seem to be more enlightened than she is.

We have decided there is no god, therefore we are smarter than everyone who believes there is.

I know lots of Christian scientists that are smarter than me. She isn't one of them.

Because anyone who actually studies the theory of evolution will automatically reject any belief in the notion of a god or creator, which is the only path to true enlightenment.

That's a mighty fine straw man you are building yourself there.

Do you always attempt to put words into other peoples mouths like this? Or is it a form of dishonesty you have taken to recently?
 
Upvote 0

Split Rock

Conflation of Blathers
Nov 3, 2003
17,607
730
North Dakota
✟22,466.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

RealityCheck

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2006
5,924
488
New York
✟23,538.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Not bad so far.

Christ did refer to the flood, and the time of Eden, so rejecting that is not believing Him on the matter.
Seems to me that the mark of one that believes in Jesus, and the bible, is that they believe in Jesus, and the bible. Many people are saved, that are not quite at that place yet, apparently, and may never be in this life. But, far as I can tell, the main thing is to simply believe Jesus, and accept His gift. The rest will follow eventually.

Therefore when I see Christians that do not believe Him, or the bible, I consider that an indication they have a long way to go in some departments.


And so you're saying the same thing. Reject belief in the Bible as literal fact, and you reject Jesus, therefore if you don't believe in the Bible you are not saved.

See? You said it, you just took a long way to say it.
 
Upvote 0

TeddyKGB

A dude playin' a dude disgused as another dude
Jul 18, 2005
6,495
453
46
Deep underground
✟8,993.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Ah, yes, the patented response of the enlightened ones.

We have decided there is no god, therefore we are smarter than everyone who believes there is. Because anyone who actually studies the theory of evolution will automatically reject any belief in the notion of a god or creator, which is the only path to true enlightenment.
Your rant isn't even on point. This is not a debate about the existence of God.

That said, I have a question: How come nearly every field of study - theologies included - gets to delineate its own parameters and sanction its own experts with little external objection, but when the hard sciences do the same, anti-evolutionists go all shriekingly post-modern, as if strength of belief is sufficient all by itself to supplant a decade of dedicated academic study?
 
Upvote 0
G

GoSeminoles!

Guest
"She's not surrounded by vipers. Just people who are better educated than she is."

Ah, yes, the patented response of the enlightened ones.

Newsflash for you, Sparky. The people who spend summer after summer in hot deserts tediously extracting fossil after fossil and who literally strain their back testing every nook and crany of evolutionary theory do in fact know way more than you. Some people are smarter, wiser, and better educated than the rest of the idiots running loose in the world. The real problem is that the idiots generally believe they're in the former and not the latter category.


We have decided there is no god, therefore we are smarter than everyone who believes there is.

Excepting of course the many evolutionists who are also religious.

I'm sorry, what were you babbling?

How about intransigent non-belief?

In the absence of any substantive evidence, it's called common sense.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

dad

Undefeated!
Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,904
1,261
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
"You'll be in the lake of fire with billions of others who believe we evolved from monkeys!"
- Jack Chick, Famous Creationist Cartoonist
http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/1041/1041_01.asp?wpc=1041_01.asp

But would it be the believing in silly fables that got them into hell? No. Besides, that lake of fire business, I think is misunderstood. The only folks I read that got thrown in were the Antichrist, false prophet, and the devil. Not all that crowded, apparently. Even if many real stinkers need to do lake time, I think that the lake is for the very very wicked. At least that is my current understanding of that.
 
Upvote 0