Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,839 Year: 4,096/9,624 Month: 967/974 Week: 294/286 Day: 15/40 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   human tails and the midriff - hiccups, what are the creatonist theories about them?
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9197
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 12 of 79 (518891)
08-09-2009 9:27 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by wirkkalaj
08-09-2009 3:40 AM


Re: The Fall and other myths
He brought up God as being a poor designer. I simply countered with a reason why I believe things are the way they are. I agree that it's a totally religious belief, but he brought it up first.
Well he basically said that there is no designer. You are asserting there is a creator and some event known as "The Fall". If you want to bring that up how about a defense of that position. Or do you not have a defense for your assertions?

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by wirkkalaj, posted 08-09-2009 3:40 AM wirkkalaj has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9197
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 63 of 79 (520716)
08-23-2009 2:05 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Dr Adequate
08-23-2009 7:02 AM


Re: Honesty
quote:
My advisor, Dr. Gilbert Woodside, was chairman of the Department of Zoology at the University of Massachusetts and was an evolutionist with an international reputation in embryology. He apparently did not appreciate a scientific alternative to evolution, but he declared to me very clearly that evolution was not applicable in the field of embryology. It was obvious to him that evolution actually had hurt embryological disciplines, because many fine scientists had wasted their time trying to fit data from their studies into some illusionary evolutionary scheme.
Also, it needs to be pointed out this supposed incident happened of 50 years ago.
One more point. Why does a supposed comment by an embryologist have any real relevance? Here is one guy that MAY have had some reservations about how embryology may be affected by a current scientific paradigm of the time? We have no evidence other than an anecdote.
Now this Frair dude is an interesting guy.
Dr Frair was the president of the Creation Research Society from 1986 to 1993, and remained on the board until 2004. He has been an active research creation scientist for several decades, publishing numerous papers on biological science. Frair is perhaps principally responsible for the development of the creation science field of baraminology, which is the study and classification of the created kinds. His papers on creationist taxonomy span 25 years with the first being published in 1967. His 2000 paper title BaraminologyClassification of Created Organisms was instrumental in defining baramin terminology that is used widely today in creationist literature.
Along with Percival Davis, he co-authored the book A Case for Creation, and was one of 50 creation scientists to contribute a chapter to the book In Six Days.
Source
Hmm, wonder where his papers have been published? Oooh gee looks like Creation Research Society Quarterly and Journal of Creation.
Don't they even realize that it isn't science if it presupposes a biblical creation? Real sharp scientists there.
His specialty is Baraminology
Baraminology is the study of the ancestry of life on Earth (biosystematics), which draws from the presupposition that God created many kinds of organisms as described in the Biblical book of Genesis.
Look at the definition. Presupposition. Kind of throws science right out the window, doesn't it.
Dr. Frairs personal statement.
quote:
In our scientific studies we learn a lot about nature, which is God’s creation. Also, God reveals himself in history and our consciences, but most importantly in His inspired Word, the Bible. For a full and fruitful life, no matter what our occupation is, I believe we must live in accord with this book.
quote:
Also, as a Christian, I accept the historicity of the Bible, this being supported by much external empirical evidence, and I have found no reasons from science to reject the Bible...But it has been my custom for more than 40 years, a custom which is consistent with that of conservative Christian biblical scholars, to take an inductive-historical approach to the Bible. This means that to construct our theology we start with accepting the Bible as literally and historically true, and we compare one passage with others to obtain a consensus on their meanings.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-23-2009 7:02 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by slevesque, posted 08-27-2009 3:00 PM Theodoric has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9197
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 64 of 79 (520717)
08-23-2009 2:08 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by slevesque
08-23-2009 5:36 AM


Re: Honesty
By the way, you should probably know the names of your sources.
It is Frair not Fair.
Kind of important to know the guys name.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by slevesque, posted 08-23-2009 5:36 AM slevesque has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9197
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 65 of 79 (520719)
08-23-2009 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by slevesque
08-23-2009 7:39 AM


Re: Honesty
Here is an evolutionists saying that it is OK to lie if it gets them to believe in evolution. How disgusting is that ?
Where is he saying anything about lying?

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by slevesque, posted 08-23-2009 7:39 AM slevesque has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9197
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 66 of 79 (520720)
08-23-2009 2:21 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Dr Adequate
08-23-2009 8:38 AM


Re: Honesty
Let's hear Dr Woodside declare this himself, and say why.
Gee he has been dead since 1992. How convenient to have an anecdote from someone that cannot confirm or deny the story or the context.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-23-2009 8:38 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9197
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 74 of 79 (521559)
08-27-2009 10:05 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by slevesque
08-27-2009 3:00 PM


Re: Honesty
I would suggest that you and Modulous sort this out as what you would want creationist to do: continue to use the word 'kind' without defining it or studying exactly what they mean when they use the word kind. You can't really have it both ways.
Why do I and and Mod have to sort anything out? Anti-creationists are not some sort of monolithic block that think and act like one mind. Let Mod have his ideas and I will have mine. Quit evading.
Are you suggesting that presuppositions are not an integral part of how science works ?
Science does not have a supposition in the supernatural. That would make it 'not science'.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by slevesque, posted 08-27-2009 3:00 PM slevesque 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