What makes a creationist a creationist?

[WingsOfEagles07]

Please make a note. This ATHEIST takes a STAND for "INTELLIGENT DESIGN" just read the article.

ID's Unlikely Defender

 

[Darkness27]

Personally, I would go with germ theory because there is a law of gravity (which is an equation) but no law of germs. Yet germ theory is still a theory just like evolution.

Even though gravity has an equation, the equation has problems, and is not entirely accurate. Just another thing I like to bring up when creationists use some form of 'evolution is only a theory.'

 

[Darkness27]

Yeah, Man I so hate this summer reading. I just read three chapters and it has gave me a headache. The reason I have to read is because I am taking, "AP English Composition" and not normal English like I will taking next year my senior year. LOL. I am not doing another summer reading. This is my schedule for this year, and my pre-planned senior schedule. There are two semesters. I have normal classes for 50 minutes called, "Mods" and Blocks are 2 Mods Long. Then after the first semester the blocks switch to the second block for example of my junior year. (Alg. 2 honors for a Block for the first semester then Trig. honors for a block 2nd semester.)

Junior Year (This Year)

1. AP English Composition
2. AP US History
3. Algebra 2 Honors (Block) / Trigonometry Honors (Block)
4. Chemistry (Block) / Physics (Pre-AP - Block)
5. Physical Education

Senior Year

1. English 12
2. Civics (History)
3. AP Calculus
4. Earth Science (Block) / Human Anatomy (Block)
5. Micro-Biology (Block) / Astronomy (Block)

That is my plan. I am taking astronomy last because I want to become an Astrophysicist. =] Going to be hard.

Have fun in AP English. I don't know about your school, but with mine AP US is supposed to be very hard. I still had summer reading for English 12, it was horrible, so if you don't have it next summer I will be very mad. I never had the desire to take any APs, luckily I didn't need any to get into college, so have fun on that front. If you really want to be an astrophysicist, make math and especially physics close friends. I really liked astronomy senior year; only seniors were allowed to take astronomy. The room was a planetarium with couches and the teacher was chill.

 

[WingsOfEagles07]

Have fun in AP English. I don't know about your school, but with mine AP US is supposed to be very hard. I still had summer reading for English 12, it was horrible, so if you don't have it next summer I will be very mad. I never had the desire to take any APs, luckily I didn't need any to get into college, so have fun on that front. If you really want to be an astrophysicist, make math and especially physics close friends. I really liked astronomy senior year; only seniors were allowed to take astronomy. The room was a planetarium with couches and the teacher was chill.

AP Calculus is the highest math class we got, lol. And physics, I might take AP Physics after I take Physics Pre-AP this year, idk. It depends. Whatever the Lord wants me to do. =]

 

[WingsOfEagles07]

Have fun in AP English. I don't know about your school, but with mine AP US is supposed to be very hard. I still had summer reading for English 12, it was horrible, so if you don't have it next summer I will be very mad. I never had the desire to take any APs, luckily I didn't need any to get into college, so have fun on that front. If you really want to be an astrophysicist, make math and especially physics close friends. I really liked astronomy senior year; only seniors were allowed to take astronomy. The room was a planetarium with couches and the teacher was chill.

Hey did you ever run Cross Country or Track and Field? Or has anyone ran Track or XC?

Because this year I am running XC and Track. I have ran track for a previous of 3 years and XC will be my first year this year and my 4th year of track this year. I am a sprinter, I run the 100,200,400, 4x100,4x200,4x400

100 - 11.91
200 - 24.96
400 - 58.13

 

[Darkness27]

Me, I did band (which automatically makes me a marching band geek), fencing, and wresting. I never ran track or cross country, but I have friends that did. If you're switching to cross country I've heard the biggest problem is learning how to pace yourself evenly; it's not how fast you can run, but how much endurance you have.

 

[Smidlee]

Even though gravity has an equation, the equation has problems, and is not entirely accurate. Just another thing I like to bring up when creationists use some form of 'evolution is only a theory.'

That really does not change what I wrote since abiogenesis is also a theory. Evolutionist tries to dogmatically claim evolution is a fact.
Now even creationist believe creatures can adapt and bacteria can mutate in order to digest a new substance. In fact a few years ago I post a link where scientist learn a way to stop one type of bacteria from mutating. They were shocked because they didn't think "evolution" could be stopped. So it seems the "almighty evolution" can be stopped just like PC Windows.

 

[Darkness27]

That really does not change what I wrote since abiogenesis is also a theory.

Abiogenesis is not a theory, it is a bunch of different hypothesis. Eventually, if a hypotheses is tested and shown to be accurate and has good supporting evidence, it becomes a theory over time. Like the theory of evolution, or the theory of gravity, or germ theory, or atomic theory, all theories. And like all theories in science, they will never turn into "facts".

Evolutionist tries to dogmatically claim evolution is a fact.

It is a fact that organisms change over time, the theory of evolution explains that fact.

Now even creationist believe creatures can adapt and bacteria can mutate in order to digest a new substance.

Because over time evolution has gotten more and more evidence in its favor and creationists have no choice but to accept micro evolution unless they want to loose all their support overnight.

In fact a few years ago I post a link where scientist learn a way to stop one type of bacteria from mutating. They were shocked because they didn't think "evolution" could be stopped. So it seems the "almighty evolution" can be stopped just like PC Windows.

Interesting, do you still have the link, or know where it is?

 

[Smidlee]

It is a fact that organisms change over time, the theory of evolution explains that fact.

Now if "evolution " only means organisms change over time than I as a creationist agree this is just as sound as gravity since it's a no brainer. Now UCD or the "Little Eyeball That Could" story is a different story all together.

 

[Darkness27]

Now if "evolution " only means organisms change over time than I as a creationist agree this is just as sound as gravity since it's a no brainer. Now UCD or the "Little Eyeball That Could" story is a different story all together.

People knew organisms went extinct, new ones arose and over time populations changed from one species to another before Darwin was on the scene. Through a combination of genetics (Mendel) and natural selection (Darwin), we have been able to explain how those changes are made; known today as the modern theory of evolution. Strangely enough the theory of evolution is considered to be better supported by the evidence than gravity! If you are really interested in the evolution of the eye, skimming the eye thread on here might be a good place to start.

 

[Smidlee]

People knew organisms went extinct, new ones arose and over time populations changed from one species to another before Darwin was on the scene. Through a combination of genetics (Mendel) and natural selection (Darwin), we have been able to explain how those changes are made; known today as the modern theory of evolution. Strangely enough the theory of evolution is considered to be better supported by the evidence than gravity! If you are really interested in the evolution of the eye, skimming the eye thread on here might be a good place to start.

It's seems natural selection has the same limits (if not more) than Mendel artificial selection. So I totally disagree both of these explains everything we see in nature.
Gravity is a extremely predictable force. While we have discovered anti-matter we have yet to discover anti-gravity.

 

[Darkness27]

It's seems natural selection has the same limits (if not more) than Mendel artificial selection. So I totally disagree both of these explains everything we see in nature.
Gravity is a extremely predictable force. While we have discovered anti-matter we have yet to discover anti-gravity.

How do you explain the diversity of life and how populations change over time? What are the "limits" to natural selection and genetics(this includes mutations)? What is lacking, from a scientific prospective?

Gravity is not as predictable as you might think. For example it can't predict mercury's orbit around the sun, gravity is flawed. As Metherion pointed out, we know what drives evolution, but we don't know what drives gravity. We know it happens, we see it happening, but we don't know how it happens.

I don't know why you brought up anti-matter and compared it to "anti-gravity". It is like saying we haven't discovered anti-electromagnetism, I truly don't know what it adds to your position.

 

[SixStringPlank]

we have yet to discover anti-gravity.

Just bouncing around and reading various post on the forums and happened to see this. I would point how that we have discovered "anti-gravity."

Einstein, to the best of my meager knowledge, was the first to propose the existence in a precise manner while working on his general relativity equations. His cosmological constant was added to make his general relativity theory conform with a static universe. However, our universe is not static but expanding.

Some scientists think that dark energy and the cosmological constant are essentially the same. This may well be the case given some recent data from the NASA Chandra X-Ray Observatory. Nervertheless, there are still a few kinks to work out as is usually the case in science.

 

[Smidlee]

How do you explain the diversity of life and how populations change over time? What are the "limits" to natural selection and genetics(this includes mutations)? What is lacking, from a scientific prospective?

Gravity is not as predictable as you might think. For example it can't predict mercury's orbit around the sun, gravity is flawed. As Metherion pointed out, we know what drives evolution, but we don't know what drives gravity. We know it happens, we see it happening, but we don't know how it happens.

I don't know why you brought up anti-matter and compared it to "anti-gravity". It is like saying we haven't discovered anti-electromagnetism, I truly don't know what it adds to your position.

This has nothing to do with gravity being flawed but heliocentric model. It's because of gravity extremely predictability that gave us the hint that the heliocentric model was off.
As far as anti-magnetism if I remember correctly copper repels from magnetism. Magnetism can be block/shielded as well.

 

[Darkness27]

This has nothing to do with gravity being flawed but heliocentric model. It's because of gravity extremely predictability that gave us the hint that the heliocentric model was off.
As far as anti-magnetism if I remember correctly copper repels from magnetism. Magnetism can be block/shielded as well.

So how do you explain the diversity of life and how populations change over time? What are the "limits" to natural selection and genetics(this includes mutations)? What is lacking, from a scientific prospective?

Gravity predicts a lot of things, as anything can, but it is how often these predictions are true that is key. Gravity can't account for everything, and there are flaws with the theory. And what does the heliocentric model have to do with this? How does gravity show that heliocentric model is off?

SixStringPlank has a good point. Dark energy is what makes the universe expand (as far as I know), and is essentially the opposite of gravity. Depending on the amount of mass compared to dark energy, the universe has it could collapse into a big crunch, or turn into a steady state, or expand forever.

I still don't know what anti-matter and "anti-gravity" bring to the discussion.

 

[PT Calvinist]

What makes a creationist a creationist?

I'm sure as someone already has stated before. A creationist is a creationist because they take the Biblical account of God's Creation in Genesis Chapter 1 to be Literal and absolute truth.

 

[marktheblake]

So how do you explain the diversity of life and how populations change over time?

whats changed? humans are still humans.

 

[Darkness27]

whats changed? humans are still humans.

We see populations change, you can call it micro-evolution or adaptation or whatever, life still changes over time. My question is how does that life change, by what mechanism does life diversify?

 

[marktheblake]

We see populations change, you can call it micro-evolution or adaptation or whatever, life still changes over time.

How did populations change?

A ethnic group of short people - like pygmies were not a result of genetic changes. They are just as human as anyone else.

 

[metherion]

How did populations change?

A ethnic group of short people - like pygmies were not a result of genetic changes. They are just as human as anyone else.

But groups DO change, and the thing that controls their change is genetic.

I mean, Oriental peoples generally have narrower eyes and smaller build than caucasians, while the Negroids generally have larger, flatter noses. Among other things, of course. No, I'm not trying to be racist, I'm being objective and all, those features generally exist. And as you say, the pygmies are shorter, hence the name pygmies.

I mean, if genetics isn't responsible for that... what is?

But nothing about evolution says they will be or are less human. They are human, will be human and their descendants will always be human.

Metherion