The science of creationism: where is it?

[juvenissun]

In my 23 years of being a Christian, my questions that were hard to answer were answered as thus, "God's ways are not our ways". I came to the early realization that this answer really means, "I don't know".

Answer these:
Why are whales most closely related to hippos?
Why are crocodiles more closely related to birds than lizards?
Why do we share so many ERV's with chimpanzees?

If science doesn't know the answer it is because we haven't found it yet.

Some biologists may help you on that. Not me. Ask a geological one and you won't be disappointed.

 

[juvenissun]

ANswer my question first. How did God turn dirt into Adam? If you cannot answer, then Creationism is disproved and I win.



Sure it is... you are making up answers. I can do that too.

You say "ape" like it is a bad thing... why is that, Mr. Dirt?

Why do you ask this trivial question? Because God gives a breath to the dirt. I am dirt alright, but I have His breath too.

By the way, I don't think you know what is the composition of the so-called "dirt".

 

[juvenissun]

That's Deep. Can I quote you on that?


Too bad "God's Word" (as interpreted by creationists) is never the right answer.



How come you are still posting here pretending to be a real creationist?

I am looking for something which is above your head. But, believe it or not, you do make some contribution. For that, I thank you.

 

[juvenissun]

That's easy --- in fact, the answer is in your statement.

The molecules would simply disassociate themeselves with each other, segment into their respective atoms; which atoms would then reassemble in their respective places and voila --- Adam.

No Iron present --- too much Nitrogen --- not enough Carbon --- Calcium missing? No problem.

The atoms themselves could disassemble into their respective particles and reassemble.

The way Genesis 1 is worded has it looking like God simply "gave out orders" when it came to making the plant and animal kingdom; but when it came to Adam and Eve, we see God actually using "hands-on" workmanship; and that coincides with the Bible later, where God talks about fashioning us like a potter making a vessel.

Ha ha, excellent, brother. I love you.

 

[juvenissun]

Not really. Please explain exactly by what mechanism(s) dirt was transformed into a human being. If you cannot, creationism is disproved and by Juvie's rules I win.

Creationism recognizes "creation". Do you understand what is the literal meaning of this word?

Stop asking stupid questions. Nobody can beat creationism. The foundation of it is not scientific.

 

[Washington]

Creationism recognizes "creation". Do you understand what is the literal meaning of this word?

Stop asking stupid questions. Nobody can beat creationism. The foundation of it is not scientific.

No, but you certainly want it to appear that science justifies it. In your own words on this very thread:

"Take ANY peer reviewed science journal and take a look of ANY article in it.
Take off the interpretation part, and then you see the creation science." (post #25)

"This illustrates the power of wisdom given to creation scientist." (#48)

​

And my particular favorite.

"YEC is justified scientifically." (#96)


​

Of course we're still waiting for such scientific justification to surface, but we understand how busy creation scientists are working at other things, like waiting on dinner customers, and taking tickets at the local theater. Keep up the good work guys.

 

[BananaSlug]

Some biologists may help you on that. Not me. Ask a geological one and you won't be disappointed.

The point was to hear an answer as to why God would do such a thing. You don't need to be a biologist to answer why God would do it. If creation is right, why would whales be so closely related to hippos? If creation is right, why do humans share so many ERV's with chimpanzees? As per your logic, creationism is disproven.
How about I ask you a question about God? If you can't answer it, then (according to your logic) God is disproven.

1. If God is a being that has always existed (he has existed for infinity years of the past), why did he wait until 6000 years ago to create the universe and everything in it?
2. Why did God create anything at all? Was he lonely?

 

[Split Rock]

Why do you ask this trivial question? Because God gives a breath to the dirt. I am dirt alright, but I have His breath too.

By the way, I don't think you know what is the composition of the so-called "dirt".

Why don't you tell me, Mr. Dirt? If you cannot, then creationism is disproved and evolution wins by default! Yeah!

I am looking for something which is above your head. But, believe it or not, you do make some contribution. For that, I thank you.

I would address this post, but you are not worth the effort. If I had a graduate student here, I would let him/her address it for me.

Creationism recognizes "creation". Do you understand what is the literal meaning of this word?

Do you know what "Creationism" means in the context of this forum?

Stop asking stupid questions. Nobody can beat creationism. The foundation of it is not scientific.

Why don't you stop asking stupid questions and pretending to be a creationist? Yes, creationism can be wrong... you are a very good example of that.

 

[Split Rock]

Whoa --- slow down here!

Gimme time to answer already --- will ya?The Holy Ghost --- picking apart the atoms and reassembling them.

How?

Either that, or a simple divine fiat will do.

There you go! The one true answer.

 

[Alunyel]

Whoa --- slow down here!

Gimme time to answer already --- will ya?The Holy Ghost --- picking apart the atoms and reassembling them.

( Now you may leave --- )

If the "Holy Ghost" picked apart an atom too fast, then it'd be a case of "Goodbye garden."

 

[juvenissun]

Why don't you tell me, Mr. Dirt? If you cannot, then creationism is disproved and evolution wins by default! Yeah!


I would address this post, but you are not worth the effort. If I had a graduate student here, I would let him/her address it for me.


Do you know what "Creationism" means in the context of this forum?


Why don't you stop asking stupid questions and pretending to be a creationist? Yes, creationism can be wrong... you are a very good example of that.

I wonder what happened to you. The quality of your argument is obviously lowered.

 

[juvenissun]

The contents of the most recent 10 replies on this thread were obviously very poor in quality. Unless I see something worth to reply, I am out of here.

 

[Split Rock]

I wonder what happened to you. The quality of your argument is obviously lowered.

What? Don't you recognize your own arguments thrown back in your face??

The contents of the most recent 10 replies on this thread were obviously very poor in quality. Unless I see something worth to reply, I am out of here.

Bye-Bye!

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

The contents of the most recent 10 replies on this thread were obviously very poor in quality. Unless I see something worth to reply, I am out of here.

You are seriously a trip.

 

[juvenissun]

Answer these:

Why are crocodiles more closely related to birds than lizards?

Believe it or not, I am back for this side point. The point of this side point discussion is that I am trying to show you evolutionists that nearly all your scientific recognitions are questionable.

May be this question can also be phrased as:

Why are crocodiles more closely related to lizards than birds?

Right?

 

[Alunyel]

Believe it or not, I am back for this side point. The point of this side point discussion is that I am trying to show you evolutionists that nearly all your scientific recognitions are questionable.

May be this question can also be phrased as:

Why are crocodiles more closely related to lizards than birds?

Right?

No, because crocodiles aren't more closely related to lizards than birds.

YouTube - Geerup's Terrible Lizard Classification

Then you turn around and have the indencency to say the quality of our arguments is "lowering".

Bull.

You just can't refute them.

 

[BananaSlug]

Believe it or not, I am back for this side point. The point of this side point discussion is that I am trying to show you evolutionists that nearly all your scientific recognitions are questionable.

May be this question can also be phrased as:

Why are crocodiles more closely related to lizards than birds?

Right?

No. Paleontological evidence shows crocodiles are archosaurs, the same group that dinosaurs and birds belong to.

Cladistics show that crocodiles and birds share more characteristics than crocodiles do with lizards.

Genetics/molecular studies show that crocodiles and birds are more closely related that crocodiles are to lizards.

Lizards belong to the class Reptilia. Crocodiles belong to the class Eusuchia.

So here we have 3 different realms of independent study that show the same thing. So here is the question-

If evolution isn't true, why would God make crocodiles so closely related to birds when "common sense" tells us they should be more closely related to lizards?

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

No. Paleontological evidence shows crocodiles are archosaurs, the same group that dinosaurs and birds belong to.

Cladistics show that crocodiles and birds share more characteristics than crocodiles do with lizards.

Genetics/molecular studies show that crocodiles and birds are more closely related that crocodiles are to lizards.

Lizards belong to the class Reptilia. Crocodiles belong to the class Eusuchia.

So here we have 3 different realms of independent study that show the same thing. So here is the question-

If evolution isn't true, why would God make crocodiles so closely related to birds when "common sense" tells us they should be more closely related to lizards?

Oooh, ooooh, I think I know this one!

 

[Hespera]

Of course everything in science is questionable. Question away.

Questionable is far from the same thing as "easy to falsify"

No creo yet has come up with a question that amounted to anything, they dont know enough to even ask a good question. Despite all their "wisdom".

Far harder than a good question is to come up with a way to falsify evolution.
it doesnt rely on magic to "explain" things (really means hide behind). All religion has in magic. Or borrowed data. Like the juvclaim that all data indicates creation.
Ok... data plus magic equals creation. THAT is wisdon!

 

[Hespera]

Lifeto..."Lizards belong to the class Reptilia. Crocodiles belong to the class Eusuchia."QUOTE/////


Hespera sez... I thought that class reptilia includes turtles, lizards snakes crocodilians and the tuatara. Order crocodilia, squamata, etc....? when did crocodiles quit being Reptilia?