Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Young earth creationism is valid and the macroevolutionary hypothesis is not valid
kendemyer
Inactive Member


Message 136 of 316 (90977)
03-07-2004 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 135 by nator
03-07-2004 3:39 PM


Re: second law and the earth being a open system
TO: Schrafinator
I know I gave you the information to answer any concerns you might have.
Sincerely,
Ken
[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 03-11-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by nator, posted 03-07-2004 3:39 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by Chiroptera, posted 03-07-2004 4:59 PM kendemyer has not replied
 Message 138 by AdminAsgara, posted 03-07-2004 5:24 PM kendemyer has replied
 Message 139 by nator, posted 03-07-2004 6:20 PM kendemyer has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 137 of 316 (90980)
03-07-2004 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by kendemyer
03-07-2004 4:56 PM


Re: second law and earth being a open system
Kendemyer, you fraud, you clearly don't understand the first thing about the second law of thermodynamics. I doubt you even understand the pseudo-argument in your link.
Please explain, in your words, why the fossil record does not provide good evidence for evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by kendemyer, posted 03-07-2004 4:56 PM kendemyer has not replied

AdminAsgara
Administrator (Idle past 2302 days)
Posts: 2073
From: The Universe
Joined: 10-11-2003


Message 138 of 316 (90983)
03-07-2004 5:24 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by kendemyer
03-07-2004 4:56 PM


Re: second law and the earth being a open system
Copied from
Is macroevolution a religion? Should we rename it evolutiontarianism?
A time honored tradition picked up from Ken, copying posts verbatim.
Ken,
I know this is the FFA and is essentially unmoderated, but I am going to step in anyway. If you truly want to make some kind of point on this forum I suggest that you actually attempt to discuss something. Battle of the Links is NOT an effective debating tool.
I am also going to suggest that your opponents in these pseudo-debates ask their simple, easily answered questions one more time and then ignore you until you answer. You have no need of their help in looking foolish for your cause, as even some of your fellow Christians and creationists have told you.
I will not suspend you, as I think you are the perfect poster boy for poor logic and ineffectual debating skills.
Rock On

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by kendemyer, posted 03-07-2004 4:56 PM kendemyer has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by kendemyer, posted 03-07-2004 6:46 PM AdminAsgara has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 139 of 316 (90998)
03-07-2004 6:20 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by kendemyer
03-07-2004 4:56 PM


Re: second law and the earth being a open system
Oops!
You posted a link.
I do not want a link.
I want a simple answer to a simple question.
Your reply should be ONE WORD.
Choose from YES or NO.
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.
Do not preach a sermon to me.
DO NOT CONTINUE TO TRY TO WEASEL OUT OF ANSWERING A SIMPLE QUESTION.
Yes or no?
Pick one.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by kendemyer, posted 03-07-2004 4:56 PM kendemyer has not replied

kendemyer
Inactive Member


Message 140 of 316 (91007)
03-07-2004 6:46 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by AdminAsgara
03-07-2004 5:24 PM


To: ASGARA
TO: ASGARA
As far as my debating skills, I will let others judge my debating skills. I will ask this question though, "Since when has excellent debating skills been necessary to win a creation/evolution debate?" God's creation testifies to Him. The Scriptures rightfully proclaim, "The heavens declare the glory of God..." - Psalms 19:1. All and any eloquence that the evolutionists have at their disposal will not change the fact that Genesis and creationism are true.
The creationist bus in people to see the creation/evolution debates as the Wall Street Journal has stated. We know we very much tend to win the debates. It is true that the evolutionists complain that the creationist pick on the things they propose and they do not have enough time to respond during the debate. That is very true. But this begs the question, "Why can't the evolutionists do the same and pick on creationism?".
After all is said and done, the macroevolution hypothesis truly is a hypothesis in crises.
Sincerely,
Ken
[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 03-07-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by AdminAsgara, posted 03-07-2004 5:24 PM AdminAsgara has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by Chiroptera, posted 03-07-2004 6:51 PM kendemyer has not replied
 Message 142 by JonF, posted 03-07-2004 6:58 PM kendemyer has not replied
 Message 144 by MisterOpus1, posted 03-08-2004 3:42 PM kendemyer has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 141 of 316 (91011)
03-07-2004 6:51 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by kendemyer
03-07-2004 6:46 PM


Re: To: ASGARA
But this begs the question, "Why can't the evolutionists do the same and pick on creationism?".
Because creationism is so empty there is nothing to pick on.
After all is said and done, the macroevolution hypothesis truly is a hypothesis in crises.
Really? With all the evidence that supports it? Again, why is the fossil record not good evidence in favor of evolution?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by kendemyer, posted 03-07-2004 6:46 PM kendemyer has not replied

JonF
Member (Idle past 167 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 142 of 316 (91015)
03-07-2004 6:58 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by kendemyer
03-07-2004 6:46 PM


Re: To: ASGARA
As far as my debating skills, I will let others judge my debating skills
OK. You have none. You know nothing of the subjects of these threads, and you are totally incapable of writing a coherent paragraph or a logical exposition of your beleifs.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by kendemyer, posted 03-07-2004 6:46 PM kendemyer has not replied

Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 143 of 316 (91170)
03-08-2004 3:24 PM


Oh, kendemyer, come out an play!
Kendemyer, please explain your understanding as to why the fossil record is not good evidence for the evolution of species.

MisterOpus1
Inactive Member


Message 144 of 316 (91174)
03-08-2004 3:42 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by kendemyer
03-07-2004 6:46 PM


Re: To: ASGARA
quote:
As far as my debating skills, I will let others judge my debating skills.
OK, you stink.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by kendemyer, posted 03-07-2004 6:46 PM kendemyer has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 145 by captainron, posted 03-09-2004 8:38 AM MisterOpus1 has not replied

captainron
Inactive Member


Message 145 of 316 (91333)
03-09-2004 8:38 AM
Reply to: Message 144 by MisterOpus1
03-08-2004 3:42 PM


Re: To: ASGARA
As far as my debating skills, I will let others judge my debating skills
misteropus1 writes:
OK, you stink.
i concur,as a layman on these subjects even i should be able to understand Ken's case, if it were structured right. I am more confused than when i started reading these threads....

We're not all there, that's why we're here... Anon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by MisterOpus1, posted 03-08-2004 3:42 PM MisterOpus1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by kendemyer, posted 03-10-2004 3:14 PM captainron has not replied

kendemyer
Inactive Member


Message 146 of 316 (91599)
03-10-2004 3:14 PM
Reply to: Message 145 by captainron
03-09-2004 8:38 AM


to: captianron
To: Captainron
I would suggest looking at the main creationist:
Answers in Genesis
The Institute for Creation Research | The Institute for Creation Research
www.creationism.org
http://www.trueorigins.org
I would also recommend these links:
Articles regarding mutations and why they are not a good argument for the macroevolutionary hypothesis:
:
Page not found – Evolution-Facts
http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/10mut13.htm
Page not found – How Does a Cryptocurrency ETF Work?
TO: Chiroptera
I believe there are at least 250,000 species in the fossil record and over 100 million fossils in Natural Museums. I also know that compared to the total amount of fossils and species currently discovered there is a handful of controversial "missing links." In short, I think the fossil record shows creationism.
To: All
I suspect my involvement at Evc Forum will be less in the future. If anyone creationist to provide additional input to the string in order to maintain a dialogue on a more frequent basis in this string it certainly would not be discouraged.
Sincerely,
Ken

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by captainron, posted 03-09-2004 8:38 AM captainron has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by Brian, posted 03-10-2004 4:18 PM kendemyer has replied

Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 147 of 316 (91617)
03-10-2004 4:18 PM
Reply to: Message 146 by kendemyer
03-10-2004 3:14 PM


Welcome back Ken.
Hi Ken,
Just a quick word to say welcome back and I hope you are well. I hope we can have many productive discussions in the future.
Good to see you again.
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by kendemyer, posted 03-10-2004 3:14 PM kendemyer has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by kendemyer, posted 03-10-2004 9:45 PM Brian has not replied

wj
Inactive Member


Message 148 of 316 (91631)
03-10-2004 5:26 PM
Reply to: Message 132 by kendemyer
03-07-2004 2:14 PM


Re: second law and earth being a open system
ken writes:
In regards to the second law of thermodynamics and the earth being an open system:
http://www.revelationwebsite.co.uk/index1/menton/om5.htm
Sincerely,
Ken
Your link says that the earth is an open system. Do you agree? And where in the 2nd law of thermodynamics is there any mention of a requirement for "(an) existing machine that is at least as complex as that which it produces"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by kendemyer, posted 03-07-2004 2:14 PM kendemyer has not replied

kendemyer
Inactive Member


Message 149 of 316 (91671)
03-10-2004 9:45 PM
Reply to: Message 147 by Brian
03-10-2004 4:18 PM


Re: Welcome back Ken.
Dear Brian:
Thank you for the welcome back and I would enjoy some productive conversations as well. I do think, however, that soon my busy season will start as far as work and so my time at EVC Forum will be more limited. Plus tax time and self employment is never fun.
Sincerely,
Ken

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by Brian, posted 03-10-2004 4:18 PM Brian has not replied

kendemyer
Inactive Member


Message 150 of 316 (91673)
03-10-2004 10:04 PM


to: WI
To: WI
I see teleonomy harnessing the sun's energy (see SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS - Does this basic law of nature prevent Evolution? - ChristianAnswers.Net) . I also see the abiogenesis hypothesis as being unworkable and I gave supporting evidence. In short, I see the earth being an open system argument as a way to eliminate the second law of thermodynamics objection to the macroevolutionary hypothesis as being a very forced extrapolation.
Lastly, I do not see our dialogue as leading anywhere at this moment in time. I think at sometimes it is just best to discontinue discourse.
Sincerely,
Ken
[This message has been edited by kendemyer, 03-10-2004]

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by nator, posted 03-10-2004 10:22 PM kendemyer has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024