15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense

[Indeependent]

You are a moron; Jews have more Noble Science Prizes than any other group on earth and plenty of them are Orthodox.
Not to mention that Israel takes the latest military equipment from the US and makes it 10x better.
Please tell me none of your physicians are Orthodox Jews.
You must be a real self-hating piece of crap to submit this stupid post.

BTW, Mensa is nothing to brag about when you live in an Orthodox Community.
Most of the Rabbis I know could debate you on any subject and make you look like a fool.
I will presume that you aren't aware that the Talmud contains extremely heavy science/math discussions way ahead of it's time.

You really are out of touch with reality.

You're the Moron and a LIAR
You Have NOT shown a SINGLE SCIENTIST, not to mention the relevant Biologist among your 50 neighbors.
You have NOT shown a significant (if any) Jewish Nobel scientists were Orthodox.
The most famous among smart Jews: [perhaps] Einstein, Bobby Fischer, Oppenheimer, were NOT religious, much less orthodox.
Religion is a JOKE. and Einstein said so about Judaism as well.

Orthodox are Genesis Kweationist clowns.
You won't be learning any Biology or Geology from those Mullahs.
Instead they spend all their time pouring over FICTIONAL scripture.
You're an IDIOT

The Smarter you are, the LESS Likely you are to believe in God.
Serious Scientists, like the Natl Academy of Sciences are 90+% NON-believers.

`

Translation...
You are too much of a coward to look because you are terrified of how your fellow Liberals would shun you.
I know plenty of self-hating Jews like you who I can destroy in a face to face debate within 15 minutes and I've done it many times.

I will be sure to forward your comments to Yeshiva University.

 

[abu afak]

You're the Moron and a LIAR
You Have NOT shown a SINGLE SCIENTIST, not to mention the relevant Biologist among your 50 neighbors.
You have NOT shown a significant (if any) Jewish Nobel scientists were Orthodox.
The most famous among smart Jews: [perhaps] Einstein, Bobby Fischer, Oppenheimer, were NOT religious, much less orthodox.
Religion is a JOKE. and Einstein said so about Judaism as well.

Orthodox are Genesis Kweationist clowns.
You won't be learning any Biology or Geology from those Mullahs.
Instead they spend all their time pouring over FICTIONAL scripture.
You're an IDIOT

The Smarter you are, the LESS Likely you are to believe in God.
Serious Scientists, like the Natl Academy of Sciences are 90+% NON-believers.


Anyone of even average IQ could have at least looked up an Orthodox Jewish Nobel winner (if there were any) in UNDER ONE Minute.
But you are THEE Stupidest religionist I have ever seen Shonda-Brain.

You are DISHONEST FILTH as well, making claim after claim based solely on your ethnicity that you cannot back up even 1c worth you CLOWN.

`
`

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Over 50% of my community is comprised of scientists who scoff at evolution.

You're a shameless little liar. You know not one working scientist in any relevant field who denies evolution. Not one. Lying little weasel.

 

[Indeependent]

Over 50% of my community is comprised of scientists who scoff at evolution.

You're a shameless little liar. You know not one working scientist in any relevant field who denies evolution. Not one. Lying little weasel.

Translation...You only read the sites and watch videos that agree with you.
I'd like you to point me to a YouTube video that explains how millions of species evolved in concert with each other over hundreds of millions of years without dying out.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Translation...You only read the sites and watch videos that agree with you.

An obviously idiotic statement. My views in evolution derive from the evidence, which is why the entire scientific community has come to 9berwhelming consensus on evolution. Which is why one would have to go very far out of their way to find any credible video or argument against it.

So, you lie. You lie like a little weasel. And even if you weren't lying, your silly lie would still have no impact on the truth. So enjoy wasting your credibility and your time.

 

[Indeependent]

Translation...You only read the sites and watch videos that agree with you.

An obviously idiotic statement. My views in evolution derive from the evidence, which is why the entire scientific community has come to 9berwhelming consensus on evolution. Which is why one would have to go very far out of their way to find any credible video or argument against it.

So, you lie. You lie like a little weasel. And even if you weren't lying, your silly lie would still have no impact on the truth. So enjoy wasting your credibility and your time.

So you have PhDs in how many science specialties?
I'm impressed...that you're so full of shit.

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

You don't even realize how stupid you're making yourself look.

I actually spent time reading about this from a neutral point of view and realized that unless someone knows everything, they're full of it.

Now drop the ad hominems and point me to a YouTube video where someone explains what I just asked for.
After all, YouTube has everything.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Regardless, there's logically no sizable scientific community where 50% "scoff at evolution." Not even among this community. You're living in

 

[ding]

THIS thread is why the RELIGION of Atheism is a RELIGION

Atheism is not a religion. Your comment is just another tired slogan used primarily by angry xtians.

Maybe not for the ordinary, average, run of the mill atheists, but for militant atheists, yeah, it is.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

So you have PhDs in how many science specialties?

Irrelevant. And if this mattered to you, you would side with the overwhelming consensus of the global scientific community. So spare me, you whiny fraud.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

 

[Indeependent]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

 

[Indeependent]

15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense
By John Rennie - July 1, 2002
Editor-in-Chief, Scientific American

15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense

Opponents of evolution want to make a place for creationism by tearing down real science, but their arguments don't hold up

www.scientificamerican.com

[.....]

1. Evolution is only a theory. It is not a fact or a scientific law.

Many people learned in Elementary School that a theory falls in the middle of a hierarchy of certainty -- above a mere hypothesis but below a law.
Scientists do NOT use the terms that way, however.
According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), a Scientific theory is "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses." No amount of validation changes a theory into a law, which is a descriptive generalization about nature.
So when scientists talk about the theory of evolution -- or the atomic theory or the theory of relativity, for that matter -- they are NOT expressing reservations about its truth.

In addition to the theory of evolution, meaning the idea of descent with modification, one may also speak of the Fact of evolution."..."

`

.


`.

Except it's not well explained to someone who is well versed in the necessary multitude of disciplines involved in the so-called science of evolution.

I predict an ad hominem of how intelligent you are that is completely void of a well formed argument with which to bolster that claim.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why? I was quoting and specifically addressing only your claims.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Tell that to the evolutionists.

The "evolutionists" taught us that. So your comment is idiotic.

 

[esalla]

Tell that to the evolutionists.

The "evolutionists" taught us that. So your comment is idiotic.

Too bad that you were not still a sea cucumber

 

[Hollie]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

 

[Hollie]

Paleontologists brought to tears, laughter by Creation Museum

For a group of paleontologists, a tour of the Creation Museum seemed like a great tongue-in-cheek way to cap off a serious conference.

phys.org

"It's sort of a monument to scientific illiteracy, isn't it?" said Jerry Lipps, professor of geology, paleontology and evolution at University of California, Berkeley.

 

[Indeependent]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

The counter argument is that the Creator/Sustainer is the obvious master of all knowledge possessed by mankind and has been more than happy to encourage mankind to discover it and use it to benefit mankind.
Mankind, however, habitually uses it for the powerful few.
Jews do not envision a cruel, jealous, limited God.

 

[Indeependent]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

And the fact is that there is no one on earth who has mastered the numerous sciences required to truly understand and explain why a deer became a deer and not a lion or why a bed bug did not want to be a bird.

 

[Hollie]

Explain grass, shrubs, bushes, trees that don't grow fruit, trees that grow fruit, fruits and vegetables, insects of millions of varieties, birds of millions of varieties, animals of all shapes and sizes, humans.
And how they all survived for hundreds of millions of years evolving into a perfect eco-system.

Those haven't "all survived" so not "perfect" and certainly not humans "for hundreds of millions of years"

Tell that to the evolutionists.

Why don't you offer a competing argument? The complimentary sciences of biology, chemistry, paleontology, etc. are not some grand conspiracy theory as religionists want to believe.

How does letting biological adaptations work over billions of years equate to supernatural "design"? It doesn't. It is an anthropomorphism, and it clearly doesn't apply. Any detailed comparison of the adaptations of nature vs. the claims to supernaturalism, a young earth and claims to various gods leaves religionism as a safe place for fear and ignorance.

The counter argument is that the Creator/Sustainer is the obvious master of all knowledge possessed by mankind and has been more than happy to encourage mankind to discover it and use it to benefit mankind.
Mankind, however, habitually uses it for the powerful few.
Jews do not envision a cruel, jealous, limited God.

An argument in favor of supernaturalism is not a counter argument. It's an unrealized supposition.

Until theology or creation science can come up with a plausible means to investigate the method of supernatural creation, some tentative hypothesis, the beginnings of a framework, then what useful role can they have in advancement of knowledge?

I think arguments are cheapened when people negligently toss around claims of ''creators / sustainers'' and that proof is nothing more than the copy and paste of articles that someone found while scouring the internet. I have no reason to accept the claim that some alleged, supernatural ''master of all knowledge'' is extant in the natural, rational world.