Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8915 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-19-2019 1:25 PM
31 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Post Volume:
Total: 857,047 Year: 12,083/19,786 Month: 1,864/2,641 Week: 373/708 Day: 67/81 Hour: 10/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12
3
Author Topic:   A Review of Creationist Web Sites
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5396
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 31 of 40 (37871)
04-24-2003 1:59 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by John
04-24-2003 12:43 PM


Re: Legitimate creation arguments...
Think tetrahedra. They have four corners.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by John, posted 04-24-2003 12:43 PM John has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by John, posted 04-24-2003 2:32 PM Coragyps has not yet responded
 Message 33 by crashfrog, posted 04-24-2003 2:37 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

    
John
Inactive Member


Message 32 of 40 (37878)
04-24-2003 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Coragyps
04-24-2003 1:59 PM


Re: Legitimate creation arguments...
I believe you've hit upon something there!!!

------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Coragyps, posted 04-24-2003 1:59 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 33 of 40 (37879)
04-24-2003 2:37 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Coragyps
04-24-2003 1:59 PM


Re: Legitimate creation arguments...
Oh, yeah! Like four-sided dice from Dungeons and Dragons!

...er, did I just totally geek out, there? Sorry.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Coragyps, posted 04-24-2003 1:59 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by John, posted 04-24-2003 2:38 PM crashfrog has not yet responded

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 40 (37881)
04-24-2003 2:38 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by crashfrog
04-24-2003 2:37 PM


Re: Legitimate creation arguments...
Maybe that is why the fundie's protested that game so much?

------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com


This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by crashfrog, posted 04-24-2003 2:37 PM crashfrog has not yet responded

  
Cold Foreign Object 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1243 days)
Posts: 3417
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 35 of 40 (71423)
12-06-2003 11:48 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by NosyNed
04-16-2003 11:51 AM


Re: Creationists as Debaters
Unfotunately you are correct in saying that the typical creationist lacks even a respectable amount of knowledge in the opposing position.

Dr.Gene Scott {Ph.D. Stanford University} says that this is also true the other way around, that most scientists and their schools have little or no knowledge about the Bible. This creates a lot of confusion especially when one assumes that it is not even necessary to understand the others claims and evidence.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by NosyNed, posted 04-16-2003 11:51 AM NosyNed has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Rrhain, posted 12-07-2003 12:16 AM Cold Foreign Object has not yet responded
 Message 39 by lpetrich, posted 12-17-2003 5:41 AM Cold Foreign Object has not yet responded

    
Rrhain
Member (Idle past 68 days)
Posts: 6349
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 36 of 40 (71426)
12-07-2003 12:16 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by Cold Foreign Object
12-06-2003 11:48 PM


Re: Creationists as Debaters
WILLOWTREE writes:

quote:
Dr.Gene Scott {Ph.D. Stanford University} says that this is also true the other way around, that most scientists and their schools have little or no knowledge about the Bible.

Since scientists don't presume to teach anything about the Bible, this would hardly seem to be a problem, now would it?

When geophysicists look to study the processes of the earth, for example, they look to the earth and let the earth speak for itself without regard to what anybody else thinks the earth ought to say. They don't seek to contradict anything the Bible says. Instead, they seek not to contradict anything the earth says.

If the Bible contradicts the earth, that isn't the geophysicists' fault. What is the Bible trying to do dictating science?

------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 12-06-2003 11:48 PM Cold Foreign Object has not yet responded

    
Drahzar
Inactive Member


Message 37 of 40 (71463)
12-07-2003 3:02 PM


quote:
"traveled to the four corners of the earth"

I'm guessing they didn't mean literal four corners, as a circle (or sphere) doesn't have corners. This seems to be an argument for a spherical earth, but it makes a lot more sense if he is talking about a circle. At least with a circle you could evenly space out the four corners. With a sphere, you'd need at least six.


Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by AdminNosy, posted 12-07-2003 5:32 PM Drahzar has not yet responded

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 38 of 40 (71477)
12-07-2003 5:32 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Drahzar
12-07-2003 3:02 PM


off topic
This comment is not on the topic of the thread. Please be more careful in picking a place to post or create your own thread.

It happens that this one has been pretty much discussed to death (though I would admit you 6 corners is something new). Use the search function under Forums Nav at the top of the page to find posts that might re relevant.

[This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 12-07-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Drahzar, posted 12-07-2003 3:02 PM Drahzar has not yet responded

  
lpetrich
Inactive Member


Message 39 of 40 (73675)
12-17-2003 5:41 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by Cold Foreign Object
12-06-2003 11:48 PM


Re: Creationists as Debaters
WILLOWTREE:
Unfotunately you are correct in saying that the typical creationist lacks even a respectable amount of knowledge in the opposing position.

Thank you for conceding that.

Dr.Gene Scott {Ph.D. Stanford University} says that this is also true the other way around, that most scientists and their schools have little or no knowledge about the Bible.

What makes him so sure of that? And what counts as "legitimate" Bible knowledge?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 12-06-2003 11:48 PM Cold Foreign Object has not yet responded

  
lpetrich
Inactive Member


Message 40 of 40 (73729)
12-17-2003 10:04 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by booboocruise
04-24-2003 4:49 AM


Re: Legitimate creation arguments...
Booboocruise, I hope that you will realize how awful your whining seems to others.

Evolutionists, particularly the ones in this forum, are among the most close-minded, biased people I've ever heard of.

You're telling me.

First off, there is no proof against the Bible,

Says who?

so you have no business ridiculing or otherwise tampering with the legitimacy of actual Bible-believers.

Cry me a river.

Also, Kent Hovind IS a doctor.

Who "earned" his degree at a diploma mill.

All the bogus riff-raff about Kent Hovind's degree is just a back-and-forth rumor between the evolutionists.

Just painful reality. And if you think that Karen Bartelt had given Mr. Hovind a hatchet job, then I challenge you to publish his thesis -- OCR it and put it in PDF, so that the rest of us can see it and judge it for ourselves.

I KNOW you will disagree, but I have seen Patriot's policies, I have SEEN WITH MY OWN EYES Dr. Hovind's PhD diploma,

But is that "diploma" worth anything?

I have talked with Dr. Hovind personally,

Congratulations.

and I have even read the 'crap' that says Patriot University is a 'degree mill.' Whether it is a degree mill or not, (you'd have to be more specific) is not your business,

When he brags about his credentials, it is.

and you need to understand that all the anti-Hovind personnal comments are based off of a photograph of a house in Colorado, sayind "that's Patriot University."

There are numerous negative things to say about him.

I have read up on Patriot University (it is not a secular college but that has nothing to do with the matter) and I have seen course descriptions of their degrees in education.

But how much work does that "university" really require?

Don't you remember ANYTHING from high school?

So what?

Dr. Hovind has the PERSONALITY of a high-school teacher if you ever get the chance to talk with him (if you ever have the integrity or courage to call him). I'd never mistake a high-school teacher's personality for any other type of scientist!

But that's what he poses as -- some sort of super scientist.

Even if Dr. Hovind WASN'T a doctor that wouldnt mean he doesn't have the righ to run CSE (which is NOT a government-controlled corporation).

CSE???

Also, any TRULY open-minded, educated person who is not arrogant or ignorant will admit that Dr. Hovind's degrees are legitimate.

For what reason?

Also, if you are looking for what YOU would call a "professional" creation scientist, get Dr. Robert Gentry's book "Creation's Tiny Mystery." Or get Dr. John Morris' book "Young Earth." Of get Dr. Comninellis' book "Creative Defense: Evidence AGAINST Evolution."

But if these gentlemen have done more worthy work than Mr. Hovind, then why are you weeping so much for Mr. Hovind?

You always seem to have anti-creationist crap posted on the web, but I've never seen any evolutionists stand up to a publicised book by a true creation scientist--read through those three books, check their sources, AND ONLY THEN tell me that you can stand up to so-called "dumb" creation scientists!!!

And you have read at least as many mainstream-science books?

Booboo, (By now the furious 'booboo' because of your arrogant personal attacks against creationists) FOLLOW YOUR OWN ADVICE--most evolutionists are just full of personnal attacks and accusations against creationists, AND THEN THEY demand THE CREATIONISTS to be 'professional!!!

What "personal attacks" and "accusations"?

Kent Hovind is the source of a lot of evolutionists' anger and prejudice, but when I rebuked your anti-Hovind crap you IGNORED IT in your next comment.

Some more weeping for Mr. Hovind. How is he the recipient of "anger" and "prejudice"?

Why CANT you prove the earth is billions of years old?

What would you consider acceptable proof? Traveling back in time in a time machine? If you are to do that, be sure to take along an oxygen tank for much of the Earth's history.

Why CANT YOU prove Jesus was lying?

We don't have to. He could have been honestly mistaken, or one of his followers had put words in his mouth, the way that Plato had done with Socrates.

Why CANT you prove that stars can form?

Star formation is now reasonably well-understood. Some interstellar gas cloud collapses because of its gravity. And though it gets hotter, this heat makes it glow more, making it lose thermal energy. This keeps the collapse going until it gets close to its final size, when it gets much more difficult for it to radiate away its heat energy.

Why CANT you prove Hovind isn't a real doctor?

Because his degree is from a known diploma mill.

Why CANT you prove we evolved, or are still evolving--the variations in modern species might just be the result of radiation from the sun following Noah's Flood (afterall, a canopy of water around the earth has evidence supporting it, AND that would have blocked out solar radiation).

That canopy would have crushed the atmosphere beneath it. And you are conceding that evolution happens.

Also, when you said that there is evidence against the Bible, I HAVE NEVER HEARD A BIGGER LIE!

A lie? Are you capable of conceiving of honest mistakes?

There is lots of evidence of Biblical errancy. Its early "history" is about as fictional as Greek mythology, and entangling fact from myth in the Gospels is a very difficult task.

The Bible is what guided many modern discoveries and advancement in Science!

Like describing evolution long before Darwin? And how all life is descended from a long-ago microscopic ancestor?

In the book of Job (1400 B.C.) God asks Job about the 'springs of the sea.' Did you know that oceanic springs were not even discovered until 1977?

However, the Bible talks about sea monsters, including a sea monster that it is possible to live inside of for three days.

The book of Isaiah (700 B.C.) mentions God 'stretching out the heavens.' SO, the fact that we document the universe expanding could be proof for the Bible JUST AS easily as it could be proof for the Big Bang.

More like picturing the sky as some sort of tent.

The Book of Revelation (70 AD) mentions God sitting upon the 'circle of the earth.'

That's Isaiah, and it refers to a disk instead of a sphere. The Book of Revelation states that the Earth has 4 corners, with an angel on each one.

Did you know that most non-Christian and non-Jewish scientists in those days thought the world was flat, when the Bible knew it was round all along?

Demonstrably false. Greek scientists had known of the roundness of the Earth since Aristotle. However, the cosmology of 1 Enoch is flat-earthian, something consistent with the Bible itself. Consider how Jesus Christ was allegedly able to see "all the kingdoms of the world" from some high mountain.

Where is your evidence against the Bible?

The Bible Unearthed, Who Wrote the Bible?, etc.

Next, I'm not going to open up a creationist geology 101 course for you, but read Gentry's book: "Creation's Tiny Mystery"
His book is thorough and sound.

How so? Please tell us how that is supposed to be the case.

Where is the evidence against the Bible?

See above.

I have read BOTH sides of almost EVERY SINGLE argument about the origin of the earth--his book is more sound than you know. He has done up-to-date and thorough research on radiopalonium halos.

I'm not sure what can possibly justify that kind of hero-worship.

Where is the evidence against the Bible?
By the way, don't bother telling me about the 'contradictions' in the Bible--I can take apart that crap from the atheist websites in a few minutes, they are really ignorant, and they only pay attention to what jumps out in front of them and not reading the WHOLE Bible.

Except that advocates of Biblical errancy have read it. In fact, over at Internet Infidels, a common way to become unconvinced of its alleged absolute truth was to read it. Yes, read it.

For my part, I find Jesus Christ's cursing of a certain fig tree an absolutely appalling display of immaturity -- it's like he was a 2-year-old boy. And the Book of Revelation -- what drugs was its author taking?

So how would a round object have FOUR corners? Simple: North, South, East, and West.

Directions, not corners.

Don't try to analize that for mistakes, I have had endless Biblical discussion on these topics with a number of Christian doctors, Creationist scientists, Pastors, etc.

Would they ever be willing to permit themselves to conclude that the Bible has any errors?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by booboocruise, posted 04-24-2003 4:49 AM booboocruise has not yet responded

  
Prev12
3
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019