|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: the rocks speak | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
joz Inactive Member |
its amazing the huge reaction i get when people start to feel insecure . my point was that most evos havent heard the creation evidence i have , because they ask me silly questions when they are losing arguements. as for your question, i have not taken these courses because your so much more cleverer than me which means i have no right to have an opinion! lol Insecure? (..........Someone hurry and get the ego surgeon, we have a critical case in post 15, we need an emergency self aggrandizement bypass stat......) Most of us "evo's" have trawled through page after page of the mindless pap at AIG and co. fact is we have probably seen more attempts to justify YEC than you have, strangely we are still "evo's", why? Because the "evidence" that we are told refutes "evolutionism" is usually uterly uncompelling, ad hoc, downright lies or any mixture of the above.... As for silly questions would that be the requests that you (attempt to) back up any assertions that you make, such as the flowers in Australia example above? Hardly a silly question, and as for "losing arguements"..... (....Dammit man we need Dr H.Umility down here straight away, we're losing him, if this man doesn't have his ego deflated to normal levels his head will explode....) As for the rest you have the right to an opinion, the rest of us also have the right to correct you when you bollocks something simple up and point out that maybe, just maybe, if you took a few courses, read a few books, whatever, you might be able to form an educated opinion and not need correcting all the time.... [This message has been edited by joz, 05-13-2003] [This message has been edited by joz, 05-13-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1017 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined: |
I'm another evo who has waded through the mountains of Creationist material and has remained an evo.
Maybe you could present the evidence we haven't seen. That sounds interesting!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
wj Inactive Member |
Mike says
quote: And is the amazing orchid story some of the creation evidence? It doesn't even rate as "the other half" because it was only a small fraction of supposed evidence for creationism. And you failed to provide any of the missing bits of the story. It seems you wish to remain wilfully ignorant of the scientific explanation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fencer Guest |
Well, I'm not an evo anymore because I've looked at the entire body of evidence in its totality and it compelled me to rethink whether evolution is probable. Therefore, I could no longer be an evolutionist since it was the wrong paradigm. Non-matter does not create matter, naturalistically speaking, despite your strange belief it does; likewise, inorganic matter does not magically transform into organic matter, but believe this only if you want to remain consistent with science.
You've seen the same evidence, but you've reached the wrong conclusions. I think the erroneous conclusions are the product of falsely accepting things as evidence for your theory, when in fact it is not evidence at all. I don't really know how to help you in this regard. Many well educated doctors, scientists, and Ph.D's heiling from every major accredited university in the world reject evolution and embrace creation as the most probable scenario of reality. Why is that? Tell me please, but providing what you think is the evidence for your conclusion would be most helpful this time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mike the wiz Member Posts: 4755 From: u.k Joined: |
'As for the rest you have the right to an opinion, the rest of us also have the right to correct you when you bollocks something simple up and point out that maybe, just maybe, if you took a few courses, read a few books, whatever, you might be able to form an educated opinion and not need correcting all the time.... '
you have just proved my point ,by swearing and suggesting i read books e.t.c however i will not lower myself to swearing back at fools. 'why? Because the "evidence" that we are told refutes "evolutionism" is usually uterly uncompelling, ad hoc, downright lies or any mixture of the above....' oh , show me this evidence , however dont expect me to change my mind.cos i have heard it all before , and oh er remind me where i messed up because i dont recall doing this,i simply was asking for some opinions!!!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5224 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
Mike,
I'm with Joz. Where's this evidence? Mark
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mike the wiz Member Posts: 4755 From: u.k Joined: |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9004 From: Canada Joined: |
LOL, you'd better pull the particular examples from that site that you think are any good and place them in the appropriate topics. You get to pick the very best ones rather than us picking the absolutely worst ones. That seems fair.
You wouldn't want us to pick 2 or 3 that have already been knocked off in topics here would you? It would make your choice of references look bad.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mike the wiz Member Posts: 4755 From: u.k Joined: |
'You get to pick the very best ones rather than us picking the absolutely worst ones. That seems fair.'
this just prooves you want to play scoring games
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
mike the wiz, you're long past being a "visitor". It's time you either register or shut up.
If you've registered under another name, but have password problems, please contact Admin (Percy), to get them straightened out. Adminnemooseus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zephyr Member (Idle past 4579 days) Posts: 821 From: FOB Taji, Iraq Joined: |
mike the wiz:
quote:You really should try to paraphrase some of it. Demonstrate understanding, you know? Otherwise the discussion will be more of "we've read all that and it's without merit" and you saying "no it's not" and round and round ad nauseum thereafter. Please, if you want to debate in good faith, do this: cite a specific piece of evidence you find convincing, with sources provided (and not just a web site but a specific document) and when it is challenged, answer in specific factual terms, not just dismissal of the poor faithless atheists' ideas. I read all of the "evidence for creation" on that site. No actual evidence is described in enough detail to indicate understanding on the part of the author(s). I have no formal training in geology and could probably summarize the polonium halo issue in a more factual and organized manner. In fact, for every single one of the issues mentioned, a solid rebuttal has existed, in some cases for decades. I'd like you to pick one issue and state 1)what facts it is based on, and 2)why you find it convincing. Then we can talk about evidence, and whether it supports that claim or not. The fact is that every single one of those claims has been refuted time and time again, and those making them may even know it. They are WRONG. They describe irregularities among mountains of evidence for evolution: irregularities which have been explained. That is all.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zephyr Member (Idle past 4579 days) Posts: 821 From: FOB Taji, Iraq Joined: |
quote:Don't get all emotional now. He was giving you a chance to choose your battles. That's more than fair IMHO.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Well... that's not evolution. Non-matter didn't create matter, but energy and matter are interchangeable. And matter does, BTW, appear to pop into and out of existence all the time. It can be measured. It is called the Casimir effect.
quote: Inorganic matter is different from organic matter in what way exactly? Seems to be the same stuff to me-- atoms, molecules, and bigger molecules.
quote: Many? Would that be 'many' in relation to those that do not accept creationism? Or would that be 'many' as in sort-of a meaningless literary device?
quote: You seem to feel that numbers of believers is an important factor in determining the truth of a claim, though this is fallacious. Numbers has no real bearing on whether the claim is true. But just for fun, why is it that you are getting 93 out of a hundred rejecting creationism?
[qs]This is clearly not the case in Ohio where the vast majority (93%) of science professors said they were not aware of "any scientifically valid evidence or an alternate scientific theory that challenges the fundamental principles of the theory of evolution."
ncseweb.org Not exactly creationism but...
No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.ovpr.uga.edu/rcd/researchreporter/summer99/god.html So... why is that? Now try this. Ask a relevant question. Say, ask a geologist about the flood. Or ask an archeaologist about the exodus. The numbers will fail you. ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
roxrkool Member (Idle past 1017 days) Posts: 1497 From: Nevada Joined: |
To be perfectly honest, I don't need to look at ALL the evidence that exists - that is nowhere near to being possible - for the average Joe, that is. Moreover, I'm not going to lie and say I completely understand the finer points of genetics, cell mutation, abiogenesis, or evolutionary theory. Fact is, I don't need to.
I know enough about the history of the Earth, as seen in the geologic record, to believe without one single doubt that this Earth is at least 4 billion years old (making room for possible future errors). I know enough about the origin of *man* and paleontology to know that evolution makes logical sense AND fits the geologic record. I also know enough about many other sciences to know that they all agree on the fact that the Earth is billions of years old and the universe even older. To me, that is enough to make evolution a fact, as well as an old Earth. As for you and I seeing the "same evidence"... no, I don't think so. If your evidence is based on what Creationist sites have to say and not on reality, then, with all due respect, I believe you are the one who has come to the wrong conclusions. You want evidence? One piece of evidence that convinces me? I don't have it. My evidence consists of the entire geologic record and all that it divulges and infers. Evolutionary theory, paleontology, anthropology,... all that is simply icing on the cake.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Karl Inactive Member |
Adding my voice to the people who most certainly have seen "both sides" of the story.
Except, of course, there aren't two sides. There is one side, science, and a load of sniping in the loosely organised religious umbrella of "Creation Science". Trust me - I've seen the "evidence" of the "other side". I used to be a YEC - for a whole week. I'm so totally ashamed that it took a whole week for me - on an undergrad Biology course, a week to see it for the drivel it was. But such is the power of fundamentalist religion, or, more properly, the power of the assumed authority of its paperbacks. But I thank God that the Christian community I was in, conservative and verging on the fundamentalist that it was, was not largely YEC. If it had have been, and I had had YEC in my mind as a fundamental part of Christianity, I would have abandoned the faith. Hell, I'd probably never have taken it on in the first place! So think on this Mike the Wiz. You want to see people on here come to faith in Christ? You want to see Crashfrog return to the fold? You're doing a damned fine job by associating the Faith with something they (and I) know isn't true. Why not add "Christians believe the moon is made of green cheese" and be done with it?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024