Questions Creationists Never Answer

quote:

---

Originally posted by schrafinator:
I have been involved in these on-line Creation/Evolution discussions for several years now, and there are some basic questions which I always ask of Creationists who claim that "Scientific Creationism" is scientific. I have yet to get any answers to them.

​

Perhaps the Creationists in this forum will provide. I will list a few of them to get us started.

​

1) Define "kind".

​

In other words, how do we tell one "kind" from another?

​

2) If ALL of the various radiometric dating methods are wrong, then how is it that they are ALL wrong in such a way that they are almost always remarkably consistent with one another?

​

3) Why do we never find flowering plants, including trees, grasses, etc., in the lower levels of the geologic column if all fossils were laid down in one Biblical Flood event?

​

---

1 Kind- The organisms originally Created by the Lord our God. Baraminology is the research involved in determining what they were.Here's a link: BaraminologyAlso you can find info on AiG and other Creation websites. I don't know why evolutionists harp on this so much- can they tell us exactly what the first alleged population(s) of single-celled organisms were and exactly how they mutated to get to the diversity of life we observe today? No. Does it matter? No. It does not matter 1 iota to the functionality and maintenance of life to know what started it. If it did someone should respond to my thread on that topic.2- radiometric dating- are you sure they all agree? Does that mean if I can find 'dates' that don't agreee your premise is refuted?3- Not everything that has lived and died has fossilized or left impressions. Add that to the fact that we haven't looked in every possible sedimentary layer- you get an incomplete and fragmented record. Also your premise is false. Organisms died before the flood so why wouldn't fossilization occur before the flood also?------------------
John Paul

schraf:
Well, I'm still waiting for a *straight* answer...John Paul:
Well then wait. Or do some actual research into what it is you are debating against.------------------
John Paul

Percy:
Hi, John Paul!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Paul writes to Schraf:
Well then wait. Or do some actual research into what it is you are debating against.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------After reading message 3 from Schraf it appears that she read your reference and had some specific comments. Isn't there anything in message 3 you could respond to?John Paul:
Gee whiz Percy, but did schraf respond to this: (see my first post in this thread)
"Also you can find info on AiG and other Creation websites. I don't know why evolutionists harp on this so much- can they tell us exactly what the first alleged population(s) of single-celled organisms were and exactly how they mutated to get to the diversity of life we observe today? No. Does it matter? No. It does not matter 1 iota to the functionality and maintenance of life to know what started it. If it did someone should respond to my thread on that topic."Absolutely not. I'm stretched pretty thin here trying to answer every evolutionist post. It's time that evolutionists did their own research so they can learn what it is they are debating against.From the True Origins glossary:kind n.
the created kind (from the Hebrew word baramin) refers to the originally created populations of various forms of life from which all other forms have arisen. It does not deny variation or mutation, but says that instead of one unicellular organism being the proginator of all life on earth through all time, there were a number of originally created populations whose individuals cannot vary or speciate across the discontinuities which separate each kind from every other kind. The concept of baramin is related to the concept of discontinuities that exist between groups of organisms. For instance, the dog, the wolf, the coyote, are clearly in the same baramin. And there is a definite discontinuity between this baramin and the bovine baramin, although both are mammals. Baramins can be partially identified by successful (live birth) hybrids, but probably go way beyond what hybridization can do today. Genetic studies may help determine discontinuities. The fossil record is also a help.Here's an article from AiG-

---

This message is a reply to:
	Message 7 by Percy, posted 01-09-2002 10:22 AM		Percy has replied

---

Replies to this message:
	Message 9 by Percy, posted 01-09-2002 10:47 AM		John Paul has replied

---

Reply    Peek

Hi, John Paul!Hey Percy.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Paul writes:
I'm stretched pretty thin here trying to answer every evolutionist post.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percy:
I understand. You might want to pace yourself. There's no time requirement.John Paul:
It seems when Creationists do that evolutionists say we abandoned whatever it was.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gee whiz Percy, but did schraf respond to this: (see my first post in this thread) "Also you can find info on AiG and other Creation websites. I don't know why evolutionists harp on this so much- can they tell us exactly what the first alleged population(s) of single-celled organisms were and exactly how they mutated to get to the diversity of life we observe today? No. Does it matter? No. It does not matter 1 iota to the functionality and maintenance of life to know what started it. If it did someone should respond to my thread on that topic."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percy:
I thought this question was rhetorical, since you followed it with your own answer, and so perhaps Schraf did, too. Schraf, can you answer John Paul's question?John Paul:
Yes I did answer myself but that doesn't mean my answer was correct. I am sure if I asked "Is the ToE scientific" and then immediately said "No way it is a religious belief" I would have plenty of responses. Or would people just say "Hey John Paul has a point. Thanks for answering that question JP."------------------
John Paul