Creation-based Science Graduate Programs Anyone?

[Upward Bound]

The previous arguements don't appear to belong in this thread. So as to toss my penny's worth in to the anarchists' wishing well.....Creation is truth in a young earth; Evolution...are you sure that's your final answer? Ask the Creator, he'll give you insight.

 

[LorentzHA]

Creation is truth in a young earth; Evolution...are you sure that's your final answer? Ask the Creator, he'll give you insight.

We do not have to "ask". The Creator left enough evidence behind for us to study. We know it is not a young Earth.... and by the way CreationISM is a scientific theory, but it was falsified, long ago.

 

[Mr_Coffee]

The previous arguements don't appear to belong in this thread. So as to toss my penny's worth in to the anarchists' wishing well.....Creation is truth in a young earth; Evolution...are you sure that's your final answer? Ask the Creator, he'll give you insight.

[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] lol wHAt a n00b

Er, seriously. This forum has an outstanding amount of resources within it pertaining specifically to evolution and the falsities of Creationism. I kind of wish people read things when joining new forums before typing and then pressing the post button. Either that or he's a napa"The Apprentice Sower of Straw-Hominids"john clone.

 

[Jet Black]

Great lucaspa, you haven't answered the question...how do you determine what design is "better"..saw your thread on bad designs like the rabbit who redigests their food, panda thumb, sperm count..yet they function and survive..yet you find flaw in his digestive design..likewise the millions of sperm needed..remember lucaspa,the world is a product of a fallen world..who knows what the design was prior to the Fall

the best ones are the ones that survive and have offspring. Surely you know this by now, it is such an astonishingly simple concept.

 

[Mike Flynn]

The previous arguements don't appear to belong in this thread. So as to toss my penny's worth in to the anarchists' wishing well.....Creation is truth in a young earth; Evolution...are you sure that's your final answer? Ask the Creator, he'll give you insight.

Not at all. When the pharisees asked Jesus if it was good to pay taxes, how did he respond? Did he engage in the debate of how to live under the rule of an oppressive occupation force?

No. He said 'give to Ceasar what is Ceasar's'. IOW, if Ceasar wants money, let him have it. The Romans created the currency...they can have it. He followed it up with 'give to God what is God's'. God created you...give yourself back to Him.

In short, he did not answer their question at all. It was not his mandate to address the socio-economic conditions of the day. His mandate was (and still is) salvation.

God's mandate is not to teach us about evolution, biochemistry, cosmology, or quantum physics. It is not His mandate to teach us history lessons either. He wants to save us...and He wants us to chose to be saved.

Through science, we can learn something about how God works His wonders. Through faith and the Bible, we can learn something about having real life.

 

[napajohn]

[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] lol wHAt a n00b

Er, seriously. This forum has an outstanding amount of resources within it pertaining specifically to evolution and the falsities of Creationism. I kind of wish people read things when joining new forums before typing and then pressing the post button. Either that or he's a napa"The Apprentice Sower of Straw-Hominids"john clone.

just wish you guys could spend your evidence and wealth of "scientific knowledge" and debate some of these guys on ICR or Discovery institute..wouldn't it be great if 1 of you could turn them on to this cite or get a dialogue with the faculty or even call the dDEpt of Education and have ICR shut down for teaching such false concepts...Surely, 1 of you could shut down or (begin the process )this facility by complaining to the Dept of education for teaching such "trash"...
actually, here is the number to icr:
(619) 596-6011
call them and see if they can answer your questions or see if they can have a faculty or grad student explain why they believe such trash...You guys should succeed since Science, truth and all the Evidence is on your side.

 

[Chi_Cygni]

just wish you guys could spend your evidence and wealth of "scientific knowledge" and debate some of these guys on ICR or Discovery institute..wouldn't it be great if 1 of you could turn them on to this cite or get a dialogue with the faculty or even call the dDEpt of Education and have ICR shut down for teaching such false concepts...Surely, 1 of you could shut down or (begin the process )this facility by complaining to the Dept of education for teaching such "trash"...
actually, here is the number to icr:
(619) 596-6011
call them and see if they can answer your questions or see if they can have a faculty or grad student explain why they believe such trash...You guys should succeed since Science, truth and all the Evidence is on your side.

Check out ICR's accreditation.

I don't think CalTech is admitting many ICR grads. Let's face it - IT ISN'T A REAL SCHOOL - it''s one step (or more) below a cosmetics & beauty college.

 

[ForeRunner]

Ha, they would never participatre in a written debate. That is much ftoo hard to do without any data or evidence.

 

[Arikay]

I would say quite a few steps below, as cosmetology schools actually teach real chemistry.

Check out ICR's accreditation.

I don't think CalTech is admitting many ICR grads. Let's face it - IT ISN'T A REAL SCHOOL - it''s one step (or more) below a cosmetics & beauty college.

 

[napajohn]

I would say quite a few steps below, as cosmetology schools actually teach real chemistry.

just say your scared to even call..i can respect that..who knows maybe an adjunct professor may take you up on it and expose evolution..and you wouldn't want that since to some of you atheist thats like your religion.

 

[Arikay]

LoL. why call, verbal debate is pointless with creationists, written debate on the other hand, is much different. How come most written debate requests I have heard about go unanswered?

I haven't e-mailed ICR but I have e-mailed both AIG and DrDino with corrections, AIG missed the entire point and couldn't come up with an answer and DrDino gave me an automated response. I wonder if ICR can do any better.

I see your witchcraft mind reading is working again, since you were able to read atheists minds and learn their religion. Do you listen to anyone here? I mean seriously, have you heard anyone here call it their religion or treat it like a religion? If so, I think we are reading different forums.

just say your scared to even call..i can respect that..who knows maybe an adjunct professor may take you up on it and expose evolution..and you wouldn't want that since to some of you atheist thats like your religion.

 

[napajohn]

LoL. why call, verbal debate is pointless with creationists, written debate on the other hand, is much different. How come most written debate requests I have heard about go unanswered?

I haven't e-mailed ICR but I have e-mailed both AIG and DrDino with corrections, AIG missed the entire point and couldn't come up with an answer and DrDino gave me an automated response. I wonder if ICR can do any better.

I see your witchcraft mind reading is working again, since you were able to read atheists minds and learn their religion. Do you listen to anyone here? I mean seriously, have you heard anyone here call it their religion or treat it like a religion? If so, I think we are reading different forums.

No but some of you treat it like a replacement for God..and yes I believe most scientist in the Academy of sciences claim to be atheists hence the real need to defend evolution at whatever cost

 

[Arikay]

Its about as much of a replacement for god as gravity is a replacement for god.

It does allow atheists to be more honest atheists because there is an answer other than "goddidit" when we look at our origins, but that doesn't rule out god at all, just says that its possible for it to happen without god, but then again, it doesn't rule out god or say that he could not have used the things we study in science to create. Which fits well with christianity as christianity is based on faith.

Yes, Many scientists are atheists, but not all, there are quite a few theists that seem perfectly fine in science.

The odd thing is that if anything, creationism creates more atheist scientists. Creationist groups often have a mentality of "you either pick god or science, but not both" and when a scientist hears a false claim from creationism, like the decay of the magnetic field, for the 1000th time, and creationists say you must pick science or god, they pick science and throw away god, because they can not believe false information, but they were told to pick, so they did.
so, if anything, creationism can push scientists away from christianity.

For example, say you met a guy that said you can either believe the earth is spherical or believe in the almighty Yefusa, but not both because the almighty Yefusa says the earth is flat.
What would you pick?
Science and a spherical earth?
or
Yefusa and a flat earth?

No but some of you treat it like a replacement for God..and yes I believe most scientist in the Academy of sciences claim to be atheists hence the real need to defend evolution at whatever cost

 

[napajohn]

Its about as much of a replacement for god as gravity is a replacement for god.
It does allow atheists to be more honest atheists because there is an answer other than "goddidit" when we look at our origins, but that doesn't rule out god at all, just says that its possible for it to happen without god,{/quote}
No when you have automatically ruled out All possibilities then that is when you have gone from being an unbiased scientist to one who has limited the possibilities...I believe the basis for not believing in God is that there are implications that must face that person with regards to the way he/she will live his life..If Mohammad came down from heaven instead of Jesus, Christians would have to face the same dilemma that they were wrong and that they should change..the atheists are just afraid of facing the consequences of God..it removes them( man ) from being master of their own lives.

Yes, Many scientists are atheists, but not all, there are quite a few theists that seem perfectly fine in science.

and many more are starting to have an impact in this atheistic-dominated
profession

The odd thing is that if anything, creationism creates more atheist scientists. Creationist groups often have a mentality of "you either pick god or science, but not both" and when a scientist hears a false claim from creationism, like the decay of the magnetic field, for the 1000th time, and creationists say you must pick science or god, they pick science and throw away god, because they can not believe false information, but they were told to pick, so they did.
so, if anything, creationism can push scientists away from christianity.

based on your unsupported and biased opinion, this is funny..no most scientists today are products of academia that preach evolution..creationism
often occurs when scientists truly see the scope of the problems and go from being dissenting evolutionists to having no opinion or creationists...People who claim to be creationists (not necessarily YECS) usually have done so out of the evidence and arguments against evolution..someone like myself and Frank Schrwin and Morris and Behe come to mind

For example, say you met a guy that said you can either believe the earth is spherical or believe in the almighty Yefusa, but not both because the almighty Yefusa says the earth is flat.
What would you pick?
Science and a spherical earth?
or
Yefusa and a flat earth?

try that argument at ICR and DI and they will laugh at you..its like going to the Apollo in blackface and trying to do black jokes..see if they won't hang you...flat earth..evolutionists love to associate creationists with this..so ridiculous

 

[Mike Flynn]

just wish you guys could spend your evidence and wealth of "scientific knowledge" and debate some of these guys on ICR or Discovery institute..

Should we also have all the Bible belt churches closed for preaching biblical literalism to the masses? Of course not, napajohn. There are no laws against having beliefs. ICR is there to support the beliefs of biblical literalism. As long as people want to believe it, ICR will remain open. What difference does it make if the literal interpretation is true or not?

Why should scientists care about the beliefs of biblical literalists? No-one hears about the cosmological formulations on ICR outside ICR because they have all been falsified. ICR has the right to keep trying if they want to. However, the best approach is to let creation be creation. Since when has narrow-mindedness been a useful tool in scientific study?

wouldn't it be great if 1 of you could turn them on to this cite or get a dialogue with the faculty or even call the dDEpt of Education and have ICR shut down for teaching such false concepts

Why don't you try to turn some of them onto this site? I would be quite interested in that debate. You havn't been doing a very good job by using their quote mine.

Is ICR the organization from which you retrieved the Majerus peppered moth research? I am looking forward to your rebuttle of lucaspa's post on that subject. It seems like your source for the quote mine has some interest in misrepresenting scientific studies. Do you still believe that source is credible?

call them and see if they can answer your questions or see if they can have a faculty or grad student explain why they believe such trash...You guys should succeed since Science, truth and all the Evidence is on your side.

They won't close down as long as there is a 'market' of people who want to have support for their system of beliefs. Its not really about truth...its about a certain portion of the population who need to impose an agenda on everyone. I'm not saying that there are no honest people at ICR. But like it or not, the bias of their agenda is clear. They cannot afford to be wrong about the science napajohn. Take it from ICR itself ...one of the tenets of Biblical creationism: (www.icr.org)

"All things in the universe were created and made by God in the six literal days of the creation week described in Genesis 1:1-2:3, and confirmed in Exodus 20:8-11. The creation record is factual, historical, and perspicuous; thus all theories of origins or development which involve evolution in any form are false. "

What room does ICR have for interpretation, either scientifically or theologically speaking? They are putting the validity of the bible on the line with their scientific formulations. If that is not building ones foundation on the sand then I am not sure what is.

They still promote Humphrey's 'Starlight and Time' as a reasonable theory on a young universe...even though the theory has been shown to be full of errors...he has been forced to revise it several times and it still doesn't work. Even other creationists have come forward to challenge these assertions for fear of the damage they could do to Christianity. (go to www.reasons.org and do a search for 'starlight and time').

Are you trying to convince us that the science community is the one who practices agenda-based and less than honest research? Coming from an ICR supporter, how can you claim to have any crediblity to make such a statement?

Why don't you call a couple of other universities who teach evolution...and present your arguments as well? You should succeed since you believe your interpretations of the scriptures are infallible. If napajohn is wrong about science, then Christianity is also wrong. Isn't that what you believe?

 

[Arikay]

"No when you have automatically ruled out All possibilities then that is when you have gone from being an unbiased scientist to one who has limited the possibilities"

when it comes to deity no one has rulled out all possibilities except for some christians and strong atheists. You will find that most atheists here are agnostic atheists, it means that they dont believe in god but they do still accept the possibility that there could be a god.

On the other hand, there are some christians (often creationists) that believe they are correct and that there is a single god and he is the god of christianity.

So careful how you sling the "limiting possibilities" claim.

"see if they won't hang you...flat earth..evolutionists love to associate creationists with this..so ridiculous"

I think you missed the point. But I will asume you picked option 1, believe in a spherical earth and not yefusa.

Now let see the question in a possible real life circumstances.

Creationist talking to a geologist,

Creationist - You can not believe in both science and god, and since polystrat fossils show that the geological column is incorrect, you must pick god over faulty science.

Geologist - did you miss geology 101 or something, if my choices are to believe in god and false information, or no god and unfalsified claims. I pick no god and valid science.

see how it works?

and many more are starting to have an impact in this atheistic-dominated
profession


based on your unsupported and biased opinion, this is funny..no most scientists today are products of academia that preach evolution..creationism
often occurs when scientists truly see the scope of the problems and go from being dissenting evolutionists to having no opinion or creationists...People who claim to be creationists (not necessarily YECS) usually have done so out of the evidence and arguments against evolution..someone like myself and Frank Schrwin and Morris and Behe come to mind



try that argument at ICR and DI and they will laugh at you..its like going to the Apollo in blackface and trying to do black jokes..see if they won't hang you...flat earth..evolutionists love to associate creationists with this..so ridiculous

 

[ifriit]

just wish you guys could spend your evidence and wealth of "scientific knowledge" and debate some of these guys on ICR or Discovery institute..wouldn't it be great if 1 of you could turn them on to this cite or get a dialogue with the faculty...

They refuse written debates. They will only do live debates, where research is impossible, and demagoguery can be used to mask scientific incompetance. They will not come to this site.

... or even call the dDEpt of Education and have ICR shut down for teaching such false concepts...Surely, 1 of you could shut down or (begin the process )this facility by complaining to the Dept of education for teaching such "trash"...

You just don't get it, do you? The DOE can't shut them down.

actually, here is the number to icr:
(619) 596-6011
call them and see if they can answer your questions or see if they can have a faculty or grad student explain why they believe such trash...You guys should succeed since Science, truth and all the Evidence is on your side.

We already know why they believe nonsense, they tell us on their website. Hooray, success!

 

[napajohn]

when it comes to deity no one has rulled out all possibilities except for some christians and strong atheists. You will find that most atheists here are agnostic atheists, it means that they dont believe in god but they do still accept the possibility that there could be a god.

does possibility mean prababibility?..By definition you can't believe in God because that would not make you an atheist.

On the other hand, there are some christians (often creationists) that believe they are correct and that there is a single god and he is the god of christianity.
So careful how you sling the "limiting possibilities" claim.

no slinging ..just stating the limitations of not allowing God in the equation..by the way you described the brunt of the human population there...creationists Christians do not have the monopoly on this attitude

Creationist talking to a geologist,
Creationist - You can not believe in both science and god, and since polystrat fossils show that the geological column is incorrect, you must pick god over faulty science.
Geologist - did you miss geology 101 or something, if my choices are to believe in god and false information, or no god and unfalsified claims. I pick no god and valid science.
see how it works?

wrong claims here: You cannot believe in science and what evolution claims if the polystyrate fossils (or other evidence ) show that the geologic column is incorrect...Belief in God has no real basis here.

better vignette:
Evolutionist: The fossil record proves x amphibian came from Y fish
Person: show me linearly the fossils of y fish and see how it developed to x amphibian
E: doesn't exist in fossil record linearly
P: you have gaps?
E: depends on what you call gaps..ay fish kinda looks like the precursor to by fish who kinda looks like the precusrsor to x amphibian
P: ok then show me the linear fossil record showing ay fish becoming by fish
E: that doesn't necessarily exist either
P: you have gaps?
E: depends on what you see as gaps!

see how it works!

 

[LorentzHA]

No but some of you treat it like a replacement for God..and yes I believe most scientist in the Academy of sciences claim to be atheists hence the real need to defend evolution at whatever cost

Napa read this again! How many times have have you been told that Evolution does not equal atheism. Take out the earplugs and open your eyes. Why would atheist have to defend evolution???!! Why do you suppose Lucapsa, Mike Flynn and Vance defend evolution?????????????????

 

[LorentzHA]

just wish you guys could spend your evidence and wealth of "scientific knowledge" and debate some of these guys on ICR or Discovery institute..wouldn't it be great if 1 of you could turn them on to this cite or get a dialogue with the faculty or even call the dDEpt of Education and have ICR shut down for teaching such false concepts...Surely, 1 of you could shut down or (begin the process )this facility by complaining to the Dept of education for teaching such "trash"...
actually, here is the number to icr:
(619) 596-6011
call them and see if they can answer your questions or see if they can have a faculty or grad student explain why they believe such trash...You guys should succeed since Science, truth and all the Evidence is on your side.

Turns my stomach that there is actually companies that front as "a schools" to prop of this kind of sludge. No self respecting scientist would utter this nonsense. These are the "smart ones" from Wednesday night creationists Bible study that gets "support" from the congregation, to be able to attend this pseudo college, so they can come back and mind meld with anyone in the congregation, that shows any sign of thinking on their own. The congregation is told to "believe then 'cause they ain't no dummy, they went to school for this stuff." (excuse me while I run to the ladies room and hurl)