|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Creationism museum opens in Alberta | |||||||||||||||||||||||
simple  Inactive Member |
quote:On the contrary, I have no need to prove what is well known. The reason you have no evidence is because you ignore it, and set up a belief system that ignores it, and a knowledge system that ignores all but the material. Why ignore this? quote:What position? That there is no God??? I thought you just said there was no evidence? Make up your mind. quote: Not this one. You must check it at the door, and admit that there is more dealt with in the museum than your brain can deal with.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Jaderis Member (Idle past 3447 days) Posts: 622 From: NY,NY Joined: |
What position? That there is no God??? I thought you just said there was no evidence? Make up your mind. The position that accepts the evidence for evolution as discovered through human reason. I thought that was the obvious position as we were discussing the museum display and its message.
On the contrary, I have no need to prove what is well known. The reason you have no evidence is because you ignore it, and set up a belief system that ignores it, and a knowledge system that ignores all but the material. Why ignore this? Because there is no evidence for it. I admit that I cannot disprove the existence of God, but neither can you disprove the existence of Krishna or Zeus or Mara or Amun (all pretty well known either now or in their time). Does that make you believe in them or do you pretty much ignore them?
Not this one. You must check it at the door, and admit that there is more dealt with in the museum than your brain can deal with. Yeah, I do have to kind of take it all in in spurts. Laughing so much makes my cheeks hurt.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Vacate Member (Idle past 4622 days) Posts: 565 Joined: |
On the contrary, I have no need to prove what is well known. Does this mean you refuse to present the evidence you promised?
The reason you have no evidence is because you ignore it. Ahh, but when RAZD provided a piece of evidence you chose to ignore it. You also have refused to take part in any other thread and provide evidence to back up your claims.
What position? That there is no God??? I thought you just said there was no evidence? Make up your mind. This is being blatantly dishonest.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
BMG Member (Idle past 230 days) Posts: 357 From: Southwestern U.S. Joined: |
So, unless you had some science here to prove that there was no God, don't mind if some of us check your brain at the door. Hi Keys. I don't believe science or the scientific method is used to measure or support those things which may be defined as "supernatural". It is based and resides in the "natural", which a God or any other supernatural entity is clearly not. In addition, the fact that there is no evidence to prove or support the belief that a God doesn't exist isn't proof that a God does exist. Absense of evidence is not evidence of absense: lack of proof is not proof.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1426 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
So you admit this tree is not really related to the museum. OK. No, read again: it has to do with the age of the earth and the global flood parts of the displays.
I don't want to engage you in your claims on a science forum here, because it allows no freedom, and is biased. It allows the freedom of truth and reality as opposed to the shackles of ignorance, expecially when willfully donned.
The ability of science to detect anything is limited by what it's abilities to detect anything are. You like tautologies? Science increases it's ability to detect reality every year, as the walls of ignorance crumble. It is certainly able to detect that the earth is old, very old, at least 4.55 years old. Ability to detect the age of the earth older than that is limited by the limitations of evidence: this does not mean that what it can detect is not valid.
Actually that is very very easy to do, but not in the science forums here. That would be like playing with a stacked deck, and only half of it at that. Another unfounded bald assertion, sounds like a bluff to me.
It seems you are the one that is demonstrating an inability to do just that. The fact is, I am not going to debate science under your kangaroo court setup here. The fact also is that the exhibit I talked about, you have not addressed. Yet I am the only one of the two of us that has posted a single fact to substantiate their argument. I present evidence and you reject and deny it, so in that aspect it is a kangaroo court, just that you are the kangaroo jumping anywhere but where the evidence leads. The next bit: Dendrochronology - Wikipedia
quote: Dendroclimatology - Wikipedia
quote: From the two trees previously mentioned plus remnant pieces of dead wood surrounding them the chronology of the Bristle Cone Pines in the Sierra Nevada show an overall age of the earth of over 8500 years with no global flood possible in that time as all the sample overlapped periods of time when they were living. These trees also provide climate data in the rings, climate data that ensures the overlapped specimen are correctly alligned. Bottom line: a 6,000 year old earth that experienced a global flood within those 6,000 years is a falsified concept, invalidated by the evidence of one species of tree, one part of gods creation. Thus the claims of the museum are false the displays of age and global flood are lies. And we are again at the point where you either acknowledge the reality of the facts or you reject them in favor of denial, preferring delusions:
It's your choice: reality or delusion. Enjoy. compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click) we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2663 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
Message 125
Maybe address the topic here. I posted an example exhibit from the museum. It was of Jesus risen from the dead. Message 129
Very nice. So, what about the exhibit again? Message 133
If you have something to say about the resurrection exhibit, let us know. Message 136
Like the exhibit picture I included earlier from the museum of the resurrected Christ. That was not limited by science. Messge 141
The exhibits in the museum, including the one at the core of the matter, the resurrection of Jesus, is relevant. Nothing is more relevant. Message 147
while you ignore the exhibit I mentioned. Message 150
The fact also is that the exhibit I talked about, you have not addressed. Let me see if I've got this straight.RAZD: Comment. keys: Oh yeah? I posted a picture of Jesus. jar: Comment. keys: Oh yeah? What about my picture of Jesus? Jaderis: Comment. keys: Oh yeah? You didn't comment on my picture of Jesus. Ad nauseum. OK. I give. keys. I see you've posted a picture of Jesus.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13018 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
Hi Keys,
Though this is a reply to you, much of this is intended for everyone. First, I agree with you that Jar should not engage in name calling, such as his Christian Cult of Ignorance. I see little difference between calling someone's beliefs ignorant and calling the person himself ignorant. Second, I would prefer that no one refer to someone else's position as a lie. Call it unsupported by evidence or unsubstantiated or made up, but do not call it a lie. The intention is to discourage inflammatory language that gets in the way of meaningful dialogue. Third, about this:
keys writes: It's my thread, I set the rules. Nowhere in the Forum Guidelines will you find it stated that the thread's originator defines the rules in his thread, and this is because thread originators have no such privilege. Thread originators propose their topic, and if approved and promoted then discussion takes place under the same set Forum Guidelines that apply to all threads. Fourth, if your position is actually that the Ken Ham museum and the Alberta museum are not actually science museums but Bible museums, and that you think the opening of more Bible museums should be encouraged, then I can move this thread to [forum=-6].
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13018 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
Hi Keys,
I am gradually reading my way through the incredible number of messages posted to this thread last night, and I've decided to respond to each message that deserves administrative comment as I encounter it, rather than respond in a single message when I'm done reading. This is a debate site where the intention is that people makes points, other people rebut them, and then other people rebut the rebuttals, and so forth. The single word sentence, "Nonsense" is not rebuttal. I've already quoted the Forum Guidelines to you once, and here is the relevant guideline again:
Please help the discussion become a substantive exchange of ideas and information.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13018 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
jar writes: Even from a theological perspective Biblical Creationism is terrible theology based on an insignificant and evil little goddlet who is incompetent and and a liar and trickster. This kind of language is more likely to inflame than to prompt measured and thoughtful responses. Please conduct the discussion in a manner conducive to the productive exchange of ideas and information.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13018 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
I've finished reading the thread.
Meaningful discussion is built upon reliable information and evidence. Much of what I've seen from Keys in this thread is a strong reluctance to discuss information and evidence, and he has several times said he doesn't want a science discussion. He seems to want to discuss the presentation of Bible stories in a museum format. Since Keys participates at a time when I am asleep, rather than waiting 24 hours for an exchange of messages I will now transfer this thread to [forum=-6] where there is no requirement to keep discussion scientific or even based upon actual real-world evidence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13018 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
Thread copied to the Creationism museum opens in Alberta thread in the Faith and Belief forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024