Creationists

[konradv]

What's laughable is your brainwashed understanding that biological machines are somehow on a different scientific level than other machines. Your Darwinist religion drives this thought, because it is devoid of all logic. Your lense is skewed because you are trying to fit the scientific evidence to your belief that it "all just happened spontaneously".

Do you understand that it "all just happened spontaneously" is precisely the argument you are forwarding in connection with your gods?

No we don't rule out the designer because he can't be put to the test ,studied,or observed.

We don't make things up that go against natural laws of nature.

The designer isn't ruled out by science, but since He can't be tested, He has no place in the study of evolution. It's not required. Even if God did breath in the initial spark, that doesn't effect the study or theories of how evolution proceded in the slightest.

 

[Hollie]

No we don't rule out the designer because he can't be put to the test ,studied,or observed.

We don't make things up that go against natural laws of nature.

My environment is non-sentient and it is discoverable as to the mechanism. Your environment has to account for an eternal sentient being (which you will never be able to fully account for), and you have to come up with reasons as to why he wouldn't tell you the truth about how it all began in his communications with you.

That's a tall order, especially when it's admitted the only ways of proving things is not available to that environment.

Empirical trust in a process (science) that will assiduously test and challenge, there's a HUGE difference. Theistic principles are undemonstrated whereas materialist ones are testable, falsifiable, and empirically constant. By the way, which scripture (faith)? Are we discussing, the catechism of the Papacy? Those church fathers? Or Luther and Protestantism? Perhaps that of Pentecostals? Or 7th Day Adventists.

One cannot even make an intelligent and verifiable choice as to the varieties of "belief", let alone use the theism of Islam to be the foundation of principles to determine knowledge. Religious beliefs are faith-based and as such detour around a need for proof, and thus cannot serve as the guidelines for knowledge (outside of their own assertions).

 

[Youwerecreated]

You apparently didn't read the cite. No miracles, just science.

Nature is a miracle, it's the explanations where most theories go wrong.

To say DNA evolves is just idiotic,all that is happening is the vast gene pool is at work. Plus you have different lineages constantly crossing and producing offspring that can look different.

Look at all the different looking dogs you get in mutts.

Why wouldn't DNA evolve? If mutations, fusions, transfections, etc. provided enhanced survival, they would grow in the gene pool and a new DNA form and new species would evolve.

Key word is if,but do they ? Remember you must have a net gain of new information for anything to evolve. Origional information can't be lost and that is what happens if a mutation causes any kind of change.

Beneficial mutations must accumulate without other mutations getting in the way. It's also fighting a losing battle for that reason alone but they also are fighting against natural selection and mechanism's correcting the error and that is what mutations are errors.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Do you understand that it "all just happened spontaneously" is precisely the argument you are forwarding in connection with your gods?

No we don't rule out the designer because he can't be put to the test ,studied,or observed.

We don't make things up that go against natural laws of nature.

The designer isn't ruled out by science, but since He can't be tested, He has no place in the study of evolution. It's not required. Even if God did breath in the initial spark, that doesn't effect the study or theories of how evolution proceded in the slightest.

Since you can't study God does not mean macroevolution took place. If he did create he did not use evolution to get his diversity there is no evidence backing the claim.

 

[Youwerecreated]

No we don't rule out the designer because he can't be put to the test ,studied,or observed.

We don't make things up that go against natural laws of nature.

My environment is non-sentient and it is discoverable as to the mechanism. Your environment has to account for an eternal sentient being (which you will never be able to fully account for), and you have to come up with reasons as to why he wouldn't tell you the truth about how it all began in his communications with you.

That's a tall order, especially when it's admitted the only ways of proving things is not available to that environment.

Empirical trust in a process (science) that will assiduously test and challenge, there's a HUGE difference. Theistic principles are undemonstrated whereas materialist ones are testable, falsifiable, and empirically constant. By the way, which scripture (faith)? Are we discussing, the catechism of the Papacy? Those church fathers? Or Luther and Protestantism? Perhaps that of Pentecostals? Or 7th Day Adventists.

One cannot even make an intelligent and verifiable choice as to the varieties of "belief", let alone use the theism of Islam to be the foundation of principles to determine knowledge. Religious beliefs are faith-based and as such detour around a need for proof, and thus cannot serve as the guidelines for knowledge (outside of their own assertions).

There is plenty of scientific evidence that would cause one to infer a designer. You want to infer a natural unintelligent and undirected process is the reason for all things have you ever stopped and considered all the timely coincedences and miracles needed to believe such a theory ?

 

[daws101]

Of course they're different. There are no scientific laws that could lead to the self-assembly of a machine or computer. There are laws of Chemistry and Physics which can explain the assembly of life.

Evolution of DNA

he'll still deny it no matter how many ways it's explained to him .
living things grow (not self assemble) assembly requires individual parts.
the only other non biologic "thing" that grows are crystals.

This gets more stupid by the minute. You really are blinded by Darwinism. Next thing you're going to tell me is that cells are made up of plasma, that they don't consist of individual tiny parts... oh wait! You already just did that... doh!!!

Your absolute blind denial is alarming...

Bacterial Flagellum - YouTube

never said or implied that, assembly and growth are two separate things.
has anyone ever seen a tree go to the branch store to buy a kit of new branches to replace worn or broken ones ?

ever seen an engine grow new spark plugs?

 

[Hollie]

There is plenty of scientific evidence that would cause one to infer a designer. You want to infer a natural unintelligent and undirected process is the reason for all things have you ever stopped and considered all the timely coincedences and miracles needed to believe such a theory ?

I have never come across any evidence that would "infer" a designer. Evidence for Zeus? Yes.

I'll be accused of "religion-bashing" by some more than likely, of being "prideful and vain" by pointing these things out, but it all comes down to what is more likely, so consider the following:

A god created existence in only 6 days, but did so in such a way to make it look immensely old and left massive clues to support that belief... and this god put forth a test to only two humans without (at least in terms of the Judeo-Christian god) giving them either the ability to make a considered choice nor did he bother to tell them the consequences would extend to every person born after them... and this god then inspired a book but did not allow the original to last in case the condemned-to damnation humans worship those texts... and allowed copies of copies to multiply so that huge civilizations would clash with one another over interpretations... and this god then comes down to earth as a human to act as a mediator to experience human weakness and pain and sin that he created in the first place anyway, and he's letting billions upon billions of people suffer thusly and choose eternal damnation on an ongoing basis in order to satisfy this need to experience the aforementioned... and finally in a climactic battle wherein agony and suffering will spread over the globe this god will battle his nemesis that he himself created and could blink to make disappear if he really wanted to...

or

Existence is natural, patterns form out of the exchange of energy, life evolved in some places, competition for that life implemented social structures, sentience ignited that social structure to a more and more complicated degree... and allowed for technology to extend the perceptions of humans to further and further reaches, chipping away at old, perhaps poetic and elegant but nonetheless outdated beliefs created by a ruling class that knew the power of ignorance and fear in people made them vastly more controllable?

 

[Montrovant]

"With that in mind, evolutionists expect us to believe that these people walked this earth for 100 times the length of all recorded history (during which humans went from living in villages to walking on the moon and launching NuStar) without ever figuring out how to plant a farm or ride a horse or discover America. Let the folly of that Darwinian tall tale simmer between your ears."

CEH

Sadly, most of you posting here are the product of a dumbed down education system and the viewing of mythical tales passed off as documentary's, which aren't even updated years later when the nonsense they preach is outdated and flat out wrong.

Wait, is your argument that sudden changes in the way humanity lives due to new invention can't happen, or that it's unreasonable to think they happen?

Have you, perhaps, heard of the industrial revolution?

 

[daws101]

"With that in mind, evolutionists expect us to believe that these people walked this earth for 100 times the length of all recorded history (during which humans went from living in villages to walking on the moon and launching NuStar) without ever figuring out how to plant a farm or ride a horse or discover America. Let the folly of that Darwinian tall tale simmer between your ears."

CEH

Sadly, most of you posting here are the product of a dumbed down education system and the viewing of mythical tales passed off as documentary's, which aren't even updated years later when the nonsense they preach is outdated and flat out wrong.

Wait, is your argument that sudden changes in the way humanity lives due to new invention can't happen, or that it's unreasonable to think they happen?

Have you, perhaps, heard of the industrial revolution?

it's another Darwinist lie!

 

[Youwerecreated]

There is plenty of scientific evidence that would cause one to infer a designer. You want to infer a natural unintelligent and undirected process is the reason for all things have you ever stopped and considered all the timely coincedences and miracles needed to believe such a theory ?

I have never come across any evidence that would "infer" a designer. Evidence for Zeus? Yes.

I'll be accused of "religion-bashing" by some more than likely, of being "prideful and vain" by pointing these things out, but it all comes down to what is more likely, so consider the following:

A god created existence in only 6 days, but did so in such a way to make it look immensely old and left massive clues to support that belief... and this god put forth a test to only two humans without (at least in terms of the Judeo-Christian god) giving them either the ability to make a considered choice nor did he bother to tell them the consequences would extend to every person born after them... and this god then inspired a book but did not allow the original to last in case the condemned-to damnation humans worship those texts... and allowed copies of copies to multiply so that huge civilizations would clash with one another over interpretations... and this god then comes down to earth as a human to act as a mediator to experience human weakness and pain and sin that he created in the first place anyway, and he's letting billions upon billions of people suffer thusly and choose eternal damnation on an ongoing basis in order to satisfy this need to experience the aforementioned... and finally in a climactic battle wherein agony and suffering will spread over the globe this god will battle his nemesis that he himself created and could blink to make disappear if he really wanted to...

or

Existence is natural, patterns form out of the exchange of energy, life evolved in some places, competition for that life implemented social structures, sentience ignited that social structure to a more and more complicated degree... and allowed for technology to extend the perceptions of humans to further and further reaches, chipping away at old, perhaps poetic and elegant but nonetheless outdated beliefs created by a ruling class that knew the power of ignorance and fear in people made them vastly more controllable?

If you have spent anytime at all in biology yes you have.

Why do all cells possess left handed amino acids when left and right handed amino acids could easily connect ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

"With that in mind, evolutionists expect us to believe that these people walked this earth for 100 times the length of all recorded history (during which humans went from living in villages to walking on the moon and launching NuStar) without ever figuring out how to plant a farm or ride a horse or discover America. Let the folly of that Darwinian tall tale simmer between your ears."

CEH

Sadly, most of you posting here are the product of a dumbed down education system and the viewing of mythical tales passed off as documentary's, which aren't even updated years later when the nonsense they preach is outdated and flat out wrong.

Wait, is your argument that sudden changes in the way humanity lives due to new invention can't happen, or that it's unreasonable to think they happen?

Have you, perhaps, heard of the industrial revolution?

What's your point ? it still took designers and builders.

 

[daws101]

"With that in mind, evolutionists expect us to believe that these people walked this earth for 100 times the length of all recorded history (during which humans went from living in villages to walking on the moon and launching NuStar) without ever figuring out how to plant a farm or ride a horse or discover America. Let the folly of that Darwinian tall tale simmer between your ears."

CEH

Sadly, most of you posting here are the product of a dumbed down education system and the viewing of mythical tales passed off as documentary's, which aren't even updated years later when the nonsense they preach is outdated and flat out wrong.

Wait, is your argument that sudden changes in the way humanity lives due to new invention can't happen, or that it's unreasonable to think they happen?

Have you, perhaps, heard of the industrial revolution?

What's your point ? it still took designers and builders.

what's yours?

 

[UltimateReality]

What's laughable is your brainwashed understanding that biological machines are somehow on a different scientific level than other machines. Your Darwinist religion drives this thought, because it is devoid of all logic. Your lense is skewed because you are trying to fit the scientific evidence to your belief that it "all just happened spontaneously".

Do you understand that it "all just happened spontaneously" is precisely the argument you are forwarding in connection with your gods?

Negative. That is not precisely the argument.

 

[UltimateReality]

No we don't rule out the designer because he can't be put to the test ,studied,or observed.

We don't make things up that go against natural laws of nature.

My environment is non-sentient and it is discoverable as to the mechanism. Your environment has to account for an eternal sentient being (which you will never be able to fully account for), and you have to come up with reasons as to why he wouldn't tell you the truth about how it all began in his communications with you.

That's a tall order, especially when it's admitted the only ways of proving things is not available to that environment.

Empirical trust in a process (science) that will assiduously test and challenge, there's a HUGE difference. Theistic principles are undemonstrated whereas materialist ones are testable, falsifiable, and empirically constant. By the way, which scripture (faith)? Are we discussing, the catechism of the Papacy? Those church fathers? Or Luther and Protestantism? Perhaps that of Pentecostals? Or 7th Day Adventists.

One cannot even make an intelligent and verifiable choice as to the varieties of "belief", let alone use the theism of Islam to be the foundation of principles to determine knowledge. Religious beliefs are faith-based and as such detour around a need for proof, and thus cannot serve as the guidelines for knowledge (outside of their own assertions).

Hollie,

You are obviously jumping into the discussion late. While Creationism is a philosophical argument, ID Theory is not. ID is scientific theory that does not attempt to mix mysticism with science. It in no way makes any claim to the identity of the designer or his/her/it's attributes. Your argument above is not related to anything I have stated in this thread and is therefore a strawman, so feel free to continue to rip your strawman apart.

 

[UltimateReality]

he'll still deny it no matter how many ways it's explained to him .
living things grow (not self assemble) assembly requires individual parts.
the only other non biologic "thing" that grows are crystals.

This gets more stupid by the minute. You really are blinded by Darwinism. Next thing you're going to tell me is that cells are made up of plasma, that they don't consist of individual tiny parts... oh wait! You already just did that... doh!!!

Your absolute blind denial is alarming...

Bacterial Flagellum - YouTube

never said or implied that, assembly and growth are two separate things.
has anyone ever seen a tree go to the branch store to buy a kit of new branches to replace worn or broken ones ?

ever seen an engine grow new spark plugs?

Nope, but I've seen a computer come up with new code. Regardless, you are now arguing against yourself. If evolution happened so easily and randomly, why can't we reproduce life. Heck we can't even place all the real, parts we just removed from one cell into a test tube and get it to come to life. This is the real absurdity of your Materialistic religion.

 

[UltimateReality]

There is plenty of scientific evidence that would cause one to infer a designer. You want to infer a natural unintelligent and undirected process is the reason for all things have you ever stopped and considered all the timely coincedences and miracles needed to believe such a theory ?

I have never come across any evidence that would "infer" a designer. Evidence for Zeus? Yes.

I'll be accused of "religion-bashing" by some more than likely, of being "prideful and vain" by pointing these things out, but it all comes down to what is more likely, so consider the following:

A god created existence in only 6 days, but did so in such a way to make it look immensely old and left massive clues to support that belief... and this god put forth a test to only two humans without (at least in terms of the Judeo-Christian god) giving them either the ability to make a considered choice nor did he bother to tell them the consequences would extend to every person born after them... and this god then inspired a book but did not allow the original to last in case the condemned-to damnation humans worship those texts... and allowed copies of copies to multiply so that huge civilizations would clash with one another over interpretations... and this god then comes down to earth as a human to act as a mediator to experience human weakness and pain and sin that he created in the first place anyway, and he's letting billions upon billions of people suffer thusly and choose eternal damnation on an ongoing basis in order to satisfy this need to experience the aforementioned... and finally in a climactic battle wherein agony and suffering will spread over the globe this god will battle his nemesis that he himself created and could blink to make disappear if he really wanted to...

or

Existence is natural, patterns form out of the exchange of energy, life evolved in some places, competition for that life implemented social structures, sentience ignited that social structure to a more and more complicated degree... and allowed for technology to extend the perceptions of humans to further and further reaches, chipping away at old, perhaps poetic and elegant but nonetheless outdated beliefs created by a ruling class that knew the power of ignorance and fear in people made them vastly more controllable?

The second description is your religion. It's called Materialism-look it up. You believe matter is the only reality. However, in your ignorance, you fail to realize it takes more faith to believe the statements above than the faith required for a Theistic worldview.

"To be ignorant of one's ignorance is the malady of the ignorant."
- Amos Bronson Alcott (1799-1888) American educator

 

[Hollie]

If you have spent anytime at all in biology yes you have.

Why do all cells possess left handed amino acids when left and right handed amino acids could easily connect ?

I’ve spent much time in biology. It seems odd that you would need to spend any time at all in biology when “the gods did it” should suffice. Biology is closely linked to that science of “evilution” so be careful – science has a way of illuminating those dark recesses of the supernatural.

I was really hoping that a ID'er / creationist would step forward and provide us with the evidence that would allow us to "infer" a god or gods. That hasn't happened. I was really hoping that you or another ID’er would step up to the plate to defend creationism / ID. I was hoping Creationists would finally propose their General Creation Theory...but after these pages of posts, not a single one has. In that sense, how disappointing that we don’t have a consensus of creationists.

As we know (well, as some of us know), It is not necessary for scientists to prove that design is not required for the complexity we see in nature. NONE of the scientific theories that explain natural phenomena make appeals to an unseen designer or one or more gods. If any I.D.er's have evidence that something shows signs of being designed (something that could not have arisen naturally) please come forward with it. To date, no one has. ID'ers / Supernaturalists are trying to shift the burden of proof. Intelligent Design advocates are the ones introducing supernatural forces... they are the ones who must substantiate their incredible claims. Scientists do not "take it on faith" that the natural answers are there... natural explanations are all that we they have evidence of. And those answers do very well. The laws of nature must act some way... they happen to act as they do. So what? Does anyone have any evidence that they could act any other way?

Therefore, I have no faith in the "naturalistic" explanation of life. Every discovery in the history of science has had a naturalistic explanation, even those that were formerly thought to have a supernatural cause. I see no reason why the evolution of life should be any different. Should the subtle and complex formulas of calculus cause us to deduce an intelligent designer of mathematics? I have no faith in math. I have no faith in chemistry, or geology, or astronomy. Things are as they are.

 

[Hollie]

The second description is your religion. It's called Materialism-look it up. You believe matter is the only reality. However, in your ignorance, you fail to realize it takes more faith to believe the statements above than the faith required for a Theistic worldview.

"To be ignorant of one's ignorance is the malady of the ignorant."
- Amos Bronson Alcott (1799-1888) American educator

There are a number of flaws in your claim. First, “materialism” is not a religion. Since that was your claim, please identify for us the established traditions, rituals and practices of “materialism”; those with a relevant parallel to belief in the supernatural. Are there various “houses of materialism” where materialists of various beliefs congregate to sing, praise, handle snakes, petition a supernatural enforcer of materialism with appropriate behavior in exchange for favors and carnal rewards? Do tell.

Lastly, I agree that it takes faith to believe in a god or gods who purposely lies and refuses to be honest with you. Why can’t your gods be honest with you?

So… let's look at this from another perspective. When you say you believe in an entity that cannot be seen, cannot be felt, exists outside of the natural realm in an asserted supernatural realm, that has attributes we need to worship but cannot understand or even describe, who lives in eternity in both directions, who can create existence from nothing and is uncreated himself and uses methods and means we can never know or hope to understand, that stands outside proof which is exactly why it's for certain he exists-- I would say that qualifies as being under a delusion... or ignorant of facts.

 

[Youwerecreated]

If you have spent anytime at all in biology yes you have.

Why do all cells possess left handed amino acids when left and right handed amino acids could easily connect ?

I’ve spent much time in biology. It seems odd that you would need to spend any time at all in biology when “the gods did it” should suffice. Biology is closely linked to that science of “evilution” so be careful – science has a way of illuminating those dark recesses of the supernatural.

I was really hoping that a ID'er / creationist would step forward and provide us with the evidence that would allow us to "infer" a god or gods. That hasn't happened. I was really hoping that you or another ID’er would step up to the plate to defend creationism / ID. I was hoping Creationists would finally propose their General Creation Theory...but after these pages of posts, not a single one has. In that sense, how disappointing that we don’t have a consensus of creationists.

As we know (well, as some of us know), It is not necessary for scientists to prove that design is not required for the complexity we see in nature. NONE of the scientific theories that explain natural phenomena make appeals to an unseen designer or one or more gods. If any I.D.er's have evidence that something shows signs of being designed (something that could not have arisen naturally) please come forward with it. To date, no one has. ID'ers / Supernaturalists are trying to shift the burden of proof. Intelligent Design advocates are the ones introducing supernatural forces... they are the ones who must substantiate their incredible claims. Scientists do not "take it on faith" that the natural answers are there... natural explanations are all that we they have evidence of. And those answers do very well. The laws of nature must act some way... they happen to act as they do. So what? Does anyone have any evidence that they could act any other way?

Therefore, I have no faith in the "naturalistic" explanation of life. Every discovery in the history of science has had a naturalistic explanation, even those that were formerly thought to have a supernatural cause. I see no reason why the evolution of life should be any different. Should the subtle and complex formulas of calculus cause us to deduce an intelligent designer of mathematics? I have no faith in math. I have no faith in chemistry, or geology, or astronomy. Things are as they are.

We can't even produce a working cell and you want me to tell you how God did it.

 

[Youwerecreated]

The second description is your religion. It's called Materialism-look it up. You believe matter is the only reality. However, in your ignorance, you fail to realize it takes more faith to believe the statements above than the faith required for a Theistic worldview.

"To be ignorant of one's ignorance is the malady of the ignorant."
- Amos Bronson Alcott (1799-1888) American educator

There are a number of flaws in your claim. First, “materialism” is not a religion. Since that was your claim, please identify for us the established traditions, rituals and practices of “materialism”; those with a relevant parallel to belief in the supernatural. Are there various “houses of materialism” where materialists of various beliefs congregate to sing, praise, handle snakes, petition a supernatural enforcer of materialism with appropriate behavior in exchange for favors and carnal rewards? Do tell.

Lastly, I agree that it takes faith to believe in a god or gods who purposely lies and refuses to be honest with you. Why can’t your gods be honest with you?

So… let's look at this from another perspective. When you say you believe in an entity that cannot be seen, cannot be felt, exists outside of the natural realm in an asserted supernatural realm, that has attributes we need to worship but cannot understand or even describe, who lives in eternity in both directions, who can create existence from nothing and is uncreated himself and uses methods and means we can never know or hope to understand, that stands outside proof which is exactly why it's for certain he exists-- I would say that qualifies as being under a delusion... or ignorant of facts.

Interpreting evidence to fit with the any theory you accept even though it contradicts other known laws of nature.

One of your problems is you have never felt God and many have. There is no doubt once you do feel him.