A Creation Website For Children

Hey RazdI just wanted to clear the air. You said:“...your task is to defend your arguments here or be treated as a hit and run spammer.”I had never intended on getting into a debate. That is why I posted my link on the LINKS page. I was challenged into a debate and as such the moderators moved my link here. I wasn’t going to except the challenge, but I obviously changed my mind.Hi StagamancerYou said:“Which is, in a sense, true. However, you've just assumed that entropy, scavengers, and the natural elements work to destroy shark teeth before " 'millions of years' can become a reality". But where is your evidence for this? Do you have the deterioration rate for shark teeth, or more importantly fossilized shark teeth since that's what we're actually dealing with?”The teeth that we are dealing with are fossilized teeth, as you pointed out. It is because the are fossilized that they won’t deteriorate, because a fossil is basically rock. However fossilization is a rapid process if you leave an animal out for it to be buried by sediments it would be composed before it becomes a rock. All of our fossils is due to Noah’s flood.In your post you commented on a few things. Please review my resources indicated above. The answers to your questions are in there.You said:“As for giant floods leaving the sharks teeth on mountains, there is absolutely no evidence for this.”Yes there is! There is a smorgasbord of it! View the resources above; enjoy.Wheely

Hi everyone, I had posted his once before, but it didn't take. So I am posting it again and hopuflly it will get posted. I don't know what went wrong.Wheely***Hey RazdI just wanted to clear the air. You said:“your task is to defend your arguments here or be treated as a hit and run spammer.”I had never intended on getting into a debate. That is why I posted my link on the LINKS page. I was challenged into a debate and as such the moderators moved my link here. I wasn’t going to except the challenge, but I obviously changed my mind.Hi StagamancerYou said:“Which is, in a sense, true. However, you've just assumed that entropy, scavengers, and the natural elements work to destroy shark teeth before " 'millions of years' can become a reality". But where is your evidence for this? Do you have the deterioration rate for shark teeth, or more importantly fossilized shark teeth since that's what we're actually dealing with?”The teeth that we are dealing with are fossilized teeth, as you pointed out. It is because the are fossilized that they won’t deteriorate, because a fossil is basically rock. However fossilization is a rapid process if you leave an animal out for it to be buried by sediments it would be composed before it becomes a rock. All of our fossils is due to Noah’s flood.In your short post you commented on a few things. Please review my resources indicated above. The answers to your questions are in there.You said:“As for giant floods leaving the sharks teeth on mountains, there is absolutely no evidence for this.”Yes there is! There is a smorgasbord of it! View the resources above; enjoy.Wheely

This is a confusing statement. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think you meant to say: However fossilization is NOT a rapid process if you leave an animal out for it to be buried by sediments it would be DEcomposed before it becomes a rock. Otherwise your statement makes no sense.Again, I ask you: how do you know this? Bones last a very, very long time even when they're not fossilized. And they obviously last long enough to become fossils because we have them. Which you acknowledged when you said . So if bones can't last long enough to become fossils, yet, as you say, Noah's flood gave us all our fossils, how did that happen?Also, it would be nice if you could actually give some of your arguments instead of telling me to go watch 19 you tube videos. I don't need you to assign me homework. By all means, cite your precious videos, but defend your position in your own words.So what evidence is there for a global flood? Where did all that water come from, and where did it go afterward?

---

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

I guess it might fool children.Why do you suppose that this sort of bullshit doesn't fool scientists, who, unlike children and creationists, are intimately familiar with the facts? People who, for example, know what "entropy" means, and who know that "scavengers" don't eat sharks' teeth? But yes, you might deceive a few children by reciting nonsense about subjects that you've never bothered to study. Are you proud of yourself?

Hi StagamancerYou said:“However fossilization is NOT a rapid process if you leave an animal out for it to be buried by sediments it would be Decomposed before it becomes a rock. Otherwise your statement makes no sense.”Fossilization IS a rapid process. If an animal dies it will decompose before it is ever becomes fossilized. If an animal is left out in the elements, scavengers, the elements and the natural process of entropy will turn the animal into compost before it can be slowly buried into sediment, which Evolution propounds: that over the course of millions of years, animals got slowly buried. You are correct that bones do last a long time and one thing that my friend says in the resources I provide above is that it has been scientifically proven that ”fish’ decompose within no time; that is days. To my recollection he doesn’t say how fast shark bones decompose, but sharks are fishes, so I am making an assumption that they also disintegrate very quickly; perhaps not as fast as say the fish in your fish tank will, but still very quickly. In addition, even though bones do take a fair length of time to disintegrate, I am pretty positive it doesn’t take millions of years, perhaps hundreds, but I highly doubt ”millions’ or even ”hundreds of thousands’. Furthermore in order for a shark to be buried it needs to be on the ground. When a shark dies it floats, just as any other fish. The sharks and every other sea creature that we see in the fossil record was deposited in the rocks and buried.You said:“So if bones can't last long enough to become fossils, yet, as you say, Noah's flood gave us all our fossils, how did that happen?”A flood is not just like a tide on a beach shore. A flood is a powerful event; it is powerful enough to pick up dirt. A world wide flood will pick up a lot of dirt and pour it on top of the animals. Every fossil that have has been buried in the flood.I understand your frustration regarding me directing me to the videos state above. But if you really want your questions answered, I really advise that you watch them and let my friend answer them for you. He is the professional here. This is what he does for a living and he has been studying Geology for an example for more than 20 years. He can give you your answers a lot better than I can. I know the answers, but he is a gifted teacher and he can portray them to you a lot better than I can. In addition, I am writing from Canada and it is currently 2:07 AM. I am a little tired and so I am not thinking straight. If you want your answers please heed my advise; view the videos, that I provided and I am sure many if not all of your questions will be answered.Hi Dr AdequateI never suggested that scavengers eat teeth. I was saying that if an animal was to die, with a combination of scavengers, entropy and the elements the animal will be gone before it can be encased into a layer of sediment and fossilized. In order for that to happen, it has to happen very fast.Also that big paragraph you posted: Most of that consists of ”Academic Institutions’. What exactly the point of writing that? Just because an academy of science says something doesn’t make it true. The fact that the many ”Academy of Sciences’ support and teach ”evolution’ proves that. Perhaps your argument was to suggest that since the majority of the academy of sciences support the ”evolution theory’ as doctrine, that makes it true. Well, science is about the study of the natural world, not supporting the majority’s interpretation. The study of the natural world provides us with the results that support God and the associated biblical claims. (Genesis creation account, Global Flood account, etc)Okay well, now I am serious I am going to sign off and go to sleep. This was fun and thanks for the conversation and for the most part the politeness’.Have a goodnight,WheelyPS. I am sorry for the double post of my previous post. I didn’t realize that it went onto the second page until I submitted the second copy, lol. Sorry!

You are, of course, wrong.I wonder what you think entropy is? Right. The facts make it true --- and scientists look at the facts. Unlike you. Right. And these are the people who, unlike you, spend their lives in the study the natural world, and don't support creationism. Petitio principii much?Compare with the following analogous debate:You: There are no skyscrapers in New York.
Me: Everyone who's ever seen New York agrees that there are skyscrapers there.
You: Just because people who've seen New York say something doesn't make it true. The fact that they say there are skyscrapers in New York proves that.Why don't you just stick your fingers in your ears and have done with it? There's no point in reciting this garbage to me; unlike you, I am familiar with the evidence. Save it for the kids. You might fool some of 'em.You have never studied the natural world, have you? Scientists have. What you have studied is dumb creationist propaganda. This is why everything you think you know about science is absurdly false.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This is nonsensical. If fossilization is so rapid then why is there not enough time for skeletons to fossilize? We have fossils! They exist! Sure, given enough scavengers and bacteria, the soft tissue of any organism can easily be gotten rid of in days, but the don't eat bones. The skeleton usually gets scattered, which is why fossils are rare. No one is saying that fossils are created every time something dies. It requires very specific circumstances. Again, skeletons don't just disintegrate in a matter of days. First of all, your pet fish floats when it dies because there is still oxygen left in its swim bladder, a feature not found in sharks, so there's no guarantee that it would float when dead. Secondly, we were talking about shark teeth, not whole shark skeletons. So even if the shark's skeleton was scattered by scavengers, the teeth would still fall to the bottom of the ocean, were it would be quickly covered in sediment and then slowly fossilized.If Noah's flood brought dirt up and covered everything to make fossils, then why are the types of fossils we find so skewed towards marine life? "most of the fossils we have are of marine organisms, which live on or in the ocean floor, or naturally sink to the floor when they die" (Why Evolution is True by J A Coyne) If Noah's flood did all the fossil making, then why don't land plants and animals have more representation in the fossil record? Hmm, and yet the entire scientific community disagrees with this assertion. No, I want YOUR answers. I want you to be able to defend you argument. If you can't even paraphrase, then how can you even say you believe what you do? I'm not going to wade through hours of video making your case for you. I watched the first 10 minutes of the first video and it was intolerably inaccurate. There were dozens of misrepresentations and lies within that short bit alone.

Wow!So based upon some video you now can dismiss all accumulated human knowledge of physics, chemistry, geology, biology, anthropology, history, and linguistics.Well, it is either that or you don't have the slightest idea of what you are up against, including any humane interpretation of Christianity.Perhaps if you hate and despise all people who have used science to feed the poor and heal the sick you may want to reread the Gospels. My suggestion is to pay particular attention to what Jesus is reported to have said as opposed to the local know-nothing preacher or the get-out-of-hell-free card offered by Paul.Maybe then you would see how Borlaug is a hero and Hovind is a criminal.

---

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis BaconThe more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

Hi Wheely,

quote:

---

You are putting words in my mouth again.

---

Perhaps. Let's take a look. Looks like I'm doing pretty well at it.If you have never heard this argument used, you have no right whatever trying to pass it off as an argument that is used to support evolution. Here on planet Earth, we call this process "lying". Please stop it; Jesus wasn't keen on it. Does your crappy site make clear that you have never heard this argument? No it does not. In fact it implies the opposite.

quote:

---

As for your ”moon made of cheese’ argument, I have never heard Creationists or Evolutionists claim the moon is made of cheese or any other silly argument like that.

---

I have. Does that give me carte blanche to make up any claim I like and insinuate that creationists believe it? Of course not. Your behaviour is dishonest and profoundly un-Christian. You are a bearer of false witness Wheely.

quote:

---

However I did here one evolutionist say that if the waters filled the entire Earth as the scriptures indicate the earth would be touching Pluto. That is as close as I have gotten so ”crack-pot’ answers like that.

---

I am curious to see a source backing up this claim. Nonetheless, even if someone has claimed this, it brings us to another source of dishonesty on your part; your use of the word "evolutionist".In the course of EvC discussions, this term gets used a lot. When used as a short-hand way of describing those on the evolution side of the debate, I have no problem with it. Your use however, I do object to.Your site constantly uses "evolutionist" and, certainly on the pages I linked to, makes no attempt to distinguish between professional scientists and internet debaters. Both are simply labelled "evolutionists". This is dishonest.You attempt to justify your lies by claiming that they are based on claims made on discussion boards by "evolutionists", yet your site does not make clear that you mean anonymous internet debaters. Any child reading your site would think that gasping-for-air is the explanation (for the death pose) favoured by actual scientists.It doesn't matter what some ignorant git said to you on the internet. It doesn't matter what I think and it doesn't natter what you think. What matters is the enormous body of work that has gone toward forming the opinions of the worlds scientists. If you want to represent the claims made by the Theory of Evolution, look to them. Don't be so dishonest as to attempt to pass off the ramblings of insane net-geeks as being representative of the state of the art in evolutionary theory. That is dishonest, i.e. it is a lie.Do you really think that Jesus would want you to lie to our kids?Oh and by the way;Where are the meat-eating dinosaur+clam fossils that you claim are ubiquitous? I'm dying to take a look at them, since I am curious as to what you think it is about these alleged fossils that contradicts the ToE.Or did you pull that one out of your ass as well?Mutate and Survive

---

"The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade

Just officially reinforcing the above statement. Forum rule/guideline 5: Choose your reference links carefully. Give the one or at most a few that most relevant and best support your position.Useful general how to do messages information: The big "Gen Reply" button at the bottom of the page is generally for making general replies, not for replies to specific messages. Getting multiple replies to one of your messages, however, is problematic. It is messy to make individual replies to all those messages, especially when such messages contain redundantly made points. For such a general reply might well be the way to go.TO MEMBERS OF THE EVOLUTION SIDE - If you are going to make a reply, have some good information in your reply. We really don't want to see messages containing little more than such as "You don't know what you're talking about", "Learn some real science", etc., etc., etc.Or something like that.Adminnemooseus

---

Just some quick notes, Wheely, I'll give you more later tonight. Then this is the wrong forum for you. This forum is to debate the issues. Great, it shows a willingness to learn, unlike many people that come here, convinced that falsehoods such as those posted on your website are true in spite of evidence that contradicts it.However, technically, it is still not correct. He compared the fossil tooth to the tooth from a modern shark to show that it was a sharks tooth, however it could have come from one of many different kinds of shark, not necessarily one that the modern shark descended from. Gosh, you said it was your last post. Twice. What gave me the idea that you really meant it was your last post? Sharks continually shed teeth throughout their lives. Thus you can find a lot of teeth and not expect to find a skeleton. Curiously, Nicholas Steno noted that it could not have been from one flood, because that does not explain the multiple layers of fossils.Leonardo da Vinci came to the same conclusion
http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/vinci.htmlThere is also the problem of the kinds of different marine fossils found on mountaintops and deep inside mountains.See Trilobites, Mountains and Marine Deposits - Evidence of a flood? for a discussion of ALL the evidence of marine fossils on and in mountains. Speak like a child, take information without investigating the validity like a child, behave like a child and be treated as one.You are in college: impression confirmed. This also means you do not have an education degree, and thus no basis to teach children.Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : msg=-14

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Sharks don't have bones, Wheely.

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

Two things about your site:1. In the Biology section, you have a document entitled 'Evolution: to much work', that should be 'Evolution: too much work'. If you're going to target children at least have the courtesy to teach the proper use of spelling and grammar.2. The name 'Pac-man', and the level layouts, are the intellectual property of Namco.

Hi Wheely,I was impressed by one of technical aspects of your website, the dynamic menus where you use a package from MacroMedia. Dynamic menus aren't something typically attempted by newbie website developers. If you have some software skills (Perl, HTML, Javascript, CSS) then EvC Forum is always looking for programming talent to help improve the website software. Let me know if you're a fit and have any interest, my email is Admin.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

I was pissin myself watchin the video of the tramp prsenting his idea that Noah took baby dinos on the Ark. He never mentioned a time machine once!