|
Author
|
Topic: Science Disproves Evolution
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
Message 25 of 196 (442290)
12-20-2007 5:40 PM
|
Reply to: Message 22 by Buzsaw
12-20-2007 5:05 PM
|
|
Re: On The Other Hand
On the otherhand, if evolutionist science can be shown to be off to the extent that billions become millions, doesn't that implicate the evo scientific methodology as being severely flawed? Of course that only happens on sites where folk lie, but even if it did, even if the current Theory of Evolution were proven to be totally wrong, it adds no weight or validity to either Biblical Creationism or ID. The problem Buz is that No Creation Science supporter has ever been able to present a model that explains anything. They have nothing except lies and misrepresentation that are useful only to keep the supply of money flowing from the Christian Cult of Ignorance and Communion of Bobbleheads. But they are very, very good at that.
Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 22 by Buzsaw, posted 12-20-2007 5:05 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 37 of 196 (442342)
12-20-2007 6:57 PM
|
Reply to: Message 35 by Pahu
12-20-2007 6:53 PM
|
|
Re: Pahu, step up to the plate.
Pahu: molbiogirl did this for us in message 19. Huh? Did you actually read Message 19? Can you show us from Message 19 "what 'facts' Tremaine 'discovered' which 'disprove' evolution?"
Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 35 by Pahu, posted 12-20-2007 6:53 PM | | Pahu has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 57 of 196 (442617)
12-21-2007 9:54 PM
|
Reply to: Message 56 by Buzsaw
12-21-2007 9:49 PM
|
|
Re: On The Other Hand
To summarize my point, scientists and students of science who receive information from one source tend to hold to that source of information and belief exclusively. Scientists and students of science who receive information from alternative sources along with the mainline source tend to be more informed and open to alternative study including archeological discoveries, fulfilled prophecy relative to history etc. These venues of study raise questions relative to varied age hypotheses. Bullshit and totally falsified Buz. I was raised in a Christian Church family and educated in Christian Church Schools. And so far you have NEVER been able to support nonsense like fulfilled prophecy or archaeological discoveries so why do you keep making false assertions and repeating refuted shit?
Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 56 by Buzsaw, posted 12-21-2007 9:49 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 64 of 196 (442683)
12-22-2007 10:14 AM
|
Reply to: Message 59 by Buzsaw
12-21-2007 10:48 PM
|
|
Re: On The Other Hand
I mentioned fulfiled prophecy relative to history because this is one of the corroborating evidences Biblicalists use to argue for an intelligent designer supportive to the Biblical model. Note that along with that I cited archeology. Natural securalistic scientists refuse to acknowledge or to falsify important discoveries and research sites which creationists like Dr Lennart Moller have done such as the Nuweiba crossing site relative to the Biblical model. Except NO ONE including you or Dr. Lennart Mller, has ever presented any evidence to support such an assertion.
I agree but our model includes such physical phenomena as I have cited above. You cited nothing. You made an unsupported assertion above.
As I've argued time and again, the Biblical model implies pre-flood conditions which should render modern dating methodology inaccurate. You have made that assertion Buz, but you have never presented the evidence or model to support those assertions. It is every bit as reasonable to assert that before the wanggledanggle the world was jello. First you need to present the evidence that there was a flood, when it happened and then the evidence of what the pre-flood environment happened to be.
We believe we do have something to offer but the majority has the bully pulpit in education, the media and the mainstream science arena. Yet you NEVER offer anything except unsupported assertion. Why is that Buz? And none of that has ANYTHING to do with the topic, which in case you missed it, is "Science Disproves Evolution".
Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 59 by Buzsaw, posted 12-21-2007 10:48 PM | | Buzsaw has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 67 by Buzsaw, posted 12-22-2007 8:19 PM | | jar has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 68 of 196 (442861)
12-22-2007 8:33 PM
|
Reply to: Message 67 by Buzsaw
12-22-2007 8:19 PM
|
|
Re: On The Other Hand
When your people falsify the evidence which has been presented get back to me. Otherwise bug off. Give me a little help Buz. Please provide links to the messages where evidence that shows "Science Disproves Evolution" is posted. Here is how it stands Buz, you have made a positive assertion that evidence has been presented. Will you actually provide links to those messages?
Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 67 by Buzsaw, posted 12-22-2007 8:19 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 83 of 196 (443279)
12-24-2007 9:32 AM
|
Reply to: Message 82 by Percy
12-24-2007 7:03 AM
|
|
Re: On The Other Hand
EvC Forum exists to examine creationism's claim that creationism is every bit as much legitimate science as evolution, supported by the evidence and deserving of representation in science classrooms. If your hypothesis is supported by revelation then that's great for your religion, but it isn't science. In the science forums your arguments must be based upon real-world evidence. In Buz's defense, I don't think he is just talking about revelation, but instead thinks that there is actual physical evidence for some of his positions. I think his Biblical references would be fine if he also presented the actual evidence for the assertion so it could be examined.
Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 82 by Percy, posted 12-24-2007 7:03 AM | | Percy has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 87 of 196 (443780)
12-26-2007 6:15 PM
|
Reply to: Message 86 by Percy
12-26-2007 6:01 PM
|
|
Re: Moon Recession
The second half of his post is simply a copy and paste from this page
Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 86 by Percy, posted 12-26-2007 6:01 PM | | Percy has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 88 of 196 (443784)
12-26-2007 6:18 PM
|
Reply to: Message 84 by Pahu
12-26-2007 5:51 PM
|
|
Re: Moon Recession
Pahu, you really need to understand that if you find it on one of the Creationist sites, the folk here have already seen it and refuted it. The only way you are going to make an impression here is to come up with something new that you can also support with reason, logic and reality.
Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 84 by Pahu, posted 12-26-2007 5:51 PM | | Pahu has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 100 of 196 (444045)
12-27-2007 11:06 PM
|
Reply to: Message 99 by Jason777
12-27-2007 10:51 PM
|
|
sources and so what?
What is your source that "australopithicenes had opposable toes?" Even if true, how would that prevent them from being bipedal? Sorry but I don't see where you have anything except yet another proof that they were transitional between some earlier primate and humans and our cousins the other apes.
Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 99 by Jason777, posted 12-27-2007 10:51 PM | | Jason777 has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 105 of 196 (444273)
12-28-2007 7:55 PM
|
Reply to: Message 101 by Jason777
12-28-2007 6:19 PM
|
|
I'm sorry but your link does not support your assertion that Australopithecus had opposable toes and it also looks like you don't realize that Australopithecus is a genus and that there were several species of Australopithecus. Not only that but having opposable toes does not preclude being bipedal. But even if it did, as I mentioned before it is yet more proof of a transitional critter, possibly not an ancestor but certainly a close cousin to Homo sapiens.
But the evidence is crystal clear for any scientist,australopithicus,homo habilis,and homo erectus all lived in the same regeion at the same time. Again, so what? How does that in anyway disprove evolution?
Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 101 by Jason777, posted 12-28-2007 6:19 PM | | Jason777 has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 109 of 196 (444512)
12-29-2007 6:13 PM
|
Reply to: Message 107 by Jason777
12-29-2007 4:25 PM
|
|
Still waiting for responses to Message 100 and Message 105. Also, why would being "knuncle walking apes" preclude them being ancestors of modern humans? Why would having opposable toes preclude being bipedal. Why wouldn't a transitional show signs of both earlier and later lifeforms?
Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 107 by Jason777, posted 12-29-2007 4:25 PM | | Jason777 has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 120 of 196 (444670)
12-30-2007 9:39 AM
|
Reply to: Message 117 by Jason777
12-30-2007 3:34 AM
|
|
some misconceptions
First, all your sources seem to be very old. Honestly, there has been much done since 1983, including a series of computer simulations that were then matched against the control, the actual footprints, and a high level of correspondence found. Further, you have not presented any evidence that Australopithecus had an opposable toe or that having an opposable toe would limit being bipedal.
So if evolution is true it went in the opposite direction. There is no direction to evolution.
The point is it proves the laetoli footprints were made by Erectus and not any species of Australopithicus. Uh, no it does not prove that. But even if it did, how would that disprove evolution? Just for your information, many folk think the Laetoli footprints were more likely Homo habilis anyway. But so far you have still offered no support that "Science Disproves Evolution". Edited by jar, : appalin spallin
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 117 by Jason777, posted 12-30-2007 3:34 AM | | Jason777 has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 124 of 196 (444681)
12-30-2007 11:18 AM
|
Reply to: Message 122 by Jason777
12-30-2007 10:54 AM
|
|
Re: You Can't Debate What You Don't Understand
Homo Habilis has been proven to not even belong in the family Homo. Suggested, not proven. But what difference would that make? How would that disprove evolution?
And using a computer reconstruction as evidence is another deceptive tactic by evolutionist.A computer can only tell you what you program into it.That is not a seperate piece of evidence that happens to agree with evolution.The program was based on the assumption that evolution did occur to start with. Sorry but that is absolute nonsense. The computer program had nothing to do with whether or not evolution happened, it was a simulation of gait based on morphological features of anatomy, bone and muscle structure. The goal was to see what normal strides would look like for someone walking who was the same height, had the same bone structure and musculature as the sample. The results were then compared to the control, the actual footprints, and a very high degree of correspondence was found. Edited by jar, : hit wrong key. added part on computer simulation.
Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 122 by Jason777, posted 12-30-2007 10:54 AM | | Jason777 has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 128 of 196 (444759)
12-30-2007 7:03 PM
|
Reply to: Message 127 by Jason777
12-30-2007 6:53 PM
|
|
Re: You Can't Debate What You Don't Understand
Sorry but nothing you have presented has any relationship to the topic, which in case you missed it is "Science Disproves Evolution". Australopithecus may or may not be an ancestor of Homo but it is not a major issue. No one but Creationists seem to be making that claim. But even if everything you said was true all it would show is that the various Australopithecus species are transitional.
Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 127 by Jason777, posted 12-30-2007 6:53 PM | | Jason777 has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 145 of 196 (445338)
01-01-2008 8:14 PM
|
Reply to: Message 139 by Pahu
01-01-2008 4:17 PM
|
|
Re: Moon Dust and Debris
The fact remains that scientists were concerned because they thought the universe was billions of years old, which would result in much more dust, given the measurements recording the annual dust entering the earth’s atmosphere. Simply not true. The scientists were concerned because they did not know how thick the surface layer of the moon would be or the consistency of that surface. The age issue simply never entered the discussion because everyone knew the universe and moon were and ARE billions of years old. None of the scientists involved had any doubts about the age of the moon, just like none of the current NASA folk have any doubt the universe is billions of years old. Come on, it is only the snakeoil salesmen selling nonsense to ignorant gullible Christians that that think the universe is young. Well, actually the snakeoil salesmen know they are lying but then they also know gullible members of the Christian Cult of Ignorance and Communion of Bobbleheads will believe all the lies and keep sending in the money.
Immigration has been a problem Since 1607!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 139 by Pahu, posted 01-01-2008 4:17 PM | | Pahu has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2