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:   Forever Faithful: A Question for Creationists
desdamona
Inactive Member


Message 61 of 95 (102318)
04-23-2004 9:51 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Loudmouth
04-23-2004 7:58 PM


Re: Perfect ! If there was such a thing as perfect.
I have not even seen any such models of supposed evidence. I have only seen different interpretations by different scientists,and they don't have models of actual evidence.

Desdamona

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Loudmouth, posted 04-23-2004 7:58 PM Loudmouth has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 62 of 95 (102321)
04-23-2004 10:28 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by desdamona
04-23-2004 9:49 PM


Scientists,do you mean all scientists,because if you do not know this already by now,many if not most scientists today aggressively disagree,and this fact is proven by those who are actual scientists
I can give you the names of 300 scientists working in biology, geology, and paleontology (and a few other fields) who all agree that evolution is an acceptably accurate description of the history of life on Earth. And those 300 are just the ones named "Steve."
If you tried you could maybe find 20-30 biologists who are creationists, of any name.
Like baseball fans, the details are often a matter of dispute. But while any two baseball fans may not agree on which team had the best year, they certainly agree that baseball exists. Evolution is the same way. The details are discussed but no serious scientist questions the general effecacy of the model - anyone who claims otherwise does so not via the scientific method but by substituting rationality with dogma.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by desdamona, posted 04-23-2004 9:49 PM desdamona has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by desdamona, posted 04-23-2004 10:37 PM crashfrog has replied

  
desdamona
Inactive Member


Message 63 of 95 (102324)
04-23-2004 10:37 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by crashfrog
04-23-2004 10:28 PM


Hello'
I'm sure there are many more than 300 scientists that will disagree with evolution and thats not even the christian ones. Whatever puts you to sleep at night dude!

Desdamona

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by crashfrog, posted 04-23-2004 10:28 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by crashfrog, posted 04-23-2004 10:41 PM desdamona has replied
 Message 65 by Asgara, posted 04-23-2004 10:45 PM desdamona has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 64 of 95 (102325)
04-23-2004 10:41 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by desdamona
04-23-2004 10:37 PM


I'm sure there are many more than 300 scientists that will disagree with evolution
Oh? You have names?
I imagine that if you scroll through the membership of AiG or the ICR, you'll see a lot of theologians, a lot of people with education degrees, a lot of engineers, a lot of computer programmers, and a whole lot of people with degrees they made themselves at a Kinko's.
What you won't find a lot of are actual scientists with advanced degrees in fields relevant to evolution, like biology, geology, and paleontology.
The number one employer of geologists is the oil industry. Why don't you come back and tell me how many creationist geologists they currently employ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by desdamona, posted 04-23-2004 10:37 PM desdamona has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by desdamona, posted 04-23-2004 10:53 PM crashfrog has replied
 Message 68 by desdamona, posted 04-23-2004 10:57 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Asgara
Member (Idle past 2302 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 65 of 95 (102327)
04-23-2004 10:45 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by desdamona
04-23-2004 10:37 PM


Re: Hello'
This is off topic, and one reason I wanted to start a new thread concerning evolution and the evidence of...
This is a perfect example Des, of making a claim and now being asked to support it. I KNOW that Crash can support his claim because I have seen the poll already. Now it is your turn to support your claim or to retract it.

Asgara
"Embrace the pain, spank your inner moppet, whatever....but get over it"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by desdamona, posted 04-23-2004 10:37 PM desdamona has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by desdamona, posted 04-23-2004 10:54 PM Asgara has replied

  
desdamona
Inactive Member


Message 66 of 95 (102332)
04-23-2004 10:53 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by crashfrog
04-23-2004 10:41 PM


O.K.
I will get you plenty of names,although I'm sure you'll come up with all kinds of reasons why they cannot be trusted,but you are on.
My husband works for the oil industry.
And there is also a poll? good,can I see it?

Desdamona

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by crashfrog, posted 04-23-2004 10:41 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by crashfrog, posted 04-24-2004 1:39 AM desdamona has replied

  
desdamona
Inactive Member


Message 67 of 95 (102333)
04-23-2004 10:54 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by Asgara
04-23-2004 10:45 PM


Re: Hello'
May I please see this poll? It needs to be modern.

Desdamona

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Asgara, posted 04-23-2004 10:45 PM Asgara has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Asgara, posted 04-23-2004 11:02 PM desdamona has replied

  
desdamona
Inactive Member


Message 68 of 95 (102334)
04-23-2004 10:57 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by crashfrog
04-23-2004 10:41 PM


Why would they study evolution if...
Why would a scientist need to study evolution if he has already been convinced that it is not valid?
How many scientists have to study evolution and get a degree in it when they have access already to prove to themselves if they find it relevant or not?

Desdamona

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by crashfrog, posted 04-23-2004 10:41 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Asgara
Member (Idle past 2302 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 69 of 95 (102335)
04-23-2004 11:02 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by desdamona
04-23-2004 10:54 PM


Re: Hello'
http://www.ncseweb.org/article.asp?category=18
Remember, these are just those scientists with doctorates who's name is Steve (or Stephanie or Esteban or Etienne...)
The list link is where you will find the names.
Here is another article discussing the list.
Project Steve: Humorous Test of Scientists' Attitudes Towards Intelligent Design

Asgara
"Embrace the pain, spank your inner moppet, whatever....but get over it"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by desdamona, posted 04-23-2004 10:54 PM desdamona has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by desdamona, posted 04-24-2004 10:44 PM Asgara has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 70 of 95 (102346)
04-24-2004 1:39 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by desdamona
04-23-2004 10:53 PM


I will get you plenty of names,although I'm sure you'll come up with all kinds of reasons why they cannot be trusted
I only need one reason - whether or not they're degreed scientists working in relevant fields. You don't go to a doctor to get help with your taxes; evolution is a biological theory so you have to assess it with biological expertise.
My husband works for the oil industry.
As a geologist? Is he employed to find oil deposits?
Working at a gas station doesn't count as being "employed by the oil industry."
And there is also a poll? good,can I see it?
Asgara's got the link. She knows the poll I'm talking about. 300+ scientists in relevant fields support evolution and are named Steve.
Why would a scientist need to study evolution if he has already been convinced that it is not valid?
You misunderstood. I'm not asking for you to give me names of evolutionist creationists (obviously.) But since the theory of evolution is a theory of biology, you have to be a biologist to expertly assess the data and judge the theory, one way or another.
How many scientists have to study evolution and get a degree in it when they have access already to prove to themselves if they find it relevant or not?
Without a degree in biology they don't have the access or the expertise to judge the evidence.
That, and you have to study the things that you reject to know why you reject them. I'll wager dollars to donuts that us evolutionists are more familiar with creationist literature, organizations, and arguments than the creationists here usually are. Creationists on the other hand, not only know nothing about evolution, generally, but they don't know anything about creationism, either.
Oh, and try not to reply to messages more than once... if you need to add something, use the "edit" button on your original post. Multiple replies is a headache for the person you're talking to.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by desdamona, posted 04-23-2004 10:53 PM desdamona has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by desdamona, posted 04-24-2004 10:53 PM crashfrog has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 71 of 95 (102469)
04-24-2004 7:43 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by desdamona
04-21-2004 5:20 PM


Re: evidence?
Your free association approach to discussion is entertaining, but it causes you to drift off topic. Funkman originally said in Message 6:
funkman writes:
I believe God's evidence (the Bible) is infallible,...
The response I made was that the Bible was written by very fallible men.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by desdamona, posted 04-21-2004 5:20 PM desdamona has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by desdamona, posted 04-24-2004 10:46 PM Percy has replied

  
desdamona
Inactive Member


Message 72 of 95 (102496)
04-24-2004 10:44 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Asgara
04-23-2004 11:02 PM


Re: Hello'
Have you noticed that these web sites are pro-evolution and not nuetral?
here are a few better sites: GenNet.org
and scienceagainstevolution.org
and ex-atheist.com
The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is clearly against evolution.
I cannot see how anyone can honestly say other wise?

Desdamona

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Asgara, posted 04-23-2004 11:02 PM Asgara has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Asgara, posted 04-24-2004 10:46 PM desdamona has not replied
 Message 75 by crashfrog, posted 04-24-2004 10:53 PM desdamona has not replied

  
desdamona
Inactive Member


Message 73 of 95 (102498)
04-24-2004 10:46 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by Percy
04-24-2004 7:43 PM


Re: evidence?
yes,sinners who had to be very cautious. They were not the pagans.

Desdamona

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Percy, posted 04-24-2004 7:43 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Percy, posted 04-25-2004 12:34 AM desdamona has not replied
 Message 83 by jar, posted 04-25-2004 3:59 PM desdamona has not replied

  
Asgara
Member (Idle past 2302 days)
Posts: 1783
From: Wisconsin, USA
Joined: 05-10-2003


Message 74 of 95 (102499)
04-24-2004 10:46 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by desdamona
04-24-2004 10:44 PM


Re: Hello'
First I think you should explain the 2nd law in your own words, and then tell us why evolution violates it.

Asgara
"Embrace the pain, spank your inner moppet, whatever....but get over it"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by desdamona, posted 04-24-2004 10:44 PM desdamona has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 75 of 95 (102501)
04-24-2004 10:53 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by desdamona
04-24-2004 10:44 PM


The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is clearly against evolution.
I cannot see how anyone can honestly say other wise?
Orderly crystals form from mixed-up, disorderly liquids, spontaneously. It happens every winter, for instance. (Oh, wait. Not where you live. )
Ponder for a moment how that might be and you'll see that evolution doesn't contradict the second law.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by desdamona, posted 04-24-2004 10:44 PM desdamona has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024