Creationist threatens academic science standards group with words of Jesus

by Gopher 129 Replies latest social current

• 

  Valis

  Hey ding dong...you don't see where threatening people with the wrath of your god would seem to be espousing the view that biblical creationism should be taught in the classroom? Surely you don't suggest a good christian would have their own version of creation taught in the same classroom with a bunch of other religious views about how the universe was created? Don't even play semantics and word games with me. You know better than that. BTW, scientists have a big problem with refutations based on faith versus facts...its a scholarly thing you might not be aware of.

  Sincerely,

  District Overbeer
• 

  drwtsn32

  Hooberus:

  Sorry, but I can't stand that AiG site... I was really turned off of it even when I was a dub looking for anti-evolution information. I have looked through it quite a bit in the past, though.
  

  Saying "God created the universe" is an unfalsifiable statement because it cannot be tested by science. Creationists do not make testable predictions that could be contradicted by scientific experimentation. Can you either prove or disprove the existence of God?

  What are some objective evidences for creationism that cannot be explained by evolution? (And something like "science can't explain how life came from non-living matter" is not support for creationism.)
• 

  heathen

  I agree that religion should not be taught in public schools but I also think that the theory of evolution has too many holes in it and they should be evaluated while they attempt to explain the origins of life . I don't know why it's even important to discuss the origin of life . NOone can prove a damn thing , why not just take the evidence that is there and go with it ? Evolution is just a theory which is something that cannot be proven but is accepted as a possible explanation.
• 

  Satanus

  Hey, for you claimed equal timers, why isn't evolution given equal time in churches/kingdom halls? Of course that wouldn't happen, but it shows you don't really believe in equal time, that's why.

  SS
• 

  Valis

  Evolution is just a theory which is something that cannot be proven but is accepted as a possible explanation.

  I don't agree heathen...I think it is a young science in relation to the age of the planet. More fissils are uncovered all the time which add to the geologic record.

  Sincerely,

  District Overbeer
• 

  drwtsn32

  Heathen:

  The mechanisms that drive evolution are not exactly known. That's the aspect of evolution that is considered theoretical. However, evolution is also a fact. Evolution is the change in genetic characteristics of a population over time.

  Evolution has "too many holes"? Can you provide one or two examples?
• 

  heathen

  Drwtsn--- What about the alleged missing link that man supposedly evolved from ape? There is nothing there to prove it as indesputable fact . They believe that dinosaurs had mass extinction but again claim they evolved into birds . They always make huge jumps after looking at fossil evidence that does not show these changes in molecular structure that account for new species of animals . I'm not even going to bother with the reason you already gave .Which really is further evidence of the improbability of evolution .
• 

  drwtsn32

  Heathen:

  What about the alleged missing link that man supposedly evolved from ape?

  We didn't evolve from apes. Rather apes and humans shared a common ancestor in the past.

  There is nothing there to prove it as indesputable fact.

  See "29+ Evidences for Macroevolution" below.

  They believe that dinosaurs had mass extinction but again claim they evolved into birds.

  Whatever caused a mass extinction of dinosaurs did not wipe out everything.

  They always make huge jumps after looking at fossil evidence that does not show these changes in molecular structure that account for new species of animals.

  I disagree. See the FAQ item I pointed out below.

  I'm not even going to bother with the reason you already gave .Which really is further evidence of the improbability of evolution .

  Uh, ok.

  Your comments show a lack of knowledge with regards to evolution. I suggest looking at talkorigins.org if you are open minded about evolution and haven't already concluded that it's false.

  Just take a look at the FAQ section for starters:

  http://talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html

  Here are some that might interest you based on your comments so far:

  If evolution is true, then why are there so many gaps in the fossil record? Shouldn't there be more transitional fossils?

  Due to the rarity of preservation and the likelihood that speciation occurs in small populations during geologically short periods of time, transitions between species are uncommon in the fossil record. Transitions at higher taxonomic levels, however, are abundant. See the Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ, the Fossil Hominids FAQ, 29 Evidences for Macroevolution: Intermediate and Transitional Forms, the Punctuated Equilibria FAQ, and the February 1998 Post of the Month Missing links still missing!?.

  	No one has ever directly observed evolution happening, so how do you know it's true?
  	Evolution has been observed, both directly and indirectly. It is true. See the Five Major Misconceptions about Evolution FAQ: Evolution Has Never Been Observed and 29 Evidences for Macroevolution.
• 

  heathen

  I suppose next you are going to tell me that the common ancestor is once again the world reknowned piltdown man . I get so tired of evolutionists that think they can explain everything away using little or no evidence or even manufacturing fake evidence to support their beliefs . It's all a bunch of mumbo jumbo to me . You really do sound like religionists .
• 

  rem

  Hooberus' position is extremely disengenuous and is part of the "wedge" strategy that creationists have been trying to use for years to get pseudoscience in the classroom.

  Hooberus claims that he want's evidence both pro and con for evolution in the classroom. What he doesn't seem to realize is that this makes just as much sense as teaching evidence pro and con for the heliocentric model. Hooberus really thinks there is a noteworthy amount of evidence against evolution. Unfortunately his arguments really sound like this:

  The heliocentric model is flawed. The evidence is obvious - the sun and the moon move accross the sky, thus the Earth is still and the center of the universe. The school kids really should be informed of this evidence against heliocentrism.

  When we roll our eyes at such non-science Hooberus and other creationists either continue with another doosey or threaten eternal damnation upon us heathens.

  rem