Scientific Evidence for Creationism

[JohnR7]

The theory of evolution is simply the current best model explaining the diversity of species.

It is more like the current model that best explains diversity of species.

 

[RealityCheck]

It is more like the current model that best explains diversity of species.

Wow you're right. ToE is the model that best explains diversity of species.

 

[I_Love_Cheese]

It is more like the current model that best explains diversity of species.

Yup that is the way that science works, when a model comes along that better explains what is seen, it becomes the current model.

 

[OdwinOddball]

So what is the difference between "no evidence" and "absolutely zero evidence" Interesting how there could be so many ancient records for floods and yet you say there is no evidence for a flood. Do you deny that there was a flood recently in New Orleans?

Even science tells us that the ice at the end of the ice age melted at three different times and the water flooded the earth faster then what they believed at first. Yet you say there was no flood. Even though the evidence for a flood is overwelming.

Because I was not speaking to you when I said this, but to someone who claims the Flood as presented in the Bible(aka Global) actually happened.

I know your mind on this issue, and you know this, we've been over this before. A localized flood is not only the probable explanation, it is the only one possible other than no flood at all.

Stop being deliberately obtuse. You knew exactly what I was talking about, but rather than actually contribut some evidence like this thread asks, you'd rather feign ignorance and try to change the subject.

Evidence, bring it forward...

 

[b*unique]

Mod hat on

Please can you try and address the topic,and please
no more baiting .

Mod hat off

 

[JohnR7]

rather than actually contribut some evidence

what evidence do you need? Would you like to take a walk though the Bible.

Genesis 1:1
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Ok, let's start off with "In the beginning". Now what problem do you have with these three words? First of all we need to try to determine what the word "beginning" means. You could spend the rest of your life just to study this one word: "beginning". At the end of your life you would only just be getting started to understand what the Bible says when it says "beginning".

Let us narrow it down though. Lets say that if you could fill up a book with your understanding of what they Bible means by "beginning" then we will assume that is enough understanding. At least enough that you can go onto trying to understand something else.

The Greeks did not believe there was a beginning. They felt that everything we eternal with no beginning and no end. Of couse there is no beginning or end with God. Perhaps they had a good reason to believe the way they did. But clearly the Bible says: "in the Beginning" so clearly there was a beginning.

Do you have any problem with this? Do you deny that there was a beginning? Do you object for some reason to the opening in the Bible that says: "In the beginning"?

 

[vitodabona]

The Greeks did not believe there was a beginning. They felt that everything we eternal with no beginning and no end. Of couse there is no beginning or end with God. Perhaps they had a good reason to believe the way they did. But clearly the Bible says: "in the Beginning" so clearly there was a beginning.

This is untrue the greeks believed in a begining to all things:

ll. 116-138) Verily at the first Chaos came to be, but next wide-bosomed Earth, the ever-sure foundations of all (4) the deathless ones who hold the peaks of snowy Olympus, and dim Tartarus in the depth of the wide-pathed Earth, and Eros (Love), fairest among the deathless gods, who unnerves the limbs and overcomes the mind and wise counsels of all gods and all men within them. From Chaos came forth Erebus and black Night; but of Night were born .....

http://ancienthistory.about.com/library/bl/bl_text_hesiod_theogony_2.htm

For those who don't want to read:

http://homepage.mac.com/cparada/GML/Theogony.html

 

[RealityCheck]

what evidence do you need? Would you like to take a walk though the Bible.

Genesis 1:1
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Ok, let's start off with "In the beginning". Now what problem do you have with these three words? First of all we need to try to determine what the word "beginning" means. You could spend the rest of your life just to study this one word: "beginning". At the end of your life you would only just be getting started to understand what the Bible says when it says "beginning".

Let us narrow it down though. Lets say that if you could fill up a book with your understanding of what they Bible means by "beginning" then we will assume that is enough understanding. At least enough that you can go onto trying to understand something else.

The Greeks did not believe there was a beginning. They felt that everything we eternal with no beginning and no end. Of couse there is no beginning or end with God. Perhaps they had a good reason to believe the way they did. But clearly the Bible says: "in the Beginning" so clearly there was a beginning.

Do you have any problem with this? Do you deny that there was a beginning? Do you object for some reason to the opening in the Bible that says: "In the beginning"?

Um, John. The poster asked for "evidence" not a philosophical musing on the definition of the word "beginning".

 

[LordoftheLeftHand]

what evidence do you need? Would you like to take a walk though the Bible.

If the bible is evidence of creation, then the story "the little old woman who lived in a shoe" is evidence that a little old woman actually lived in a shoe! It also means the the Koran is evidence that Mohammed was right! I think you might want to move the bar of what you will accept as evidence just a wee bit higher...

Let us narrow it down though. Lets say that if you could fill up a book with your understanding of what they Bible means by "beginning" then we will assume that is enough understanding. At least enough that you can go onto trying to understand something else.

The Greeks did not believe there was a beginning. They felt that everything we eternal with no beginning and no end. Of couse there is no beginning or end with God. Perhaps they had a good reason to believe the way they did. But clearly the Bible says: "in the Beginning" so clearly there was a beginning.

What does any of that have to do with the OP?

Do you have any problem with this? Do you deny that there was a beginning? Do you object for some reason to the opening in the Bible that says: "In the beginning"?

Are you still beating your wife, JohnR7?

LLH

 

[OdwinOddball]

what evidence do you need? Would you like to take a walk though the Bible.

Genesis 1:1
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Ok, let's start off with "In the beginning". Now what problem do you have with these three words? First of all we need to try to determine what the word "beginning" means. You could spend the rest of your life just to study this one word: "beginning". At the end of your life you would only just be getting started to understand what the Bible says when it says "beginning".

Let us narrow it down though. Lets say that if you could fill up a book with your understanding of what they Bible means by "beginning" then we will assume that is enough understanding. At least enough that you can go onto trying to understand something else.

The Greeks did not believe there was a beginning. They felt that everything we eternal with no beginning and no end. Of couse there is no beginning or end with God. Perhaps they had a good reason to believe the way they did. But clearly the Bible says: "in the Beginning" so clearly there was a beginning.

Do you have any problem with this? Do you deny that there was a beginning? Do you object for some reason to the opening in the Bible that says: "In the beginning"?

John, stop dodging. For once in your life just answer a question straight out.

You know we cannot accept the Bible as evidence, as that is basis of the idea in question. Creationism in all its forms is based on the Bible.

You keep saying you have scientific evidence. And thats what we want to see. Here in a post, your evidence. Not Bible quotes, not a reference to a book my local library doesnt have that I would need to spend money to get. Not a line of text we can punch into google.

Step up the the plate and put some work into this debate like so many of your fellow posters do on a daily basis.

 

[Pseudonym]

Even if it's just one link to one simple article, give me something to look at. I noticed that b*unique created two threads today: one for links about evolution, one for links about creationism. The one about evolution (at the time of this post) has two pages full of links. The thread about creationism surprisingly does not even have one post.

I'm beginning to think that the lack of evidence (along with the lack of attempting to find evidence) speaks volumes. How is anyone supposed to take creationism seriously?

 

[JohnR7]

John, stop dodging.

I am sorry I took you serious enough to try and answer your questions, from now on you are going to go on ignore. Along with anyone else that is not here to learn but just wants to cause trouble.

 

[azmurath]

I am sorry I took you serious enough to try and answer your questions, from now on you are going to go on ignore. Along with anyone else that is not here to learn but just wants to cause trouble.

We are not causing trouble, we want you to answer the question and give us evidence, not Biblical quotes, not trying to downsize our questions by asking what we mean when we say such and such word, we want scientific evidence with sources for creationism, you are the only one causing trouble by skipping around the mark.

 

[Pseudonym]

I am sorry I took you serious enough to try and answer your questions, from now on you are going to go on ignore. Along with anyone else that is not here to learn but just wants to cause trouble.

I'm here to learn about your argument and I want to learn about your scientific evidence. I've asked you nicely to stay on topic and contribute to my thread. But now I'm telling you, stay on topic and contribute to my OP or stay out of my thread. It seems that you only started posting in my thread to derail the topic and cause trouble. Please find a new hobby.

If any other creationists would like to post scientific evidence following the guidelines of my OP, please do so because I am eager to read something relevant.

 

[JohnR7]

we want scientific evidence with sources for creationism, you are the only one causing trouble by skipping around the mark.

Whatever, I try to work with evos and provide them with "scientific" evidence but they are not here to learn, they are here to cause problems.

There are good Bible schools out there, if you want to learn the Bible, then go to a good Bible school.
No one wants me here anyways, so why should I put anymore time and effort into this board.

I feel sorry for your teachers at school because they have to put up with your nonsense.
They get paid to put up with it. Well, no one is paying me and I am not going to tolerate it anymore.

 

[azmurath]

Whatever, I try to work with evos and provide them with "scientific" evidence but they are not here to learn, they are here to cause problems.

There are good Bible schools out there, if you want to learn the Bible, then go to a good Bible school.
No one wants me here anyways, so why should I put anymore time and effort into this board.

I feel sorry for your teachers at school because they have to put up with your nonsense.
They get paid to put up with it. Well, no one is paying me and I am not going to tolerate it anymore.

No, you offer scientific evidence and we show that it does not provide evidence for what you think it does, otherwise you sit here and criticize us for believing in evolution, well guess what, that is on par with racism.

 

[steen]

Whatever, I try to work with evos and provide them with "scientific" evidence but they are not here to learn, they are here to cause problems.

rather, you have NOT provided any scientific evidence for your claims. You are bearing false witness.

 

[Cassandra]

John, have you ever written a research paper? You know when you have to find outside sources that support your thesis and make a work cited list at the end? Same rules apply here.


We are looking for those outside sources. Your word alone doesn't prove a thing.

 

[JohnR7]

You are bearing false witness.

Post after post after post that shows no one wants me here and that people seem to want me off of this forum.
Even though I have tried so hard to help show the truth to as many people as I could.

 

[RealityCheck]

Post after post after post that shows no one wants me here and that people seem to want me off of this forum.
Even though I have tried so hard to help show the truth to as many people as I could.

John, all we wanted was for you to link us to a non-Biblical source of scientific evidence that supported creationism. You've claimed that such exists... but it's the way we are, we want to see it, not just trust your claim.