Best creationist theories ever!

vipertaja · Nov 25, 2005

I have read some truly bizarre spins in my visits...and a considerable amount
of them go to the member dad.

Right now the designed banana feels close to winning my vote but the
dancing greenland theory is still number one. It brings such strange mental
images when one tries to visualise it. Also depends on what kind of music my
imagination throws into it.

USincognito · Nov 26, 2005

Micaiah said:
For whacky theories you can't beat the one about people evolving from a primordial soup of chemicals, or the universe spontaneously evolving from a big bang.

Ooooo. And I had just gotten my irony meter out of the shop...

It was alomst going to make it until the "world came from nothing" post, which is patently absurd since the stellar and planetary accretion models, as well as geology and biology reference things that already existed before the formation of the Earth, it's topography or life on it.

Q2004 · Nov 26, 2005

Mistermystery said:
What is in your opinion the best creationist theories/ideas/whatever you may call them? Ranging from "God created the world in 6 days" to "Danging Greenland theory" to "water-vapor-canopies", basically any are alowed. We (I) want to hear from you (you) what you think is the best and why.

I personaly like the 'YHWH woke up after an infinite amount of time, decided to create something, and so he made A bunch of stuff, and killed some people, and saved some people, and genocided etc. etc.' Theory.

calidog · Nov 26, 2005

random_guy said:
So which dinosaurs could breathe fire?

the dragon

calidog · Nov 26, 2005

Caphi said:
Ignoring the fact that there should be a smooth cueball Earth because of intense erosion, ignoring the fact that we should find evidence of rainfall in tree and ice rings, ignoring the fact that no cloud could maintain that much water intensity for that much time...

AND allowing that the water reached to the peak of Mt. Everest, some 28000 feet high, and allowing that the underground water reservoir starts at precisely sea level and is present and equally deep the entire world around, and allowing for mountains and trenches...

There should be a 30000 foot deep reservoir of water immediately below the crust.

Well?

read the book. It will explain where the water came from.

USincognito · Nov 26, 2005

calidog said:
read the book. It will explain where the water came from.

Go back and read what he wrote. He's asking where the water went, not where it came from.

Mystman · Nov 26, 2005

calidog said:
read the book. It will explain where the water came from.

Serious question: why bother coming to a debating forum if you're not going to debate?

Just stating "you are all wrong, X is the truth.. but I'm not going to tell you why, MWUAHAHAHAHA" is a bit pointless.

calidog · Nov 26, 2005

Mystman said:
Serious question: why bother coming to a debating forum if you're not going to debate?

Just stating "you are all wrong, X is the truth.. but I'm not going to tell you why, MWUAHAHAHAHA" is a bit pointless.

debate what?

calidog · Nov 26, 2005

USincognito said:
Go back and read what he wrote. He's asking where the water went, not where it came from.

already answered that.

Dannager · Nov 26, 2005

calidog said:
debate what?

For starters, any of the points you've discussed in your last few posts. You haven't provided arguments for any of them, just standpoints. Three-word quips lacking any sort of backup aren't going to get you very much credibility here. I would suggest providing evidence for some of your counter-points, such as any sort of indication that dragons ever existed, aside from fairy-tales and scripture, neither of which are evidence.

vipertaja · Nov 26, 2005

Dannager said:
For starters, any of the points you've discussed in your last few posts. You haven't provided arguments for any of them, just standpoints. Three-word quips lacking any sort of backup aren't going to get you very much credibility here. I would suggest providing evidence for some of your counter-points, such as any sort of indication that dragons ever existed, aside from fairy-tales and scripture, neither of which are evidence.

What do you mean? Darth Vader existed didn't he? It was just...a long long time ago, far far away.
How are dragons any different?

calidog · Nov 26, 2005

Dannager said:
For starters, any of the points you've discussed in your last few posts. You haven't provided arguments for any of them, just standpoints. Three-word quips lacking any sort of backup aren't going to get you very much credibility here. I would suggest providing evidence for some of your counter-points, such as any sort of indication that dragons ever existed, aside from fairy-tales and scripture, neither of which are evidence.

here's another one. In the beginning God...(this one is a 4 word group). Scripture is my support. If scripture is'nt evidence here, I'll exit. thanx

Elduran · Nov 26, 2005

calidog said:
here's another one. In the beginning God...(this one is a 4 word group). Scripture is my support. If scripture is'nt evidence here, I'll exit. thanx

kthanksbye.

Scripture counts for just about nothing when discussing science. I guess that means you'll be leaving?

calidog · Nov 26, 2005

Elduran said:
kthanksbye.

Scripture counts for just about nothing when discussing science. I guess that means you'll be leaving?

yes, I won't input unless I can show scientific evidence.

HairlessSimian · Nov 26, 2005

vipertaja said:
What do you mean? Darth Vader existed didn't he? It was just...a long long time ago, far far away.
How are dragons any different?

I'd like to know how any creature can breathe fire.

I'd also like to know what Job had to say about the other dragon... er... dinosaur species, like the flying ones for instance, or the small cute ones.

vipertaja · Nov 26, 2005

HairlessSimian said:
I'd like to know how any creature can breathe fire.

It ordered mexican. Any creature can breathe fire then.

HairlessSimian · Nov 26, 2005

vipertaja said:
It ordered mexican. Any creature can breathe fire then.

Haha. I wonder if Job's dragons got "delivery in 30 min or it's free".

OC1 · Nov 26, 2005

My current favorite creationist theory is "accelerated nuclear decay" (to explain why the radiometric dates don't work out to 6,000 years).

Here's something from some recent creationist "research":

Thus our new diffusion data support the main hypothesis of the RATE research initiative: that God drastically accelerated the decay rates of long half-life nuclei during the earths recent past. For a feasibility study of this hypothesisincluding Gods possible purposes for such acceleration, Biblical passages hinting at it, disposal of excess heat, preserving life on earth, and effects on stars see Humphreys (2000, pp. 333379). The last three problems are not yet fully solved, but we expect to see progress on them in future papers.

(from here: http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/41/41_1/Helium_lo_res.pdf)

Yes, I would agree that boiling oceans and the frying of all life on earth is a bit of a problem with the "acclerated decay" theory.

But hey, they're working on it!

Lord Emsworth · Nov 26, 2005

random_guy said:
So which dinosaurs could breathe fire?

T-Rex, according to Hovind IIRC. Anyway, not only does Leviathan breathe fire, it is descrided to have multiple heads too.

FSTDT · Nov 26, 2005

Mystman said:
Those arguments from FSTDT are all perfect examples of Poe's Law...

I honestely can't see if they are parody or not >_<

If not though, it's a weird combination between funny and extremely sad.

All of the quotes I posted are genuine, they are part of a larger collection of about 8100 quotes that are featured on http://www.fstdt.com

Best creationist theories ever!

A real nobrainer

a post by Alan Smithee

Regular Member

Veteran

Veteran

a post by Alan Smithee

Atheist with a Reason

Veteran

Veteran

Back in Town

A real nobrainer

Veteran

Disruptive influence

Veteran

Well-Known Member

A real nobrainer

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Je ne suis pas une de vos élèves.

Yahweh

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency