Young earth creationism is valid and the macroevolutionary hypothesis is not valid

Dear WJ:I think your post was an excellent example of how the proponents of the macroevolutionary hypothesis haven't really offered anything.I do realize that materialist/evolutionist like to run for cover when abiogenesis is brought up. I know they realize it conflicts with the materialist creed "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." I would also say that Christians have ample evidence for Christianity and it is not just limited to science as my other post demonstrate. I also know the abiogenesis hypothesis is very contra-evidence in that the "inference to the best explanation" as Meyer indicated is a Creator.Sincerely,Ken[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 03-03-2004]

Ken, you post is meaningless drivel. I take it that you will be running away shortly.

hehe, for a minute there wj, I thought he had managed to edit your post to him. It wouldn't surprise me if he has tried.

Your juvenile style of tit for tat is mindless subterfuge, where is some type of plausible rationale from the Bible for a young Earth ?Young Earth Creationism (YEC) is the product of dogma based upon traditional belief in the 7000 year history cap, it is also a reaction of fear to the claims of macro-evolution.The Bible indicates nothing about a young Earth except when handled by amateurs. The eons and eons of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 are rightfully deduced/adduced from the massive amount of physical evidence contained in the Earth.The pre-historic animal kingdom is a fact. God tells us that a 1000 years to Him is like a day.YEC is the black box of creationism, I am just plain tired of doing penance for your damnable use of scripture. You may fool certain science types who do not know the Bible, but if you want to learn the real arguments against evolution, then go to the Evolution category and Wj's topic that bears my name. Read my arguments Ken and abandon YEC.

quote:

---

To: IrishRockhound
I offered resources and some argumentation in regards to those resources. You do not like my resources. I understand that. You disagree with me in the string. I see that. I do not think at this juncture things are going to change although they could in the future.

​

I will also say that I have never understood the pink unicorn/leprauchan argument for the non existence of God. Because there is one false belief that does not make all beliefs false.

​

Sincerely,

​

Ken

---

Ken, you gave us a bunch of out-of-context quotes and a load of random crap on the bible, and you haven't even defended them to any degree. Most of what you posted is hopelessly irrelevent to evolution! Why can't you see this?If you can't debate in good faith or even coherently, stop posting and stop wasting all our time. I predict that you won't, though - and I'm starting to think that you're just an annoying evolutionist pretending to be stupid in order to get a few laughs.The Rock Hound[This message has been edited by IrishRockhound, 03-04-2004]

quote:

---

Dear WJ:
I think your post was an excellent example of how the proponents of the macroevolutionary hypothesis haven't really offered anything.

​

I do realize that materialist/evolutionist like to run for cover when abiogenesis is brought up. I know they realize it conflicts with the materialist creed "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." I would also say that Christians have ample evidence for Christianity and it is not just limited to science as my other post demonstrate. I also know the abiogenesis hypothesis is very contra-evidence in that the "inference to the best explanation" as Meyer indicated is a Creator.

​

Sincerely,

​

Ken

---

I hope WJ won't mind me butting in here... Ken, we are debating evolution here, not abiogenesis. Please try to stick with the topic you started. The claim that "Christians have ample evidence for Christianity" again has nothing to do with evolution.Ok, Ken. Decision time. Are we debating evolution or abiogenesis? Either one is good, but bear in mind that the validity or invalidity of one has nothing to do with the validity or invalidity of the other.The Rock Hound

Irish, butt away. I don't intend to be involved further with Ken's rambling evasions.

Ken, for goodness sake, will you PLEASE use the small reply button at the bottom of the original message you are replying to and NOT the large reply button at the top and bottom of the page.

quote:

---

I have read that emotion and the more dispassionate brain faculties actually improve decision making. It helps us set priorities, for example. People who have had the emotional regulators damaged in their brains make very poor decisions from what I have studied.

​

On the other hand, some people have such poor emotion control that they allow hate and other emotions to have too much sway. There are militant atheist and militant religionist. In short, I think there are problems on both sides of the fence. I would say, however, that God can give patience to those who desire it.

---

Well, at any rate, the people who get banned and suspended ere are usually the ones who say thing like "You are going to hell!!"

quote:

---

The materialists wish to push God out of the picture

---

But God is "out of the picture" in all of science, ken.Science ignores God and all other supernatural ideas. It has no opinion whatsoever upon the existence of god, because there is no way to measure God's existence.Will you please explain how scientific inquiry would benefit from letting supernatural explanations in? Be specific.How would our understanding of antibiotic-resistant strains of tuberculosis be benefitted by letting "Godidit" be an explanation for how they became resistant, for example?

quote:

---

and I would say they have been very unsuccessful. Without credible evidence for the abiogenesis hypothesis I would say the materialist are not even at first base.

---

Evolution began once the first life form appeared on earth. HOW that life got here has no bearing on IF it evolved. Therefore, the ToE is a wholly separate theory from Abiogenesis.God could have made the first life and Evolution would still be correct, because that is where the evidence has led us.What evidence for evolution do you believe is lacking, or do you believe is in error?Be specific.

---

"Evolution is a 'theory', just like gravity. If you don't like it, go jump off a bridge."

quote:

---

re: second law and macroevolutionary hypothesis

​

A man died in Texas and he had an unusual will. He left his house and all his possessions to the devil. The judge did not know what to do. The judge deliberated for a week. Finally, the judge thought of the perfect answer to honor the will of the departed. The judge built a very high fence around the property and posted guards around it. Why? The judge knew that things left to themselves go to the devil. I think this analogy applies to the second law and the macroevolutionary hypothesis.

​

I would also say that the macroevolutionary hypothesis in regards to the second law of thermodynamics can be likened to a salmon trying to swim up Niagara Falls. The salmon just will not be able to do it.

​

I further believe that Behe has thrown an additional large wrench into the philosophy of materialism.

---

Ken, do you admit that your site lied to you about the 2LoT, and that the solar system is not a closed system?Yes or no?

---

"Evolution is a 'theory', just like gravity. If you don't like it, go jump off a bridge."

TO: SchrafinatorI agree with Kelvin who was called "that odious spectre" by Darwin. Kelvin was a staunch creationist who made a significant contribution in terms of the second law of thermodynamics.Here is some more information regarding the second law of thermodymaics for you to consider:SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS - Does this basic law of nature prevent Evolution? - ChristianAnswers.NetLastly, I see the see the materialist being closed in on every side. Molecular biology and the growing contra-evidence and empirical bankruptcy of the abiogenesis hypothesis, for example. I know this trend is continueing. I also see Bible archeology giving us more and more evidence for the Bible and Genesis. Sodom was discovered for example. I realize this makes some materialist upset but this will not stop the trend from continueing.Sincerely,Ken[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 03-04-2004]

Actually, molecular biology is providing more and more evidence how abiogenesis may have occurred.No one doubts that some of the places and some of the people and maybe some of the events described in the Bible actually existed or happened. But there is no evidence that any of the major stories occurred the way the Bible says that they did.From the link: As someone with some training in physics, I can say that this is not the second law of thermodynamics. How much do you really know about the second law? Here is a test on the second law of thermodynamics. Why don't you look at it yourself and tell us how much you really know about it? By the way, I already know the answers.

Ken, do you agree that the Earth is NOT a closed system, but is receiving lots of energy from the sun?Yes or No.Do not post another website.Do not argue related or unrelated topics.Answer; "yes" or "no".

to: schrafinatorYou seem to want to be a controlling individual. You say you NEED an answer to your post. You say you want yes or no answers. If you wish to state that somehow sunlight causes lizards to grow hollow bones that make them less fit and develop complex systems that enable flight so they can sprout wings and fly then I think you are deluding yourself. I think you are trying to enter naturalistic miracles into science through the backdoor in order to justify your bankrupt materialist ideology. I have left the Church of Darwin. I see no need to lay hands on beakers and cry, "In the name of materialism I command non-life to become life.". I see the whole endeavor of trying to believe materialism as being a hopeless endeavor. It is inconsistent. Nothing becoming the universe. Asserting "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" while maintaining abiogenesis. I am saved. I am free. I see the majesty of creation. You seem to want to drag me down into the materialist tar pit via your controlling tactics and I wiil emphatically tell you right now that I have no desire to go there.Sincerely,Ken[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 03-11-2004]