M
MarvinAndroid42
Guest
Can someone give me the most comprehensive internet site against the arguments made by creationism?
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Upvote
0
The index is useful but it is an index- not an in depth discussion which is why Mark provides so many links and references.
For example:
Claim CC371:
For example:
Claim CC371:
Upvote
0
The already referenced Talkorigins is probably the most comprehesive. A site I like is No Answers in Genesis.
A very comprehensive collection of arguments against the global flood can be found on Glenn Morton's Homepage.
The Frumious Bandersnatch
A very comprehensive collection of arguments against the global flood can be found on Glenn Morton's Homepage.
The Frumious Bandersnatch
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Phred
Junior Mint
- Aug 12, 2003
- 5,373
- 998
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Democrat
http://www.talkorigins.orgMarvinAndroid42 said:
It's not necessarily against creationism, it just puts forth the facts of evolution which naturally discredit magic.
Upvote
0
It is not very comprehensive but I kind of like Debunking Creation Science with Creation Science.
The Frumious Bandesnatch
The Frumious Bandesnatch
Upvote
0
I think that the most even handed presentation is the link list at CSUF, Senior Seminar on Evolution and Creation.
Upvote
0
The nost comprehensive site is reality.MarvinAndroid42 said:
If you are looking for quick answers, the above are excellent, but if you really want to know and understand, just look out your window and find out what works.
Upvote
0
NASAg03
Active Member
http://www.trueorigin.org/
lots of good stuff and builds off a lot of arguments made in talk.origins.
EDIT: forgot to mention, the read on SLoT is very informative and fills in a few of the details Steiger left out...
lots of good stuff and builds off a lot of arguments made in talk.origins.
EDIT: forgot to mention, the read on SLoT is very informative and fills in a few of the details Steiger left out...
Upvote
0
That is a creationist site arguing against Evolution and has nothing to do with science.NASAg03 said:http://www.trueorigin.org/
lots of good stuff and builds off a lot of arguments made in talk.origins.
Upvote
0
The misrepresentation of the second law of thermodynamics can be traced at least to the early 1970s when it was touted by Duane Gish. It was patheticly wrong then, and it is pathetically wrong now.
Since this particular creationist canard has been refuted over and over for at least 30 years, any creationist invoking the 2ndLaw is either admitting gross ignorance or dishonesty.
I'll leave the rending of creato limbs to others, but a good place to start is; The Second Law of Thermodynamics in the Context of the Christian Faith by Allan H. Harvey. A more technical approach without much effort to "go easy" is Entropy and the second law of thermodynamics. And for an important introduction to the application of thermodynamics to cellular stuctures, I recommend The Nonequilibrium Thermodynamics of Small Systems.
Since this particular creationist canard has been refuted over and over for at least 30 years, any creationist invoking the 2ndLaw is either admitting gross ignorance or dishonesty.
I'll leave the rending of creato limbs to others, but a good place to start is; The Second Law of Thermodynamics in the Context of the Christian Faith by Allan H. Harvey. A more technical approach without much effort to "go easy" is Entropy and the second law of thermodynamics. And for an important introduction to the application of thermodynamics to cellular stuctures, I recommend The Nonequilibrium Thermodynamics of Small Systems.
Some good low level introductions are available from links given in the articles above.
Upvote
0
Tim Wallace's butchering of the second law shows a stunning lack of understanding of both evolution and thermodynamics. Funny how his amazing insights (which can be debunked by any 19 year old with a semester of college level physics) have not been picked up by the Nobel committee - he has somehow found observed processes that break the 2nd law - ha!
I am sure you will think that because I do not bother to write a dissertation to attacking every point in his worthless diatribe that I must not be able to refute his claims. You are free to believe that - you'd be wrong, but you are free to believe that. The truth is that creationists, even ones who know better like Sarfati at AiG like to use this ridiculous argument because they know that most of their opponents will just throw their hands up and ignore them instead of taking the time necessary to educate every possible audience on how bad this argument really is. See, real physics uses annoying things like math - that most people don't want to spend the time to try to understand - shocking that Wallace doesn't, he just uses bad reasoning, faulty understanding, and a big old quote mine.
One quick counter - Wallace is concern that "raw solar energy" would just speed up the 2nd Law (this is an assinine statement BTW) and that life needs a "energy conversion mechanism" which he tries to fool the reader into being something unique to life. This is of course absurd - air being heated and rising converts infrared radiation (heat) into kinetic energy (rising) into potential energy (gravity). Of course there is also the WATER CYCLE as a big freaking example of an "energy conversion and storage mechanism" - look it up, you might learn something.
Upvote
0
NamesAreHardToPick
All That You Can Leave Behind
notto said:
I hadn't heard of that one before, but that was a good site. Excellent link.
Upvote
0
M
MarvinAndroid42
Guest
Thanks all.
I'm pretty convinced in the falsity of creationism, but my mother isn't.
She had the pastor give her a print-out of this link Top Evidences Against the Theory of Evolution which she wants to use to "challenge" me.
I've found a few sites here and there that directly address the points made by Mr. Doug LaPointe there, though they aren't university-affiliated, just amateur. [1]
But in any case, I haven't been able to find credentials of this LaPointe person. Apparently he's a reverend at a church. And "Calvary Academy" appears to be a high school [2].
If someone might help me blast Rev. LaPointe's points out of the water, I'd really appreciate it.
I'm pretty convinced in the falsity of creationism, but my mother isn't.
She had the pastor give her a print-out of this link Top Evidences Against the Theory of Evolution which she wants to use to "challenge" me.
I've found a few sites here and there that directly address the points made by Mr. Doug LaPointe there, though they aren't university-affiliated, just amateur. [1]
But in any case, I haven't been able to find credentials of this LaPointe person. Apparently he's a reverend at a church. And "Calvary Academy" appears to be a high school [2].
If someone might help me blast Rev. LaPointe's points out of the water, I'd really appreciate it.
Upvote
0
National Academies of Science:
http://nationalacademies.org/evolution/
They have a bunch of free material online which pretty well kills the Creationist argument.
http://nationalacademies.org/evolution/
They have a bunch of free material online which pretty well kills the Creationist argument.
Upvote
0
I think there's also something there at the NAS which was signed by the National Academies of Science of over 86 countries (I think there are only 86 National Academies of Science) verifying that evolution is a crucial theory of biology.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
