Have any of the creationists here done the following?

[loveiseverywhere]

1) Taken a college level Biology course?

2) Learned about evolution from a source other than what a Creation Scientist told you?

3) Taken both sides equally into account before making your decision to be a creationist or have you just gone with it because that's what you were told to do by your church leaders?

4) Read the following books:

*Finding Darwin's God by Kenneth Miller (A Catholic Biologist)
*The Language of God by Francis Collins (Christian and Director of Human Genome Project)
*The Counter-Creationism Handbook (which debunks MOST if not ALL the creationist myths that are so often perpetuated) [like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics myth]

5) Visited the following websites:

The BioLogos Foundation THE BIOLOGOS FOUNDATION

In addition, do you understand cultural anthropology?

And finally, do you understand that Kent Hovind is NOT an accredited scientist? That he got his so-called degree from a degree mill?

 

[Hespera]

1) Taken a college level Biology course?

2) Learned about evolution from a source other than what a Creation Scientist told you?

3) Taken both sides equally into account before making your decision to be a creationist or have you just gone with it because that's what you were told to do by your church leaders?

4) Read the following books:

*Finding Darwin's God by Kenneth Miller (A Catholic Biologist)
*The Language of God by Francis Collins (Christian and Director of Human Genome Project)
*The Counter-Creationism Handbook (which debunks MOST if not ALL the creationist myths that are so often perpetuated) [like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics myth]

5) Visited the following websites:

The BioLogos Foundation THE BIOLOGOS FOUNDATION

And finally, do you understand that Kent Hovind is NOT an accredited scientist? That he got his so-called degree from a degree mill?

Ad to that..

Has any creationist here ever conceded that they were mistaken on some significant point regarding their belief about evolution?

 

[rosenherman]

1) Taken a college level Biology course?
YES
2) Learned about evolution from a source other than what a Creation Scientist told you?
YES
3) Taken both sides equally into account before making your decision to be a creationist or have you just gone with it because that's what you were told to do by your church leaders?
YES
4) Read the following books:

*Finding Darwin's God by Kenneth Miller (A Catholic Biologist) NO
*The Language of God by Francis Collins (Christian and Director of Human Genome Project)NO
*The Counter-Creationism Handbook (which debunks MOST if not ALL the creationist myths that are so often perpetuated) [like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics myth]NO
However, I have read "Darwins Black Box"
5) Visited the following websites:

The BioLogos Foundation THE BIOLOGOS FOUNDATION NO

And finally, do you understand that Kent Hovind is NOT an accredited scientist? That he got his so-called degree from a degree mill?
YES

 

[loveiseverywhere]

Darwin's Black Box is a book on ID not evolution.

 

[rosenherman]

Darwin's Black Box is a book on ID not evolution.

Quite right.

 

[Hespera]

1) Taken a college level Biology course?
YES
2) Learned about evolution from a source other than what a Creation Scientist told you?
YES
3) Taken both sides equally into account before making your decision to be a creationist or have you just gone with it because that's what you were told to do by your church leaders?
YES
4) Read the following books:

*Finding Darwin's God by Kenneth Miller (A Catholic Biologist) NO
*The Language of God by Francis Collins (Christian and Director of Human Genome Project)NO
*The Counter-Creationism Handbook (which debunks MOST if not ALL the creationist myths that are so often perpetuated) [like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics myth]NO
However, I have read "Darwins Black Box"
5) Visited the following websites:

The BioLogos Foundation THE BIOLOGOS FOUNDATION NO

And finally, do you understand that Kent Hovind is NOT an accredited scientist? That he got his so-called degree from a degree mill?
YES

ok, inteeresting, and unusual. So, I would be interested to know what you leanred that made you believe as you do. (what is it that you believe, btw?)

 

[Ectezus]

3) Taken both sides equally into account before making your decision to be a creationist or have you just gone with it because that's what you were told to do by your church leaders?
YES

Yes to what? To blindly following your church leaders or taking both sides equally into account?

 

[AV1611VET]

1) Taken a college level Biology course?

2) Learned about evolution from a source other than what a Creation Scientist told you?

3) Taken both sides equally into account before making your decision to be a creationist or have you just gone with it because that's what you were told to do by your church leaders?

4) Read the following books:

*Finding Darwin's God by Kenneth Miller (A Catholic Biologist)
*The Language of God by Francis Collins (Christian and Director of Human Genome Project)
*The Counter-Creationism Handbook (which debunks MOST if not ALL the creationist myths that are so often perpetuated) [like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics myth]

5) Visited the following websites:

The BioLogos Foundation THE BIOLOGOS FOUNDATION

In addition, do you understand cultural anthropology?

And finally, do you understand that Kent Hovind is NOT an accredited scientist? That he got his so-called degree from a degree mill?

I'll give the answer that carries more weight:

1. No
2. No
3. No[sub]2[/sub]
4. No[sub]3[/sub]
5. No

• In addition = No
• Finally = Yes[sub]2[/sub]

 

[AV1611VET]

Ad to that..

Has any creationist here ever conceded that they were mistaken on some significant point regarding their belief about evolution?

Yes --- I thought abiogenesis was an integral part of evolution.

There is, in fact, no such thing.

 

[rosenherman]

Yes to what? To blindly following your church leaders or taking both sides equally into account?

Taken both sides equally into account. I probably gave evolution more weight because my church has never pounded creationism into our heads.

 

[rosenherman]

ok, inteeresting, and unusual. So, I would be interested to know what you leanred that made you believe as you do. (what is it that you believe, btw?)

I believe in Intelligent Design. I don't believe there is such a thing as abiogenesis. And since there has never been a "bridge species," for lack of a better word, from and/or to; darwinism is wrong. God started the universe, created earth and started life. How long He took to come up with the mammal we are today I don't know. Fact is I don't care how long He took, it isn't important in any way to my life.

 

[rosenherman]

ok, inteeresting, and unusual. So, I would be interested to know what you leanred that made you believe as you do. (what is it that you believe, btw?)

I'm interested in knowing why my answers are unusual.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm interested in knowing why my answers are unusual.

--- very good question.

 

[Hespera]

I believe in Intelligent Design. I don't believe there is such a thing as abiogenesis. And since there has never been a "bridge species," for lack of a better word, from and/or to; darwinism is wrong. God started the universe, created earth and started life. How long He took to come up with the mammal we are today I don't know. Fact is I don't care how long He took, it isn't important in any way to my life.

Thanks for the answer! Does it really boil down to "I dont know and I dont care"?

You do know tho, that if anyone could prove that evolution is wrong, they would have made the greatest scientific discovery of all time? Not just evolution as such, but the foundations of modern biology, of paleontology geology etc etc would come down.

Clearly its not so simple for an amateur to just come along and spot a fatal flaw so easily as that.

If you wish to discuss it... which perhaps dont know / dont care means that you dont want to...I would be interested to know what you mean by a "bridge species" and why you think they dont exist. (dont forget plants! they evolve too)

I said unusual in that my experience with creationists / ID people is that they are almsot touchingly uneducated and argue, try to, on the level of someone saying that calculus isnt math because they see a bunch of stuff that isnt numbers. No numbers, no math. Simple.

I guess you do have some education going by your checklist.

 

[AV1611VET]

You do know tho, that if anyone could prove that evolution is wrong, they would have made the greatest scientific discovery of all time?

Why would that go down as a "scientific discovery", rather than an admission that they've been wrong for decades, or even touting it as one of the greatest scientific mistakes of all time?

 

[Hespera]

Why would that go down as a "scientific discovery", rather than an admission that they've been wrong for decades, or even touting it as one of the greatest scientific mistakes of all time?

If you discovered and proved beyond any possible doubt even by you that the there was no Noahs flood or parting of the red sea...Like say you have a time machine and can go check for yourself..........

Would that be a discovery? Or an admission that the Christians had been wrong for centuries, and tout it as the biggest religious fraud of all time?

 

[AV1611VET]

Why would that go down as a "scientific discovery", rather than an admission that they've been wrong for decades, or even touting it as one of the greatest scientific mistakes of all time?

If you discovered and proved beyond any possible doubt even by you that the there was no Noahs flood or parting of the red sea...Like say you have a time machine and can go check for yourself..........

Would that be a discovery? Or an admission that the Christians had been wrong for centuries, and tout it as the biggest religious fraud of all time?

Aside from not answering the question, interesting word choice in your response.

Freudian Slip?

 

[rosenherman]

Thanks for the answer! Does it really boil down to "I dont know and I dont care"?

You do know tho, that if anyone could prove that evolution is wrong, they would have made the greatest scientific discovery of all time? Not just evolution as such, but the foundations of modern biology, of paleontology geology etc etc would come down.

Clearly its not so simple for an amateur to just come along and spot a fatal flaw so easily as that.

If you wish to discuss it... which perhaps dont know / dont care means that you dont want to...I would be interested to know what you mean by a "bridge species" and why you think they dont exist. (dont forget plants! they evolve too)

I said unusual in that my experience with creationists / ID people is that they are almsot touchingly uneducated and argue, try to, on the level of someone saying that calculus isnt math because they see a bunch of stuff that isnt numbers. No numbers, no math. Simple.

I guess you do have some education going by your checklist.

My bridge species terminology is meant to reflect the absence of anything becoming something else. Not as in caterpillar to butterfly, but as in a turtle turning into a frog or fish into a snake; let alone from monkey, fish or bird into man.

 

[Hespera]

Aside from not answering the question, interesting word choice in your response.

Freudian Slip?

I answered the question in the same way that you usually do, with another question.

And no, that was a deliberate word choice. because I think it is accurate. Religion in all its many forms is a fraud. Are you somehow suggesting that evolution and related sciences are a fraud? i cant tell what your odd question about Freudian slip is supposed to mean.

I think its basically a word game question you asked, but, trying to set an example for you to actually answer a question:

The person who made the discovery would be making a discovery. Simple. One person is not in a position to make an 'admission" for the world scientific community. The word "tout" should be left out. but, as for part two of the question, it would of course be recognized that the biggest mistake... well, a vast series of interlocking mistakes... had been made.

Does that answer? Now, you answer my question.

 

[juvenissun]

1) Taken a college level Biology course?

2) Learned about evolution from a source other than what a Creation Scientist told you?

3) Taken both sides equally into account before making your decision to be a creationist or have you just gone with it because that's what you were told to do by your church leaders?

4) Read the following books:

*Finding Darwin's God by Kenneth Miller (A Catholic Biologist)
*The Language of God by Francis Collins (Christian and Director of Human Genome Project)
*The Counter-Creationism Handbook (which debunks MOST if not ALL the creationist myths that are so often perpetuated) [like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics myth]

5) Visited the following websites:

The BioLogos Foundation THE BIOLOGOS FOUNDATION

In addition, do you understand cultural anthropology?

And finally, do you understand that Kent Hovind is NOT an accredited scientist? That he got his so-called degree from a degree mill?

All are no for me. But I know more than you do on both creation and evolution. (Want to try one?)

So, what is the point of your questions?