Help a (creationist) brother out?

[inquiring mind]

You have to be joking. She does not debate because she know whose donkey would be kicked.

Georgia probably has more biotech knowledge than 90% of the so-called experts that promote macroevolution.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Georgia probably has more biotech knowledge than 90% of the so-called experts that promote macroevolution.

Really? Then why can't she do what real experts do?

Sorry, but she is just a hack at best. I do not know of any of her claims that have not been refuted.

 

[inquiring mind]

Really? Then why can't she do what real experts do?

You mean give hour-long lectures on their findings?

Sorry, but she is just a hack at best. I do not know of any of her claims that have not been refuted.

I bet.

 

[Astrid]

If it bothers you, consider it a metaphor.

If it doesnt bother you to bear false witness before your
God, no reason for it to bother me.
In the event, we've observed before a tendency to
claim baseless opinion as fact.

 

[durangodawood]

Beowulf sure showed that silly old Grendel!

Say hwæt?

 

[Hark]

We understand very well how they got up there. The fact that those facts contradict your personal beliefs does not in make those facts an attack on God.

Funny how "facts" in evolution theory keeps changing with the wind, but you would have noted that, right? Doesn't look like it to me that you did. Of course, many evolutionists say that is what science does. I call that backpeddling and a work of fiction instead. So your facts are not really facts.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Funny how "facts" in evolution theory keeps changing with the wind, but you would have noted that, right? Doesn't look like it to me that you did. Of course, many evolutionists say that is what science does. I call that backpeddling and a work of fiction instead. So your facts are not really facts.

Really? There have been minor changes, but that is the way of all of the sciences. As we learn more minor incorrect beliefs are dropped. And if one is paying attention the changes keep getting smaller and smaller.

Do you have any specific examples?

By the way there is no scientific evidence for creationism at all. And it is largely due to the cowardice of people that work at such places as Answers in Genesis that are too blame. Why does all of the scientific evidence only support one side of the story?

 

[inquiring mind]

If it doesnt bother you to bear false witness before your
God, no reason for it to bother me.
In the event, we've observed before a tendency to
claim baseless opinion as fact.

Psalms 2:4-5

 

[Subduction Zone]

You mean give hour-long lectures on their findings?

No, that is not what experts do. They publish in well respected peer reviewed professional scientific journals. She has a handful of such publications at the most.

I bet.

You could always try to list one. Please do not do a Gish Gallop. When one does that the entire list is disproved by disproving one. Find one good solid claim of hers.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Funny how "facts" in evolution theory keeps changing with the wind, but you would have noted that, right? Doesn't look like it to me that you did. Of course, many evolutionists say that is what science does. I call that backpeddling and a work of fiction instead. So your facts are not really facts.

No, that's not right. Scientific facts are verified observations; scientific hypotheses are testable explanations for the facts; scientific theories are hypotheses that have been repeatedly tested and have become widely accepted. Scientific theories can be overturned and completely replaced when new facts show them to be wrong, but more often they are shown to be good approximations that need refining or extending.

So it is rare for scientific facts to change, but not unusual for the explanation of scientific facts to change.

Does that help?

 

[inquiring mind]

No, that is not what experts do. They publish in well respected peer reviewed professional scientific journals. She has a handful of such publications at the most.

A weight-watchers convention wouldn’t dare put chocolate bon-bons on the menu.

You could always try to list one. Please do not do a Gish Gallop. When one does that the entire list is disproved by disproving one. Find one good solid claim of hers.

Did you watch the video previously posted? You tell me the claims that aren't solid.

 

[Astrid]

Psalms 2:4-5

Maybe you will get to find out how funny you are.

 

[Subduction Zone]

A weight-watchers convention wouldn’t dare put chocolate bon-bons on the menu.

What is that supposed to mean? Purdhan is claims to be a scientist, but she does not do what scientists do. That is why she is a hack.

Did you watch the video previously posted? You tell me the claims that aren't solid.

Sorry, I do not play the video game. One has to demonstrate that one is reliable first. She works at an organization where their workers are not allowed to follow the scientific method. They have to swear not to follow it in fact.

 

[Astrid]

Funny how "facts" in evolution theory keeps changing with the wind, but you would have noted that, right? Doesn't look like it to me that you did. Of course, many evolutionists say that is what science does. I call that backpeddling and a work of fiction instead. So your facts are not really facts.

Empty generalizing, no example.

 

[Hark]

Ah. So you don't know. Or rather you think they were created as-is. I guess plate tectonics is not worth discussing then. Do you know much about geology at all?

That is assuming every mountain formed was by plate tectonics rather than having been created as is.

One that would try to fit the evolution theory into the Bible, could assume that all the asteroid impacts on earth & the moon happened at the same time, the cause and effect for the global flood, thus causing the massive shifting of the plate tectonics that created all those mountain ranges, but again, that is an assumption about how those mountains came into being when the Bible testifies how high the flood waters went as covering the mountains which would be indicative that they were there before the flood.

I could believe the asteroid impacts on the moon & the earth happened at the time of the flood, as being the cause for how the fountains of the deep rose up ( that which watered the whole earth with a mist like that mid-Atlantic mountain range making like Old Faithful ) and why that global greenhouse mist would rise up to form rain clouds for the first time by the moon which started to slowly move away from the earth due to the asteroid impacts, but applying as if there were no mountains formed until the plate tectonics moved to formed them at the time of the flood, would not align with the scriptures in the Bible to report how high those flood water had gone.

One could say the mountains were formed at the time of the flood but how would anyone know since the flood waters had covered the mountains? So they had to exist before the global flood so the survivors knew how high the flood waters had gone.

Anyway, yeah, you could refer to plate tectonics as the cause for how all the mountains were formed, but you do not really know. It is an assumption to make that plate tectonics were responsible for every mountain just as assuming every island formed was due to volcanic activity by pointing to one that formed in the ocean recently. I have not heard of any mountain formed recently unless you count a volcanic island with that volcano being that mountain.

So I am not prone to avoid evidence in nature, when discerning the cause & effect of the flood. I just do not believe in the evolution theory nor their time table since their dating methods have given errant dating results as proven within human history for why any one should not take stock in it going past known human history of over 6,000 years.

As it is, marine fossils on mountaintops and all over the world are evidence to me of the Biblical global flood but another judgment of a fiery calamity that is coming on a third of the earth. 2 Peter 3:1-18 Revelation 8:7 which will set the stage for the NWO & the mark of the beast system after the rapture.

 

[Hark]

Empty generalizing, no example.

Like birds evolved from dinosaurs but now dinosaurs evolved from birds?

Course evolutions will say as they have said it before, "well, that is what science does.."

But I say.. their "facts" keep changing and there is no way to prove that they have the facts now.

All assumptions; always have been and will continue to be a false science.

Real science is about what can be observed and proven and a valid scientific theory has to have a phenomenon to be observed in the natural world.

Evolutionists will say this and give an example like the theory of gravity and dropping an object for everybody to see is an example of observing the phenomenon of gravity in the natural world.

But they stop right there because they cannot give an example of the phenomenon of macroevolution to observe in the natural world. They can only give an example of microevolution or the Law of Biogenesis.

BTW You would be remiss in ignoring the title of that Law as if it does not mean life did not come from nothing, but life comes from similar life hence Biogenesis.

Science is changing even that Law by just inferring that it only means life did not come from nothing just like if you go online, the definitions of microevolution and macroevolution are not the same at all the dictionary web sites & universities web sites. Some keep it separate, some starts blurring the line between the two, and a few reads almost the same thing. So how can you say they are keeping their facts straight when they cannot keep their definitions straight?

Funny how evolutionists do not cry foul on this, but they ignore it just as they do when "science" change their "facts".

 

[Psalm 27]

Of course she does not like being called a liar.

What you should be trying to learn is how do we know that she is a liar.

Evolution is the lie

 

[inquiring mind]

Maybe you will get to find out how funny you are.

We all will. You accused me of false witness for suggesting God might chuckle at some of man’s reasoning (that with arrogance, vanity and derision). I provided supporting scripture… simple as that.

 

[inquiring mind]

What is that supposed to mean? Purdhan is claims to be a scientist, but she does not do what scientists do. That is why she is a hack.

Dr. Georgia Purdom holds a PhD in molecular genetics from The Ohio State University.

Sorry, I do not play the video game.

Of course you didn't.

 

[Astrid]

We all will. You accused me of false witness for suggesting God might chuckle at some of man’s reasoning (that with arrogance, vanity and derision). I provided supporting scripture… simple as that.

No, i did not do that. Tsk