Sad what creationism can do to a mind, part 2

--------------------------------------------------------------------
SLPx writes:
No, they are saying "The creationist has already had his butt kicked, so why keep going over this same stuff"...
Yes, I realize that. One of the reasons I registered was to counter the propagandistic nonsense spewed by creationists. Especially those that present themselves as having some sort of expertise to make their arguyments look more imnpressive than they are."
--------------------------------------------------------------------Sonnikke:
this is LOL stuff...WHO is spreading propagandistic nonsense? I tell you, the evolutionist has MUCH greater faith than the creationist.
To believe that everything we see and feel happened by chance without a designer...it goes contrary to all else that we know. No building ever builds itself; no organization runs smoothly without managament& planning (design)...there's design in virtually everything, why is it so hard for the evolutionist to attribute design to something so complex as life? It's all about faith in either THE God or the evo-god...

quote:

---

Originally posted by robinrohan:

​

What gives you the idea that nature runs smoothly? It seems pretty chaotic to me. One example: birth defects. Babies born without arms or legs or whatever. Does that sound like a smoothly run organization? Whoever's running it should be fired.

---

Firstly, it's not the fault of the CEO of a multinational corporation that the junior draftsman in the overseas electrical CAD department made a typing error which resulted in a deficiency in the original design.2nd'ly, what you described sounds like the "glorious" product of your evo-god, random mutation NOT providing new information or beneficial information but rather destroying and making defects...lets fire the evo-god!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mammuthus:

M: It is all about people who are blinded by a literal interpretation of some book about some mythological god and people who are not.

---

No, it's about people who can't accept that there is a GOD and thus must do everything conceivable to invent stories (sugar coated and technical-jargon coated) and denounce the opposition in order to attempt acceptance of their quasi-plausible theory, and make themselves feel good that they discovered that contrary to all else, order and life appeared spontaneously by accident.It's ironic that evolutionists so often say to creationists what THEY are guilty of (ie. blinded to the truth)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mammuthus:

Is there a testable hypothesis for the existence of your god/a god/gods?
Is it a falsifiable hypothesis?
Can you make testable predictions based on the hypothesis?
Is there supporting data you can gather?
Can you think of any tests i.e. lab experiments etc. that would support your hypothesis?

​

If you can (you would be the first creationist ever) then there would be some merit into looking into your views as valid..or at least they might be possible to substantiate. If you cannot, you are not dealing with something scientifically valid and the only support you have for your assertions is your own personal belief...and I have no reason to accept it merely because you say so.

---

Once again, the very same thing you are asking me, is what you have failed to do..macroevolution has never been observed, life has never been created by man, the evidence (ie. fossils, etc) points towards creation...your "science" is also faith.Psalms 19:1. ... The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:That's your evidence.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by SLPx:*yawn*If you say so....[/B][/QUOTE]Gee, that was easy...glad you see it my way...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mammuthus:

M: Actually, upon further reflection on this post you made...what about all those people who do accept god AND accept evolution...and even study it professionally?

​

---

Yeah, I know they're out there....it seems like the "fence sitting" thing to do eh?

quote:

---

Originally posted by SLPx:

Yes, your argument was so compelling and filled with supporting documentation that I would be a fool not to adopt your beliefs at once...

---

hardy har har... that's my point...there is so much technical jargon involved in some threads that you just don't have time to read it ...Listen, explain to me (as if I was 6 years old) how life came about, survived to even "evolve", became the immense variety we see around us today, and why there's so much variety from one cell...

quote:

---

Originally posted by gene90:
I'm sorry you don't want to go out of your way to learn enough about evolution to follow us in the threads, but that is like asking us to to explain String Theory with no math.

​

I'd be much more interested to hear you tell us about evolution, to see if you really understand it.

---

If you can't explain it in simple terms, perhaps it's because when you state it in basic language...it sounds too preposterous to be true.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mammuthus:

++++++++++++++++++++

​

So your statement is in effect, that if something cannot be simplified to a level that you understand, it is false and therefore your views on science are correct and should be taken seriously? That is ridiculous. Scientific understanding is not determined by the lowest common denominator. I guess you don't know much about genomic imprinting or prions either so should all scientists studying these phenomenon quit because you don't understand them?

​

And you are still asserting that evolution is false without even providing YOUR own definition.

---

Did I say that science was false if you can't understand it? NO!
There's also a HUGE difference between non-evolution science and evo-science.
Any decent scientist should be able to simplify something so a layman can understand it...it seems when the truth is too hard to swallow, it's easier to hide behind complex calc's and terminology so the avg. person loses interest in the topic and just says "well, I guess it's true...".---Life appears out of nowhere - un-explained by evolutionists.
The first life is a single celled organism living in a hostile environment, un-protected, for who knows how long before it magically divides into two organisms.
What protects it?
What supports it?
What force causes it to change?
How can all life we see, with all the different complexities and information codes, come from that?
When everything around us breaks down and deteriorates, believing the opposite to be true and for unimaginable periods, is certainly a fairytale.
Anyway, the environment magically reverses to accommodate the new life (ie. atmosphere).
Ages pass, simple life miraculously becomes more complex...all of a sudden there are two different species...male female? Who knows, evolution doesn't care, it can explain everything...ages and ages pass, somehow there's food, somehow species reproduce, somehow they change to different species (it's very complex, you know, math and stuff) ...they live they die..yada yada yada...behold! Humans!!And that, little 6 year old Johnny, is how we came about...without any intelligence and guiding force...just accidentally...---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mammuthus:

​

++++++++++++++++++++

​

... I guess you don't know much about genomic imprinting or prions either so should all scientists studying these phenomenon quit because you don't understand them?

​

---

I would imagine you probably don't know much about finite element analysis, yet when you see a building you don't think it just made itself...you recognize that there was a designer behind it, right??Toodles

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl:

And this, little fundamentalist, is a straw man of wondrous stature.

---

It is a rather convenient position to find yourself in when all you have to do to avoid dealing with a fallacy is accuse the opposition of concocting a straw man...you guys are certainly never guilty of making creationists straw men right??

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mammuthus:

I also know that a building does not reproduce and is not subject to heritable mutations so the analogy is inapplicable.

---

Why is every design analogy I submit dismissed by you? How about you give me an everyday analogy that would describe ToE?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mammuthus:

**************

​

Despite your obvious confusion of abiogenesis and evolution (a common creationist problem so don't take offense) is this really the basis of your understanding of evolution or are you joking? You always end with a so it is hard to tell...but there is so much wrong in what you said I would like to know if this is where your knowledge really stands before proceeding.

​

cheers,
M

---

Okay, lets do one step at a time.
Origin of life...where and how did that happen according to you?
(hey, smiling is nice is it not?)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl:
Origin of life is (a) nothing to do with evolution, and (b) currently in the realms of hypothesis. We don't know.

​

Do we erect straw men? Please point them out when we do. I called yours a straw man because it was. It is not a real reflection of what mainstream science says.

---

Origin of life would seem to be the foundation for the whole thing. If you can't get past how life began how can you exclude God and simply believe that natural "accidents" "created" the world and the variety and complexity of life and nature we know?You call mine a straw man because it does sound preposterous, but that is exactly what ToE is..preposterous....too unbelievable for the logical mind (even if you leave God out of the question, I would never believe such a fairy tale)Listen, this question is for all of you:
what is preventing you from accepting God in your life??
Seriously, what holds you back?Smiley

quote:

---

Originally posted by TechnoCore:
In almost all discussions between intelligent people among different subjects, both parts can mostly fully understand and describe the opponents view, and why they believe in it. When we disagree it is often due to a part in the other idea/concept which is thought to undermine it.

​

In your post it is just plain evident you have not understood evolution at all. Your points just miss the target.

​

(A small comparison. Communism for example. Anyone who have understood it can agree that it's a great idea. _In theory_. Everyone living together, sharing everything equally in harmony. No class or economical differences. It would be a kind of utopia. I however, and most people nowadays would argue that humans doesn't seem to fit into this model, since we all are a bit too greedy. And that communism doesn't seem to work very good in a real society. But still I can understand the greatness of the idea. )

​

What is astonishing about creationists is that most of you don't even seem to grasp why evolution is thought of by almost all scientists as a great explanation. Why is that then ? In message after message it becomes evident that most of you haven't taken the time to fully understand it. (Or even just the basics.)
Time after time i am just amazed. Does your intellects go into sleeping-mode every time someone offers you a good explanation for evolution ? This debate sometimes seems like a debate between a person and a brick wall.

​

Maybe you should get into the role of the devils advocate...
Don't you agree it is easier to argue against something that you actually understand ?
Imho most creationists don't even want to understand it.

​

(mind the english, it's not my native languange
//TechnoCore

---

Hello T.,
(I won't hold it against you that you're a swede .. I'm from Denmark myself)Alright mr. Socialist country man.. if you will, present an every day analogy of what evolution is....it shouldn't be too hard, I would think, since you have such a grasp on it.Vi snakkes hved,