How are you able to put a pic in your post and I am not? The rules say you have to have 1000 posts before you can do this.
Upvote
0
Human foot print tells a story.
- Thread starter ikester7579
- Start date
Today at 07:10 AM notto said this in Post #140
I guess if you feel the need to change the picture of a piece of evidence that you are so sure about, then that is up to you. I think it is deceptive (and confusing) for anyone who would start reading the thread from the beginning if they can't see the picture you are discussing in the opening thread. But, it's your credibility on the line, not mine, so feel free to do as you see fit. It is only a reflection on you and the evidence you present.
As far as proving your point, I'm not sure you did. I had already seen everything you presented about this track (there hasn't exactly been anythin new about it recently) so yes, my mind was made up. It is a carving. This is not bias. You didn't present anything new (and have yet to) with regards to this track. In fact, it looks like there were serveral posters presenting new evidence that you had not seen including pages from both AIG and ICR (creationist organizations). We had already seen both side of this story and they both say that the evidence is not credible (and that Carl Baugh over reaches in using it as such). Perhaps it was you who was bias coming into the thread.
Has nothing to do with credibility. I guess you did not read my earlier post so I will post it again for your info for future reference. Someone decided it would be a joke to increase my blessing to equal 6666 to relate me to the number 666. Funny huh? Well when you change avatars it will decrease your blessings so that's what I did to get away from 666. But It would not let me change it back. This happened yesterday. But today I change it back and since you and others would like me to close the pole makes me wonder why?
The pic was only there for one day. Maybe this be a joint effort?
Upvote
0
Today at 12:31 PM ikester7579 said this in Post #142 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=664664#post664664)
Has nothing to do with credibility. I guess you did not read my earlier post so I will post it again for your info for future reference. Someone decided it would be a joke to increase my blessing to equal 6666 to relate me to the number 666. Funny huh? Well when you change avatars it will decrease your blessings so that's what I did to get away from 666. But It would not let me change it back. This happened yesterday. But today I change it back and since you and others would like me to close the pole makes me wonder why?
I explained why I suggested you might want to close the poll. Thanks for changing the avatar back. This will lead to less confusion for those taking the poll.
Upvote
0
You wish lol! I figured it out by going into edit and seeing what you did. So now I have posted the pic in the first post so if anyone tries that changing of my blessings again the pic will still be there. Also someone pulling this joke shows me that I am making some headway with this issue and they can't stand!
Upvote
0
Ikester: Or they could just be trying to pull a joke on you.
So a quick off topic question, that someone else brought up.
Ikester: if the sky is blue because it glows, why can we see the earth from space? The glow should make the earth look almost completly blue.
So a quick off topic question, that someone else brought up.
Ikester: if the sky is blue because it glows, why can we see the earth from space? The glow should make the earth look almost completly blue.
Upvote
0
When did he say that?
Besides, everyone knows the sky is blue because nitrogen is just the right size to scatter blue light. (IE, that wavelength of sunlight).
Upvote
0
Its relating to a couple posts in this post and also many many posts in another thread.
I tried explaining to him about scattering. but he read on a creationist website about a canopy theory (that is full of holes) that says that the sky is blue because the oxygen glows. And that before the flood the sky was pink, because the solid hydrogen in the canopy would glow pink. and refuses to believe scattering is real.
I tried explaining to him about scattering. but he read on a creationist website about a canopy theory (that is full of holes) that says that the sky is blue because the oxygen glows. And that before the flood the sky was pink, because the solid hydrogen in the canopy would glow pink. and refuses to believe scattering is real.
Upvote
0
Melchior
Active Member
Although it looks a bit weird, I could imagine situations that might cause this footprint to distort to the dimensions in the picture. Also, ancient man could have had a foot that was similar in shape. If it's real, it was certainly made by something that is human-like.
All I have seen so far are paleontologists and archeologists investigating the footprints. Why not get some geologists with powerful microscopes to examine the footprint for signs of forgery? Even if it was sand/water blasted, with a microscope you are able to tell the difference. Conclusive evidence that it wasn't a forgery would be a huge boom not only to creationists groups like YEC, but even to the Judeo/Christian churches that would profit immeasurably from such proof. I am sure the Catholic Church could sponsor such investigation.
And such claims would create a huge amount of free peer review from many unbiased and credible sources. The validity of such a claim would be broadcast on all major news networks, and only crackpot evolution sites would refute it with pseudo-science.
The fact that this hasn't happened is why I assume that these footprints, and that footprint specifically, is fake.
All I have seen so far are paleontologists and archeologists investigating the footprints. Why not get some geologists with powerful microscopes to examine the footprint for signs of forgery? Even if it was sand/water blasted, with a microscope you are able to tell the difference. Conclusive evidence that it wasn't a forgery would be a huge boom not only to creationists groups like YEC, but even to the Judeo/Christian churches that would profit immeasurably from such proof. I am sure the Catholic Church could sponsor such investigation.
And such claims would create a huge amount of free peer review from many unbiased and credible sources. The validity of such a claim would be broadcast on all major news networks, and only crackpot evolution sites would refute it with pseudo-science.
The fact that this hasn't happened is why I assume that these footprints, and that footprint specifically, is fake.
Upvote
0
In terms of the scientific theory, you are correct. Both accept common ancestry and natural selection.
In terms of worldviews and a view of ultimate reality, they are, of course, very different. Micaiah was listing categories of worldviews.
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
Theistic evolution is the belief that deity created using evolution. In terms of science, there is no difference.
Atheistic evolution is the belief that there is no deity and the material causes of evolution are the only causes. In terms of science, again there is no difference.
Thus, in terms of evolution only, both Kenneth Miller and Richard Dawkins are evolutionists. However, in worldview they are very different.
Upvote
0
All creationists maintain that animals were created according to their "kind". Some OECers believe a world-wide flood while others accept a local flood. A world-wide flood is only a necessity for YEC.
Theistic evolutionists are separate from OECers because OECers still have each species specially created.
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/1593_the_creationevolution_continu_12_7_2000.asp
"
<I><B>Old Earth Creationism</B></I> (OEC) -- That the earth is ancient was well-established in science by the mid- 1800´s, and was not considered a radical idea in either the Church of England or the Catholic Church (Eiseley, 1958). From the mid-1700´s on, the theology of Special Creationism has been harmonized with scientific data and theory showing that the earth was ancient."
Upvote
0
Today at 07:02 AM ikester7579 said this in Post #139
It's a members only club, Where creationists who believe in God's word only are not welcome. No matter what the evidence or experiment. Fine example, is how Mr. Kuban got his cast of the foot print while Mr. Baugh had walked away, then hid it what he had done.
Ikester, in going back over the posts in this thread, I can't find this incident. Can you post that again?
Science, as a discipline, cannot accept people who "believe in God's word only". Because this simply is not science any longer.
"...what we learned in school about the scientific method can be reduced to two basic principles.
"1. All our theory, ideas, preconceptions, instincts, and prejudices about how things logically ought to be, how they in all fairness ought to be, or how we would prefer them to be, must be tested against external reality --what they *really* are. How do we determine what they really are? Through direct experience of the universe itself.
2. The testing, the experience, has to be public, repeatable -- in the public domain. If the results are derived only once, if the experience is that of only one person and isn't available to others who attempt the same test or observation under approximately the same conditions, science must reject the findings as invalid -- not necessarily false, but uselss. One-time, private experience is not acceptable." Kitty Ferguson, The Fire in the Equations, pg. 38.
Anyone who believes their interpretation of the Bible only can't do science because their preconceptions and desire of how they want reality to prevent them from experiencing what reality actually is.
Now, before you yell about this, remember that you won't let a Muslim imam do Christian theology, will you? Why not? Because they don't accept the basics of Christianity. Well, anyone putting their interpretation of the Bible ahead of what reality is can't accept the basics of science.
This shows his intensions to disprove these findings in a bias manner. Mr. Baugh does not own the land and could not stop Mr. Kuban and his friends from doing this. This proves the unwillingess and bias to even try to work with a creationist. Then to finish off the bias Mr. Kuban takes the cast to some one he knows to have it tested. If Mr. Baugh had done this you and others would have been yelling bias from the highest roof tops. How come Mr. Kuban can do this? Is there a double standard for evolution scientists? :confused:
Not confused, just biased. The cast taken by Kuban is open for anyone to examine it that wants. That makes it public knowledge and outside of bias. Have you asked Kuban to examine the cast yourself? Try that, and then get back to us about bias.
The way it should have been done is the cast taken in front of both scientists. Then taken to scientist that neither person knows and then tested. In front of both scientist. This way there could be no bias.
This type of "blinded" assay is only necessary when the data is opinion -- such as whether your headache feels "better" or "worse" taking a new analgesic -- but does not apply when you have objective data. Such as the measurements of the cast.
Evidence gathered in the way Mr. Kuban has done it would have been thrown out of a court of law for being bias
No it wouldn't. As long as there is chain of evidence to show that the cast is the one taken at the site and if the cast is available for examination by the jury, then it would be admitted. What you are doing is trying to set up artificial conditions to keep your hypothesis from being falsified.
Most of the evidence presented here today has been either bias or hearsay.
Wishful thinking.
It's a members only club, Where creationists who believe in God's word only are not welcome. No matter what the evidence or experiment. Fine example, is how Mr. Kuban got his cast of the foot print while Mr. Baugh had walked away, then hid it what he had done.
Ikester, in going back over the posts in this thread, I can't find this incident. Can you post that again?
Science, as a discipline, cannot accept people who "believe in God's word only". Because this simply is not science any longer.
"...what we learned in school about the scientific method can be reduced to two basic principles.
"1. All our theory, ideas, preconceptions, instincts, and prejudices about how things logically ought to be, how they in all fairness ought to be, or how we would prefer them to be, must be tested against external reality --what they *really* are. How do we determine what they really are? Through direct experience of the universe itself.
2. The testing, the experience, has to be public, repeatable -- in the public domain. If the results are derived only once, if the experience is that of only one person and isn't available to others who attempt the same test or observation under approximately the same conditions, science must reject the findings as invalid -- not necessarily false, but uselss. One-time, private experience is not acceptable." Kitty Ferguson, The Fire in the Equations, pg. 38.
Anyone who believes their interpretation of the Bible only can't do science because their preconceptions and desire of how they want reality to prevent them from experiencing what reality actually is.
Now, before you yell about this, remember that you won't let a Muslim imam do Christian theology, will you? Why not? Because they don't accept the basics of Christianity. Well, anyone putting their interpretation of the Bible ahead of what reality is can't accept the basics of science.
This shows his intensions to disprove these findings in a bias manner. Mr. Baugh does not own the land and could not stop Mr. Kuban and his friends from doing this. This proves the unwillingess and bias to even try to work with a creationist. Then to finish off the bias Mr. Kuban takes the cast to some one he knows to have it tested. If Mr. Baugh had done this you and others would have been yelling bias from the highest roof tops.
How come Mr. Kuban can do this? Is there a double standard for evolution scientists? :confused: Not confused, just biased. The cast taken by Kuban is open for anyone to examine it that wants. That makes it public knowledge and outside of bias. Have you asked Kuban to examine the cast yourself? Try that, and then get back to us about bias.
The way it should have been done is the cast taken in front of both scientists. Then taken to scientist that neither person knows and then tested. In front of both scientist. This way there could be no bias.
This type of "blinded" assay is only necessary when the data is opinion -- such as whether your headache feels "better" or "worse" taking a new analgesic -- but does not apply when you have objective data. Such as the measurements of the cast.
Evidence gathered in the way Mr. Kuban has done it would have been thrown out of a court of law for being bias
No it wouldn't. As long as there is chain of evidence to show that the cast is the one taken at the site and if the cast is available for examination by the jury, then it would be admitted. What you are doing is trying to set up artificial conditions to keep your hypothesis from being falsified.
Most of the evidence presented here today has been either bias or hearsay.
Wishful thinking.
Upvote
0
Today at 07:31 AM ikester7579 said this in Post #142
Has nothing to do with credibility. ... But today I change it back and since you and others would like me to close the pole makes me wonder why?
I don't care if you close the poll or not. I never voted in it to begin with.
Looking at the picture, the carving marks are obvious even at the magnification Notto used. Your "human footprint" is a fake. A hoax.
Upvote
0
Maybe it is accurate. Have you considered this? I suggested you consider it before, but you, of course, ignored the post. Just like you ignore any data that doesn't fit your preconceptions.
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
20th February 2003 at 09:37 PM lucaspa said this in Post #153[/i]
Today at 07:02 AM ikester7579 said this in Post #139
It's a members only club, Where creationists who believe in God's word only are not welcome. No matter what the evidence or experiment. Fine example, is how Mr. Kuban got his cast of the foot print while Mr. Baugh had walked away, then hid it what he had done.
Ikester, in going back over the posts in this thread, I can't find this incident. Can you post that again?
Here's the link: http://www.bibleandscience.com/dinosaurhumanprints.htm
Science, as a discipline, cannot accept people who "believe in God's word only". Because this simply is not science any longer.
"...what we learned in school about the scientific method can be reduced to two basic principles.
"1. All our theory, ideas, preconceptions, instincts, and prejudices about how things logically ought to be, how they in all fairness ought to be, or how we would prefer them to be, must be tested against external reality --what they *really* are. How do we determine what they really are? Through direct experience of the universe itself.
2. The testing, the experience, has to be public, repeatable -- in the public domain. If the results are derived only once, if the experience is that of only one person and isn't available to others who attempt the same test or observation under approximately the same conditions, science must reject the findings as invalid -- not necessarily false, but uselss. One-time, private experience is not acceptable." Kitty Ferguson, The Fire in the Equations, pg. 38.
Anyone who believes their interpretation of the Bible only can't do science because their preconceptions and desire of how they want reality to prevent them from experiencing what reality actually is.
In your opion!
Now, before you yell about this, remember that you won't let a Muslim imam do Christian theology, will you? Why not? Because they don't accept the basics of Christianity. Well, anyone putting their interpretation of the Bible ahead of what reality is can't accept the basics of science.
You forget. Theories or not reality.
This shows his intensions to disprove these findings in a bias manner. Mr. Baugh does not own the land and could not stop Mr. Kuban and his friends from doing this. This proves the unwillingess and bias to even try to work with a creationist. Then to finish off the bias Mr. Kuban takes the cast to some one he knows to have it tested. If Mr. Baugh had done this you and others would have been yelling bias from the highest roof tops. How come Mr. Kuban can do this? Is there a double standard for evolution scientists? :confused:
Not confused, just biased. The cast taken by Kuban is open for anyone to examine it that wants. That makes it public knowledge and outside of bias. Have you asked Kuban to examine the cast yourself? Try that, and then get back to us about bias.
Yep, and I can say the same for the foot print from Dr. Baugh. Have you examined it? But I forgot about the double standards, I mean bias. Dr. Baugh's foot print is on public display also. At least I plan to go see it to get truth.
The way it should have been done is the cast taken in front of both scientists. Then taken to scientist that neither person knows and then tested. In front of both scientist. This way there could be no bias.
This type of "blinded" assay is only necessary when the data is opinion -- such as whether your headache feels "better" or "worse" taking a new analgesic -- but does not apply when you have objective data. Such as the measurements of the cast.
But like I said before, If Dr. Baugh done this it would not be accecptable. Ex: Dr. Baugh takes the cast with out the knownledge of Mr. kuban, and has it tested. Finds out it was what he said it was. Puts the cast back and makes his claims. Now that it has been done and tested the same way Mr. Kuban did his. Would you accept it? I think not. But yet you defend Mr. Kuban? Come back when you learn the definition of bias.
Evidence gathered in the way Mr. Kuban has done it would have been thrown out of a court of law for being bias
No it wouldn't. As long as there is chain of evidence to show that the cast is the one taken at the site and if the cast is available for examination by the jury, then it would be admitted. What you are doing is trying to set up artificial conditions to keep your hypothesis from being falsified.
Yep, And I guess your the world wide expert that determines these things.
Most of the evidence presented here today has been either bias or hearsay.
Wishful thinking. [/B]
[/QUOTE]
Again, theories are not reality.
Today at 07:02 AM ikester7579 said this in Post #139
It's a members only club, Where creationists who believe in God's word only are not welcome. No matter what the evidence or experiment. Fine example, is how Mr. Kuban got his cast of the foot print while Mr. Baugh had walked away, then hid it what he had done.
Ikester, in going back over the posts in this thread, I can't find this incident. Can you post that again?
Here's the link: http://www.bibleandscience.com/dinosaurhumanprints.htm
Science, as a discipline, cannot accept people who "believe in God's word only". Because this simply is not science any longer.
"...what we learned in school about the scientific method can be reduced to two basic principles.
"1. All our theory, ideas, preconceptions, instincts, and prejudices about how things logically ought to be, how they in all fairness ought to be, or how we would prefer them to be, must be tested against external reality --what they *really* are. How do we determine what they really are? Through direct experience of the universe itself.
2. The testing, the experience, has to be public, repeatable -- in the public domain. If the results are derived only once, if the experience is that of only one person and isn't available to others who attempt the same test or observation under approximately the same conditions, science must reject the findings as invalid -- not necessarily false, but uselss. One-time, private experience is not acceptable." Kitty Ferguson, The Fire in the Equations, pg. 38.
Anyone who believes their interpretation of the Bible only can't do science because their preconceptions and desire of how they want reality to prevent them from experiencing what reality actually is.
In your opion!
Now, before you yell about this, remember that you won't let a Muslim imam do Christian theology, will you? Why not? Because they don't accept the basics of Christianity. Well, anyone putting their interpretation of the Bible ahead of what reality is can't accept the basics of science.
You forget. Theories or not reality.
This shows his intensions to disprove these findings in a bias manner. Mr. Baugh does not own the land and could not stop Mr. Kuban and his friends from doing this. This proves the unwillingess and bias to even try to work with a creationist. Then to finish off the bias Mr. Kuban takes the cast to some one he knows to have it tested. If Mr. Baugh had done this you and others would have been yelling bias from the highest roof tops.
How come Mr. Kuban can do this? Is there a double standard for evolution scientists? :confused: Not confused, just biased. The cast taken by Kuban is open for anyone to examine it that wants. That makes it public knowledge and outside of bias. Have you asked Kuban to examine the cast yourself? Try that, and then get back to us about bias.
Yep, and I can say the same for the foot print from Dr. Baugh. Have you examined it? But I forgot about the double standards, I mean bias. Dr. Baugh's foot print is on public display also. At least I plan to go see it to get truth.
The way it should have been done is the cast taken in front of both scientists. Then taken to scientist that neither person knows and then tested. In front of both scientist. This way there could be no bias.
This type of "blinded" assay is only necessary when the data is opinion -- such as whether your headache feels "better" or "worse" taking a new analgesic -- but does not apply when you have objective data. Such as the measurements of the cast.
But like I said before, If Dr. Baugh done this it would not be accecptable. Ex: Dr. Baugh takes the cast with out the knownledge of Mr. kuban, and has it tested. Finds out it was what he said it was. Puts the cast back and makes his claims. Now that it has been done and tested the same way Mr. Kuban did his. Would you accept it? I think not. But yet you defend Mr. Kuban? Come back when you learn the definition of bias.
Evidence gathered in the way Mr. Kuban has done it would have been thrown out of a court of law for being bias
No it wouldn't. As long as there is chain of evidence to show that the cast is the one taken at the site and if the cast is available for examination by the jury, then it would be admitted. What you are doing is trying to set up artificial conditions to keep your hypothesis from being falsified.
Yep, And I guess your the world wide expert that determines these things.
Most of the evidence presented here today has been either bias or hearsay.
Wishful thinking. [/B]
[/QUOTE]
Again, theories are not reality.
Upvote
0
If a man came up to you and pointed a gun to your head and said: Prove these foot prints are fake, or I blow your brains out. Would you bet your life on that you could prove it? No? Just as well I could not prove for 100% that they are real. This is why I go see them on my next vacation.
Upvote
0
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
Similar threads
