ICR Acts and Facts

[nolidad]

View attachment 258524

This is a photo of a brief video. It describes what creationists say about Lucy and also gives the accurate mainstream scientific info . That’s a model of Lucy’s pelvis in the crushed state . As you see the pubic area is just ....weird. Tony Reed’s videos are very good at debunking creationist nonsense. The name of the series is a little misleading though.
How Creationism Taught Me Real Science and he has about 90 of the commonest misleading creationist tropes on here . All the videos are short

Well your snide ad-hominem aside I have watched enough of those attack videos to know they are like the mainstream media as Trump thinks of them.

But tell me this if you want to know what an original pelvis looks like- what sane scientist would remove a significant portion of the pelvis to get it to look original? You and Jimmy are both ignoring that glaringly obvious problem!

 

[nolidad]

He's a YEC with enough sense to realize that the theory of evolution is not just a worldwide atheistic conspiracy to deny the Bible.

Well I do not know of any of the scientists I study that believes that is true on the human level either. But we know there is spiritual warfare going on and the enemy of mankinds soul is busy deceiving people.

We just recognize, that if people are indoctrinated all their life to believe evolution and the BB is true- they will view the world through that presupposition!

 

[VirOptimus]

Well your snide ad-hominem aside I have watched enough of those attack videos to know they are like the mainstream media as Trump thinks of them.

But tell me this if you want to know what an original pelvis looks like- what sane scientist would remove a significant portion of the pelvis to get it to look original? You and Jimmy are both ignoring that glaringly obvious problem!

Is there any theoretical data or evidence that would make you accept the ToE?

 

[nolidad]

your info about Lucy’s pelvis is incorrect . Shaped like that original fossil, the pubic bones would have crossed if both halves were shaped the way the pelvis was originally found and Lucy wouldn’t have been able to walk . Upright walking can be determined by looking at the base of the skull in Hominidae The spine inserts into the skull directly underneath .

So of course the evolutionists solution is to take a saw and remove significant portions of the original pelvic bone to restore it to the original? C'mon!

Fit well and PBS says Lovejoy said it was too chimp like! The fact you can defend this when fraud is filmed says way too much!

Listen closely this time. Lovejoy said her hip looked at superficially chimp like

 

[nolidad]

Is there any theoretical data or evidence that would make you accept the ToE?

Proof by actual observation and testability (you know the scientific method)- that shows that random undirected undesigned mutations accumulating over eons of time produced the biodiversity we see today. If they can demonstrate that- I will reconvert!

Otherwise, I classify Darwinian Evolution (what I call goo to you by way of the zoo) as an untestable unobserved unrepeatable belief system like Creation. Because as of now- that is what it is! Both are beliefs that one holds to based on their worldview! Fossils do not prove evolution! They only prove that a creature with that structure once lived. But it says nothing about whether it was always that creature or if it evolved from another creature. As the short video above shows- evolutionists are not above being filmed committing fraud to get to a predefined point.

 

[VirOptimus]

Proof by actual observation and testability (you know the scientific method)- that shows that random undirected undesigned mutations accumulating over eons of time produced the biodiversity we see today. If they can demonstrate that- I will reconvert!

Otherwise, I classify Darwinian Evolution (what I call goo to you by way of the zoo) as an untestable unobserved unrepeatable belief system like Creation. Because as of now- that is what it is! Both are beliefs that one holds to based on their worldview! Fossils do not prove evolution! They only prove that a creature with that structure once lived. But it says nothing about whether it was always that creature or if it evolved from another creature. As the short video above shows- evolutionists are not above being filmed committing fraud to get to a predefined point.

Why do you think that all university education and research around the world is based on the ToE?

 

[nolidad]

View attachment 258524

This is a photo of a brief video. It describes what creationists say about Lucy and also gives the accurate mainstream scientific info . That’s a model of Lucy’s pelvis in the crushed state . As you see the pubic area is just ....weird. Tony Reed’s videos are very good at debunking creationist nonsense. The name of the series is a little misleading though.
How Creationism Taught Me Real Science and he has about 90 of the commonest misleading creationist tropes on here . All the videos are short

A fun fact for all you out there. Once a creature dies- its bones, if broken will not fuse together anymore. Those processes stop at death!

Also if ti was buried with so much pressure and force on it that it would shatter bone- it would shatter in place- remember it is buried in sedimentary rock and not in solid lead.

If it was broken by being stepped on as the video said- the bones would be somewhat scattered nearby. It wouldf not be so close as the video shows!

Folks this is just a man altering the evidence to make it fit what he believes instead of letting teh evidence form his belief!

 

[Speedwell]

Now you are straining at gnats. The average person who sees this would accept he holds that it is at the very least plausible.

That's the point. He rejects evolution for religious reasons based on his beliefs about the Bible just like you do. He is a YEC just like you. But he recognizes that the theory of evolution is at least plausible. Not a "theory in crisis" or an outright fraud.

 

[Speedwell]

So of course the evolutionists solution is to take a saw and remove significant portions of the original pelvic bone to restore it to the original? C'mon!

That is a false statement. The original pelvic bone was not altered and is still available for examination in its as-found condition. It is a cast of that fossil which was modified.

 

[Jimmy D]

So your professional scientist removed a significant portion of the ilium so it could fit they way he thought it should!

Post MOrtem distortion? About the only way that can happen with thick bone like pelvis bone is continued steady pressure while the bone still has a soft center over X time. C'mon selling land below the keys is more believable than that!

What amazes me is that you still buy that removing significant portions of a fossil is necessary to make that fossil be right!

I don't know of any doctor who, if a patinet shatters a pelvis and it heals wrong- removes significant portions of the pelvis to insure proper fit!

Thanks for your professional opinion Dr.

But as I keep saying...

LUCY IS JUST ONE SPECIMEN, WE HAVE OTHERS THAT WEREN’T SQUASHED THAT VINDICTATE THE RECONSTRUCTION.

Sheesh.

And that quote from my “professional scientist” is from creation.com. A rare creationist actually qualified to speak on the topic.

It seems that you really don’t bother reading or attempting to understand any viewpoint that contradicts your own. Just go and read some valid scientific sources for pete’s sake.

 

[Jimmy D]

That is a false statement. The original pelvic bone was not altered and is still available for examination in its as-found condition. It is a cast of that fossil which was modified.

He clearly has no idea of what he’s attempting to discuss.

 

[Yttrium]

Can you even name one intelligent design group that isn’t based in the United States? I’m not aware of any, though I admit, I haven’t looked too hard.

Creation Ministries International is headquartered in Australia, with ministries in the various English-speaking countries.

Creation Ministries International - Wikipedia

 

[Ophiolite]

Creation Ministries International is headquartered in Australia, with ministries in the various English-speaking countries.

Creation Ministries International - Wikipedia

Is this not a standard Creationist organisation, rather than ID focused?

 

[pitabread]

Now you are straining at gnats. The average person who sees this would accept he holds that it is at the very least plausible.

I'm simply conveying what Todd Wood states about his position. You're the one trying to argue with what he believes.

 

[Ophiolite]

A fun fact for all you out there. Once a creature dies- its bones, if broken will not fuse together anymore. Those processes stop at death!

Also if ti was buried with so much pressure and force on it that it would shatter bone- it would shatter in place- remember it is buried in sedimentary rock and not in solid lead.

If it was broken by being stepped on as the video said- the bones would be somewhat scattered nearby. It wouldf not be so close as the video shows!

Folks this is just a man altering the evidence to make it fit what he believes instead of letting teh evidence form his belief!

I find it interesting you are making these definite remarks regarding taphonomy, even though you may have to google what taphonomy is.

I'll make just one correction from the several options. The bones were not buried in sedimentary rock. They were buried in sediment that subsequently, through the processes of diagenesis, became lithified.

 

[Yttrium]

Is this not a standard Creationist organisation, rather than ID focused?

True.

 

[Ophiolite]

True.

The Centre for Intelligent Design is more on target. The website, though, does not seem to have been updated recently. A quick scan of content reveals far more of the usual attacks on evolutionary theory, rather than arguments for and evidence of, Intelligent Design.

The wikipedia article states it is an advocacy group, based in Glasgow. (As fellow Scots will know the only meaningful intelligent design in Glasgow is the outstanding architecture and the memories of a shipbuilding industry that constructed 20% of all ships worldwide in the early 1900s. )

 

[lasthero]

The Centre for Intelligent Design is more on target. The website, though, does not seem to have been updated recently. A quick scan of content reveals far more of the usual attacks on evolutionary theory, rather than arguments for and evidence of, Intelligent Design.

The wikipedia article states it is an advocacy group, based in Glasgow. (As fellow Scots will know the only meaningful intelligent design in Glasgow is the outstanding architecture and the memories of a shipbuilding industry that constructed 20% of all ships worldwide in the early 1900s. )

Another thought - are there any intelligent design groups that aren’t based in Christianity?

 

[Ophiolite]

Another thought - are there any intelligent design groups that aren’t based in Christianity?

From casual, incidental internet exposure, the Islamist interest in ID seems to piggy-back off the work of American YECs, principally the Discovery Institute. Notable among these is the Turkish advocate, Harun Yahya, who is considered a charlatan by many Islamist scholars.

Edit: This I was unaware of, from wikipedia:
"In 2011, the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) Bhaktivedanta Book Trust published an intelligent design book titled Rethinking Darwin: A Vedic Study of Darwinism and Intelligent Design. The book included contributions from intelligent design advocates William A. Dembski, Jonathan Wells and Michael Behe as well as from Hindu creationists Leif A. Jensen and Michael Cremo."

 

[nolidad]

I find it interesting you are making these definite remarks regarding taphonomy, even though you may have to google what taphonomy is.

I'll make just one correction from the several options. The bones were not buried in sedimentary rock. They were buried in sediment that subsequently, through the processes of diagenesis, became lithified.

I am quite confident you knew what I meant- but had to show how punctilious you can be!

And all your technical terms simply mean that it was buried in a muddy or moist slurry that solidifed into rock!

Well I did google it! Lo and behold why am I not surprised that the high priests of science had to come up with a term that people would have to look up to know it simply means the process of fossilization.

But you and I and most here know that being buried in sediment will not crush bones together- it will simply crush bones-sometimes.

Lovejoy simply altered the existing structure to get it to look how he felt it should look-FRAUD! PBS even went along with it and evo believing troglodytes simply just nod theiur head and say sure-- removing significant portions of bones is a perfectly good way of showing what the original bone looked like!

I have some land just a few miles south of the Florida Keys for sale!