Creationists suffer another legal defeat

[konradv]

The Light sez:

There is evidence of man living with dinasaurs, so just because they are not burried in the same tomb doesn't mean that they didn't live together. I know that one takes a little common sense to put together but it really isn't that hard.

There is NO SUCH EVIDENCE. All human fossils and signs of habitation occur 65 million years or more AFTER the dinosaurs. All contrary "evidence" is either misinterpreted or dilberately misrepresented. If you have proof, PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

 

[THE LIGHT]

You continue to attempt to tack it onto evolution directly and indirectly. Make up your mind.

In other words, you lied and that is your lame excuse for it.

Perhaps you need to work on your reading comprehension. I asked: "How does the theory of creation explain the living creatures we now have - where did they all come from?"

I read it fine. I just don't think you are educated enough to know what you are writing. It said and says... W - H - E - R - E ....D - I - D ....T - H - E - Y... A - L - L.... C - O - M - E .....F - R - O - M ?

source (sôrs, sōrs)

noun

1. The point at which something springs into being or from which it derives or is obtained.
2. The point of origin, such as a spring, of a stream or river. See Synonyms at origin.
3. One that causes, creates, or initiates; a maker.
4. One, such as a person or document, that supplies information: A reporter is only as reliable as his or her sources.
5. Physics The point or part of a system where energy or mass is added to the system.

ori·gin (ôr′ə jin, är′-)

noun

1. a coming into existence or use; beginning
2. parentage; birth; lineage
3. that in which something has its beginning; source; root; cause
4. Anat. the less movable of the two points of attachment of a muscle, usually the end attached to the more rigid part of the skeleton
5. Math.
   1. in a system of Cartesian coordinates, the point at which the axes intersect; base point where the abscissa and ordinate equal zero
   2. any zero reference point from which measurement begins

So if it is origins that you would like to speak of, I just need to know where you want to start at. Is it at lifeless primordial soup or is it at a single cell that you have not one incling of where it came from?

Not the origin of life but the origin of the species we now have. Evolution theory proposes that they evolved from simpler organisms.

The species exist. Some variations have gone extinct or gotten rare.

I propose they did not evolve from simpler organisms, you propose they did yet have no evidence to back up your claim. It is your job to prove that your fairy tale happened.

Your theory seems to be something along the line of ZAP! - flip the switch and there they are. Deus ex Machina - a bored deity, and empty universe. What evidence supports that theory? You seem to be dodging that pesky detail.

Now you are looking to talk about origins of life again. Which one will it be?

What evidence?
What evidence?

There are many artifacts that demonstrate that not only were ancient natives aware of dinasaurs but they were also a part of their daily lives.

Listen carefully- you make zero sense.

What are "unnecessary functions"?

Flying and swimming are adaptations of form through evolution. That adaptation led to a divergence of species and the creation of new species. That supports evolution.

Listen carefully you don't seem to comprehend what you are saying. Things don't addapt to something that doesn't need adapting to. Just because I am exposed to air doesn't mean that I need to grow wings to fly in it. And even though man has a desire to fly he has still as of yet failed to show any signs of growing wings.

Again, who created the creator?

Besides the fact that you continue to go back to "origins" which I thought you didn't want to talk about, you are getting really good at dodging that question.

Again, how did the giraffe evolve?

You just don't like the answers I give you.

How is "Again, who created the creator?" an answer to, "how did the giraffe evolve? "

You can now return to a simpler era more suited to your cognition, when science was not allowed to thwart the Church.

The era of Hollywood?

 

[THE LIGHT]

The Light sez:

There is evidence of man living with dinasaurs, so just because they are not burried in the same tomb doesn't mean that they didn't live together. I know that one takes a little common sense to put together but it really isn't that hard.

There is NO SUCH EVIDENCE. All human fossils and signs of habitation occur 65 million years or more AFTER the dinosaurs. All contrary "evidence" is either misinterpreted or dilberately misrepresented. If you have proof, PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

Well it appears that you have put up the typical disclaimer of all evolutionist worshipers.

"Put up all proof that you have but if it disproves evolution then it is false!"

 

[SmarterThanHick]

I read it fine. I just don't think you are educated enough to know what you are writing. It said and says... W - H - E - R - E ....D - I - D ....T - H - E - Y... A - L - L.... C - O - M - E .....F - R - O - M ?

The answer is simple: with respect to evolution, it doesn't matter. Do you or do you not understand that point?

So if it is origins that you would like to speak of, I just need to know where you want to start at. Is it at lifeless primordial soup or is it at a single cell that you have not one incling of where it came from?

Primordial soup has nothing to do with evolution. A single cell never popped into being, nor does evolution suggest such a thing is possible. Please try again.

There are many artifacts that demonstrate that not only were ancient natives aware of dinasaurs but they were also a part of their daily lives.

You do realize you just pulled that image off a website DREAMS OF THE GREAT EARTH CHANGES that promotes aliens making crop circles and other ridiculous ideas, right?

Listen carefully you don't seem to comprehend what you are saying. Things don't addapt to something that doesn't need adapting to. Just because I am exposed to air doesn't mean that I need to grow wings to fly in it. And even though man has a desire to fly he has still as of yet failed to show any signs of growing wings.

Correct. Just because you are exposed to something doesn't mean you WILL adapt to it. But the animals that do happen to adapt better to it out-live those that don't. That's evolution. Do you see no survival advantage in flying, or even gliding a bit?

Again, how did the giraffe evolve?

You keep asking this despite receiving an answer several times. Height was a survival advantage because lower grazing animals could not reach the tree foliage. As such, height was selected for by nature as advantageous, and the giraffe came about. This is where you ignore the answer and just keep asking the question.

 

[konradv]

The Light sez:

There is evidence of man living with dinasaurs, so just because they are not burried in the same tomb doesn't mean that they didn't live together. I know that one takes a little common sense to put together but it really isn't that hard.

There is NO SUCH EVIDENCE. All human fossils and signs of habitation occur 65 million years or more AFTER the dinosaurs. All contrary "evidence" is either misinterpreted or dilberately misrepresented. If you have proof, PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

Well it appears that you have put up the typical disclaimer of all evolutionist worshipers.

"Put up all proof that you have but if it disproves evolution then it is false!"

But you never put up any proof. YOU made the claim of humans and dinosaurs co-habiting the earth. Show us the proof.

 

[Coyote]

You continue to attempt to tack it onto evolution directly and indirectly. Make up your mind.

In other words, you lied and that is your lame excuse for it.

I read it fine. I just don't think you are educated enough to know what you are writing. It said and says... W - H - E - R - E ....D - I - D ....T - H - E - Y... A - L - L.... C - O - M - E .....F - R - O - M ?

Don't go getting your knickers in a knot - just read the entire quote and you'll get the entire meaning (you can do that right?). Where did this array of species spring whole and in entirety from? The fertile imagination of a deity along with a bit of magical mud and some potter's skill and a spare rib? How DO you explain it within the constraints of science?

So if it is origins that you would like to speak of, I just need to know where you want to start at. Is it at lifeless primordial soup or is it at a single cell that you have not one incling of where it came from?

Nope. I'll type S-L-O-W-L-Y for you. Origin of species. Three simple words that even you should be able to make out.

I'm trying to make sense of your claim. Where did they come from?

The species exist. Some variations have gone extinct or gotten rare.

I propose they did not evolve from simpler organisms, you propose they did yet have no evidence to back up your claim. It is your job to prove that your fairy tale happened.

Up to this point, I've provided evidence. You have not.

Time to strut your evidence and put proof to your personal mythological origin myth.

You can do that right?

Now you are looking to talk about origins of life again. Which one will it be?

Back up and re-read. I'm being specific enough for even a paramecium to understand and I'm assuming you're at least a couple of cognitive levels above that unicellular creation.

There are many artifacts that demonstrate that not only were ancient natives aware of dinasaurs but they were also a part of their daily lives.

Dreams and visions...that's pretty cool....but, I was hoping for something a bit more concrete?

Listen carefully you don't seem to comprehend what you are saying. Things don't addapt to something that doesn't need adapting to. Just because I am exposed to air doesn't mean that I need to grow wings to fly in it. And even though man has a desire to fly he has still as of yet failed to show any signs of growing wings.

And there you go, you made my point - that's evolution.

Let me see if I can dumb it down even more. Being "exposed" to something doesn't mean something will "adapt" to it. There has to be a need and a niche to fill. Humanity long ago broke off and committed to a land-running, plains dwelling social hunter - a meat-eating development that gave us the energy to devote to building better brains and intricate hands instead of better guts - a development which has served us well and isn't conducive to flight. Desire isn't need and need is determined by environmental conditions and the opening of new niches to exploit - like the high altitude tibetans.

Besides the fact that you continue to go back to "origins" which I thought you didn't want to talk about, you are getting really good at dodging that question.
Again, how did the giraffe evolve?

I answered that. Several times.

Go back and read.

Now, how about you answer a question: who created the creator? Or...can you? Shall I be prepared for yet another dodge?

The era of Hollywood?

No dissing Monty Python!

 

[AmericanFirst]

Typical satan worshipers, the truth scares them so they shut out the truth.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Creationists suffer another legal defeat | Bad Astronomy | Discover Magazine

once again math and common sense wins

Why are you mad at Texas when they discriminate against gays, but cheer when they discriminate against Christians? Just odd

this isn't discrimination against Christians. its protection of vulnerable children in public schools so they are not brought up learning fairy tales and that if they don't follow ten rules they will burn in hell. it is about preserving our country and attempting to regain our former supremacy in math, science, and engineering instead of filling a generation's head with lunacy that directly contradicts provable science.

For one thing thing evolution has never been proven, it is a lie. Another thing Christ beleiving is not fairy tales it is the truth, like I said before the truth scares satan worshipers. Besides this country was founded on biblical truths, but satan and his followers are lying to the American people and tearing this country apart. Budha was just a man, mohamed was a lier, and Jesus saves.

 

[AmericanFirst]

you are being dense as usual. As I said in my last post, a math teacher can be religious and teach math as well as anyone else as long as the nonsense in the bible doesn't slant her teaching. if she sticks to real science and not junk then everything is okay. unfortunately, as shown numerous times, people can't seem to leave their religion behind and instead start forcing it on people like the science teachers who dissed evolution and discuss creationism in science classrooms

Yeah, I been down this road with you folks many times. Christian teacher wears a cross to school and they are "shoving Christianity down my kids throat" Paranoid or what?

And what happens when the same organization refuses to accredit a school that endorses gays? You see the problem.........................

stay on topic idiot instead of your usual deflection. did I say anything about a cross? I said its a problem when christian teachers in public schools start teaching creationism and young earth nonsense instead of science. I am guessing you are avoiding that topic because you agree with their stupidity?

Stop calling Christians stupid. If you beleive in evolution which is a lie, you are stupid, stupid!!!!

 

[AmericanFirst]

I am not doing your homework for you. you obviously don't know creationism if you don't think they bend math to make it fit their models

In other words you don't really -have anything. How do you bend math rules? They are absolute and what does God possibly have to do with 2+2=4?

if you think math stops at addition you have problems. also 2+2=5 in certain situations in beyond basic math

about your question, for instance, one of the main theories of creationism is that light used to travel faster than it does now (which is impossible according to einsteins laws) and then creationist use this idea to explain how we see things that are billions of light years away. There idea is that light traveled faster back then so it could have got closer to us without it having to take billions of years to get to us in order to make the earth being around 6k years be plausible.

You are an idiot, 2+2 = 4 period!!!

 

[AmericanFirst]

So you have no problem allowing gay couples around children but you do not like the idea of children being taught about christian views?

What's wrong with having gay couples around children?

Everything!!!

 

[AmericanFirst]

The conservative Bush Republican appointed Federal judge in the Dover case called the intelligent design/creationist attorneys liars, fabricators, distorters and twisters of "facts".
As a Christian I am embarrassed by the lies school board memvers testify to in open court. Judge Johnson in the Dover case considered perjury indictments sought from the US attorney in that Pa. district.
The fight against evolution has turned into that by the religous right. It is OK to lie in open court according to them. "God wants us to" is their cry.
They do it because deep down they KNOW evolution is fact and most Christians agree.

No we don't, evolution is a lie. To be taught as fact there has to be a missing link, none yet. Even Darwin said you can't prove evolution.

 

[AmericanFirst]

You should stick to spankin your monkey Bucko..there is no master plan.

I guess we'll all find out when our time here is over.

Until that time I will continue to try to understand this wonderful universe that I have the privelige to inhabit.

What you are trying to convince me of is that members of an agrarian society over the period from 5000 thousand years ago to 2000 years ago, totally understood the working of the universe. That they had such a personal relationship with the Diety that everything they stated will stand for all time.

Simply, humans wrote the Bible.

God wrote the Bible thru man.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Go science. People think we aren't moving forward. Getting away from pagan religions of all kinds is good. Especially fundamentalist Christians who murder at the highest rates.

Idiot!!!

 

[AmericanFirst]

Do people really believe that God created the universe in six days?

Really?

Yes!!!

 

[AmericanFirst]

The Swift Report: Math for Believers: 'Deometry' is Hot Subject for Fall

The Bible is very educational, perhaps you should read it. I still don't see this as forcing a particular religious belief on anyone.

Does the Bible say that animals were created before Man was created, or does the Bible say that Man was created before the animals were created?

Or does it say both?

Obviously you have not read the Bible. All creatures were created then man and man was given dominion over all the creatures of the earth.

 

[AmericanFirst]

The Ten Commandments


“Thou shalt have no other gods before me” ( Exodus 20:3).

Unconstitutional. Government has no right to determine whether a person worships a Diety, or which Diety.

“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image” ( Exodus 20:4).

See above.

“Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain” ( Exodus 20:7).

Unconstitutional. Freedom of speech. Besides, without a bit of cursing, nothing would ever be repaired.

“Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy” ( Exodus 20:8).

Whose Sabbath? Again, unconstitutional.

“Honour thy father and thy mother” ( Exodus 20:12).

Good advice, but how does one enforce that?

“Thou shalt not kill” ( Exodus 20:13).

That is common in almost all cultures and religions.

“Thou shalt not commit adultery” ( Exodus 20:14).

Again, not illegal now in most states, or Christian nations. Wise advice, but not for law.

“Thou shalt not steal” ( Exodus 20:15).

Again, common law to all cultures and religions.

“Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour” ( Exodus 20:16).

Another one that is law in most cultures.

“Thou shalt not covet” ( Exodus 20:17).

What? Are you trying to destroy capitalism?

So we have three of the ten commandments that are actually reflected in law. At least four of the
commandments are unconstitutional.

Prove they are unconstitutional. Besides Gods law trumps a nations law, he is the ultimate authority.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Creationists suffer another legal defeat | Bad Astronomy | Discover Magazine

once again math and common sense wins

No it doesn't. You just claim your religion is better than mine.

i don't have a religion. math & science are proven while creationism is provably false

Wrong as usual, idiot.

 

[AmericanFirst]

i don't have a religion. math & science are proven while creationism is provably false

You keep saying that and it's ridiculous.

Please prove the idea of a single creator of the universe is false.

You can't. You fail.

And the Chudnovsky Brothers believe in God.

Good point as I have been making that point for 40 years.
NO ONE can prove the idea of a single creator of the universe is false.
You left out this:
NO ONE can prove the idea of a single creator of the universe as TRUE.
Why are both of those statements true?
Because they both are BELIEFS.
Allie, beliefs are not science. You can not test beliefs by the scientific method. Evolution has been tested by the scientific method and held up.

Wrong, still can not be proven.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Creationists suffer another legal defeat | Bad Astronomy | Discover Magazine

once again math and common sense wins

What about it, National Center for Science Education still can't prove (without a shadow of doubt) how the world was created. So this just shows how some idiots follow one more than the other. it will all come clear at your death, but then if you followed the wrong one it will be to late to change sides.

not proven YET. religious people are always holding on to temporary beliefs as science knocks down more and more of their crap. its why when religion takes over the world as the christians did in the dark ages science is restricted because it always trumps their beliefs. what are you going to do in 20 or 30 years when science has proven how the world was created without the help of a god?

Wrong, idiot!!!