Creationists

[Youwerecreated]

I see. I'm in denial because I don't accept the manufactured contents of a YouTube video. An important concept you're missing is this: "it must be true because I read it on the internet", is not a grown up way to discern truth from falsehood.

As usual, you are requiring others to accept your religious claims without any evidence to support them. Do you truly believe a YouTube video is adequate toward supporting evidence for your gods?

These YouTube videos you post are consistent in that they are staged, edited and contrived to support a narrowly defined perspective proposed by Christian creationists. Attempts to vilify science in desperate attempts to promote religion is a fools errand.

Do you know which video we are discussing ?

How would you explain the many different breeds in domestic animals since we see more change in domesticated animals ?

We also see it in families in the wild.

We see animals producing traits in their offspring that have been passed to them.

Did you somehow miss that you are describing the results of evolutionary processes?

No i'm not, domesticated animals are products of selective breeding. Now why does it happen in the wild ? maybe they were simply created the way they appear in the wild but some may be the result of cross breeding.

 

[Youwerecreated]

The obvious problem shared by Christian fundies is their confusion and misrepresentation of evolutionary science. In the broadest sense, there is no such thing as macro, minor or terms seized upon by religious fundies regarding evolution. There is just evolution as a process well established and reasonably well understood by science.

The humiliating defeats sufferrd by the Christian creationist crowd in attempting to force their religious views on others (the total rejection of Christian creationism being part of a public school syllabus) should have been enough to send them packing.

Really,how well do you know your own theory ?

This is from one of your sites that you guys quote from so much.

My comment ,Your side extrapolates from microevolution which should be termed microadaptations as your evidence for macroevolution. They claim the two are the same process but admit there is no evidence for macroevolution. Macroevolution is only based on a vivid imagination.

CB902: Microevolution vs. Macroevolution

I know the theory well.

"Microevolution and macroevolution are different things, but they involve mostly the same processes. "


"Creationists have created another category for which they use the word "macroevolution." They have no technical definition of it, but in practice they use it to mean evolution to an extent great enough that it has not been observed yet. (Some creationists talk about macroevolution being the emergence of new features, but it is not clear what they mean by this. Taking it literally, gradually changing a feature from fish fin to tetrapod limb to bird wing would not be macroevolution, but a mole on your skin which neither of your parents have would be.) I will call this category supermacroevolution to avoid confusing it with real macroevolution"

It seems the Christian fundies will need to invent a new term to promote their religious views.

May I suggest "supermacrosupernaturalism"

That is not what you implied and both terms were coined by scientist's.

 

[Hollie]

Do you know which video we are discussing ?

How would you explain the many different breeds in domestic animals since we see more change in domesticated animals ?

We also see it in families in the wild.

We see animals producing traits in their offspring that have been passed to them.

Did you somehow miss that you are describing the results of evolutionary processes?

No i'm not, domesticated animals are products of selective breeding. Now why does it happen in the wild ? maybe they were simply created the way they appear in the wild but some may be the result of cross breeding.

I certainly have every reason to accept that Zeus had a hand in creating creatures in the wild. What can you offer to suggest that it was your gods who created wild creatures?

And which ones? I want a list.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Did you somehow miss that you are describing the results of evolutionary processes?

No i'm not, domesticated animals are products of selective breeding. Now why does it happen in the wild ? maybe they were simply created the way they appear in the wild but some may be the result of cross breeding.

I certainly have every reason to accept that Zeus had a hand in creating creatures in the wild. What can you offer to suggest that it was your gods who created wild creatures?

And which ones? I want a list.

I say YAHWEH created all things and gave organisms the limited ability to adapt. You have been presented with plenty of evidence for design with your side having no explanation for complexity.

Intelligence creates and design,we know of no natural method of the beginning of life. We know cars ,homes,and communication systems were designed by a intelligent mind.

 

[Youwerecreated]

So do we have to leave that line of reasoning when it comes to biological systems ?

 

[Hollie]

No i'm not, domesticated animals are products of selective breeding. Now why does it happen in the wild ? maybe they were simply created the way they appear in the wild but some may be the result of cross breeding.

I certainly have every reason to accept that Zeus had a hand in creating creatures in the wild. What can you offer to suggest that it was your gods who created wild creatures?

And which ones? I want a list.

I say YAHWEH created all things and gave organisms the limited ability to adapt. You have been presented with plenty of evidence for design with your side having no explanation for complexity.

Intelligence creates and design,we know of no natural method of the beginning of life. We know cars ,homes,and communication systems were designed by a intelligent mind.

You can make any claim you wish regarding your religious views. I'm also free to advise that your claims are totally unsupported and substanceless.

I've learned to expect dishonesty from Christian fundies and in concert with those expectations I have to advise that you have offered no evidence of anything. Posting canned YouTube videos is pointless as we know that Christian fundies have an agenda of pressing Christianity, not truth or facts.

And yes, mechanical components show design intent. Nothing in nature shows design. Everything in nature shows clear evidence of fitness for survival. Your silly comparisons are the standard boilerplate nonsense on Christian fundie websites. Your claims are neither original nor true. They're just tired cliches used by Christian creationists for lack of a defendable argument.

 

[UltimateReality]

Where did you find these out of context, mis-representing lies? Next time you might want to check your sources more thoroughly.

In fact, there is a very reputable source that isn't like Wiki. It is called the Library of Congress. They actually have scanned photo's of letters and decrees, not made up stuff that is easily altered on the internet. Here is the Library of Congress on religion in America. We find that before historical revisionist like yourself started twisting and altering the truth, Church services, yes, you heard me, church services were held every Sunday in the House of Representatives. The concept that has been twisted is separation of church (a specific, denominational organization or group meeting to espouse a specific doctrine) and state, not religion and state. IN GOD WE TRUST!!!!

Here you go. You might learn some REAL History. Don't be duped.

Religion and the Federal Government, Part 1 - Religion and the Founding of the American Republic | Exhibitions - Library of Congress

Ben Franklin: Supposed Deist? Atheist?

"In the beginning of the Contest with G. Britain, when we were sensible of danger we had daily prayer in this room for the divine protection.- Our prayers, Sir, were heard, & they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending providence in our favor.
To that kind providence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of establishing our future national felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful Friend? or do we imagine that we no longer need His assistance? I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth- that God Governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings, that "except the Lord build the House they labour in vain that build it." I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without His concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better, than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our little partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a reproach and bye word down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing Governments by Human wisdom and leave it to chance, war and conquest.

I therefore beg leave to move-that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the Clergy of this City be requested to officiate in that Service-"

Original un-Wiki-ized manuscript here from the Library of Congress:

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/vc006642.jpg

So Nice Try but your Ad is a lie.

 

[UltimateReality]

Speaking of indoctrinated!!! There is very little science involved in the TOE. I'm not talking about the genetics level stuff but Darwin's stupid theory that is totally baseless in science. There are no tested hypothesis. There is no agreed upon definition of fitness. There is no evidence for gradual change in the fossil record (hundreds of thousands of fossils and counting, a few so so examples at best of transitional fossils). Yet, the quacks call it science and you, Daws, fall for it. Not only that, but you fall for passages like you posted above, basically saying nothing but that some people question the science but we know the TOE is true because it is. Are you really falling for this stuff? The biggest joke is that one of their ICON's is the finch beak story. No proof whatsoever for that story or the conjecture about Giraffe necks but it they call it an Icon??? This makes me like at the mass ignorance that would fall for such fairy tales passed off as science.

To claim that there is very little science involved in the TOE is so far from the truth. You are either ignoring or ignorant of the tomes of multi-disciplinary empirical data that support the TOE. Despite what you may think the fossil record provides powerful evidence of 'macro-evolution'. For example, the discovery of tiktaalik- a genus that had long been predicted to exist by the TOE- is powerful evidence that humans and fish share a common ancestor. Additionally, the breadth of fossils in the homo and austrolapithicines is for all intents an purposes incontrovertible proof that humans descended from a common ancestor shared with the great apes. Take a look at this chart showing the fossils of the Homo genus

Template:Homo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm curious as to how someone who believes in creation would explain the numerous species we have identified in the Homo genus from their fossilized remains. There isn't any scientific data that contradicts the TOE- it is universally supported by a massive multi-disciplinary dataset. Its disappointing that many people still believe that the TOE is a massive fraud perpetrated for nefarious reasons as nothing could be further from the truth.

Here it is again since you missed it. The question is, "does descent with modification account for the origin of new species?" Going one step further, does it account for every species? Like change over time, descent with modification within a species is not controversial. But Darwinian evolution claims that descent with modification explains the origin and diversification of all living things.

Scientist can't even agree on a common definition of fitness. Genetic studies have shredded Darwin's tree of life. The elusive human LUA has never been found. You need to update yourself on recent findings.

 

[UltimateReality]

To claim that there is very little science involved in the TOE is so far from the truth. You are either ignoring or ignorant of the tomes of multi-disciplinary empirical data that support the TOE. Despite what you may think the fossil record provides powerful evidence of 'macro-evolution'. For example, the discovery of tiktaalik- a genus that had long been predicted to exist by the TOE- is powerful evidence that humans and fish share a common ancestor. Additionally, the breadth of fossils in the homo and austrolapithicines is for all intents an purposes incontrovertible proof that humans descended from a common ancestor shared with the great apes. Take a look at this chart showing the fossils of the Homo genus

Template:Homo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm curious as to how someone who believes in creation would explain the numerous species we have identified in the Homo genus from their fossilized remains. There isn't any scientific data that contradicts the TOE- it is universally supported by a massive multi-disciplinary dataset. Its disappointing that many people still believe that the TOE is a massive fraud perpetrated for nefarious reasons as nothing could be further from the truth.

Change within a family of organisms is not evidence of macroevolution, It sure as heck is not evidence of natural selection and survival of the fittest.

The obvious problem shared by Christian fundies is their confusion and misrepresentation of evolutionary science. In the broadest sense, there is no such thing as macro, minor or terms seized upon by religious fundies regarding evolution. There is just evolution as a process well established and reasonably well understood by science.

The humiliating defeats sufferrd by the Christian creationist crowd in attempting to force their religious views on others (the total rejection of Christian creationism being part of a public school syllabus) should have been enough to send them packing.

Yeah, because the establishment is always right. Just ask Rosa Parks. I'm sorry, but only under evolutionary philosophy does might make right. Under the individual rights espoused by Christianity, might does NOT make right.

 

[UltimateReality]

I see. I'm in denial because I don't accept the manufactured contents of a YouTube video. An important concept you're missing is this: "it must be true because I read it on the internet", is not a grown up way to discern truth from falsehood.

As usual, you are requiring others to accept your religious claims without any evidence to support them. Do you truly believe a YouTube video is adequate toward supporting evidence for your gods?

These YouTube videos you post are consistent in that they are staged, edited and contrived to support a narrowly defined perspective proposed by Christian creationists. Attempts to vilify science in desperate attempts to promote religion is a fools errand.

Do you know which video we are discussing ?

How would you explain the many different breeds in domestic animals since we see more change in domesticated animals ?

We also see it in families in the wild.

We see animals producing traits in their offspring that have been passed to them.

Did you somehow miss that you are describing the results of evolutionary processes?

Wow, you obviously totally lack understanding of your own theory. Don't look now, but...

 

[UltimateReality]

I certainly have every reason to accept that Zeus had a hand in creating creatures in the wild. What can you offer to suggest that it was your gods who created wild creatures?

And which ones? I want a list.

I say YAHWEH created all things and gave organisms the limited ability to adapt. You have been presented with plenty of evidence for design with your side having no explanation for complexity.

Intelligence creates and design,we know of no natural method of the beginning of life. We know cars ,homes,and communication systems were designed by a intelligent mind.

You can make any claim you wish regarding your religious views. I'm also free to advise that your claims are totally unsupported and substanceless.

I've learned to expect dishonesty from Christian fundies and in concert with those expectations I have to advise that you have offered no evidence of anything. Posting canned YouTube videos is pointless as we know that Christian fundies have an agenda of pressing Christianity, not truth or facts.

And yes, mechanical components show design intent. Nothing in nature shows design. Everything in nature shows clear evidence of fitness for survival. Your silly comparisons are the standard boilerplate nonsense on Christian fundie websites. Your claims are neither original nor true. They're just tired cliches used by Christian creationists for lack of a defendable argument.

You can make any claim you wish regarding your materialistic religious views. I'm also free to advise that your claims are totally unsupported and unsubstantiated.

I've learned to expect dishonesty from Evo fundies and in concert with those expectations I have to advise that you have offered no evidence of anything. Posting canned ICR responses is pointless as we know that EVO fundies have an agenda of pressing Darwinism, not truth or facts.

And yes, mechanical components show design intent. Micro machines in the cell show design. Everything in nature shows clear evidence of design. Your silly comparisons are the standard boilerplate nonsense on Evo fundie websites. Your claims are neither original nor true. They're just tired cliches used by Darwinists, like the joke Icons of Evolution, because they have no defendable scientific evidence, only speculation and conjecture. Nice try.

 

[UltimateReality]

"It just doesn’t make sense that the entire biological world spontaneously arose all by itself. But the challenges to evolution go far beyond the intuition. When Charles Darwin proposed his unlikely idea in 1859 it defied much of what was known about biology in that day. Today, the situation has only become worse. If there was ever a modern-day myth, this is it and science is increasingly revealing this with its empirical findings dealing with both biological patterns and processes.

If the pattern does not comply, then you must falsify"

Darwin's God: Evolutionists Are Losing Ground Badly: Both Pattern and Process Contradict the Aging Theory

The notion that the entire biological world spontaneously arose all by itself defies common sense. It also defies empirical science.

 

[Hollie]

Do you know which video we are discussing ?

How would you explain the many different breeds in domestic animals since we see more change in domesticated animals ?

We also see it in families in the wild.

We see animals producing traits in their offspring that have been passed to them.

Did you somehow miss that you are describing the results of evolutionary processes?

Wow, you obviously totally lack understanding of your own theory. Don't look now, but...

You're more than a little befuddled. The science and theory of evolution has progressed substantially as the means and methods of examination and study have advanced. The supporting science has only gotten better defined and better understood. It only makes sense for that to continue.

It's obvious that your claims to gods and supernaturalism are becoming more marginalized and more out of touch.

 

[Hollie]

"It just doesn’t make sense that the entire biological world spontaneously arose all by itself. But the challenges to evolution go far beyond the intuition. When Charles Darwin proposed his unlikely idea in 1859 it defied much of what was known about biology in that day. Today, the situation has only become worse. If there was ever a modern-day myth, this is it and science is increasingly revealing this with its empirical findings dealing with both biological patterns and processes.

If the pattern does not comply, then you must falsify"

Darwin's God: Evolutionists Are Losing Ground Badly: Both Pattern and Process Contradict the Aging Theory

The notion that the entire biological world spontaneously arose all by itself defies common sense. It also defies empirical science.

Of course, the falsified "quotes" taken from crestionist ministries have a long and lurid history of falsification.

It's actually laughable to claim that evolution science is losing ground as the science is becoming more exacting.

Are the creation ministries suggesting that evolutionary science is losing ground to Christian creationism because that would be an absurd claim.

 

[Hollie]

I say YAHWEH created all things and gave organisms the limited ability to adapt. You have been presented with plenty of evidence for design with your side having no explanation for complexity.

Intelligence creates and design,we know of no natural method of the beginning of life. We know cars ,homes,and communication systems were designed by a intelligent mind.

You can make any claim you wish regarding your religious views. I'm also free to advise that your claims are totally unsupported and substanceless.

I've learned to expect dishonesty from Christian fundies and in concert with those expectations I have to advise that you have offered no evidence of anything. Posting canned YouTube videos is pointless as we know that Christian fundies have an agenda of pressing Christianity, not truth or facts.

And yes, mechanical components show design intent. Nothing in nature shows design. Everything in nature shows clear evidence of fitness for survival. Your silly comparisons are the standard boilerplate nonsense on Christian fundie websites. Your claims are neither original nor true. They're just tired cliches used by Christian creationists for lack of a defendable argument.

You can make any claim you wish regarding your materialistic religious views. I'm also free to advise that your claims are totally unsupported and unsubstantiated.

I've learned to expect dishonesty from Evo fundies and in concert with those expectations I have to advise that you have offered no evidence of anything. Posting canned ICR responses is pointless as we know that EVO fundies have an agenda of pressing Darwinism, not truth or facts.

And yes, mechanical components show design intent. Micro machines in the cell show design. Everything in nature shows clear evidence of design. Your silly comparisons are the standard boilerplate nonsense on Evo fundie websites. Your claims are neither original nor true. They're just tired cliches used by Darwinists, like the joke Icons of Evolution, because they have no defendable scientific evidence, only speculation and conjecture. Nice try.

I do find it interesting that you're reduced to falsely rewriting my comments in failed attempts to support your gods.

As usual, you fail to understand the scientific support for evolution. While your virulent hatred for science is demonstrated in your posts, no amount of your hatreds are going to prevent exploration and the advancement of knowledge.

Your silly plagiarism of my post represents a new low for the Christian creationist cabal.

 

[daws101]

You obviously didn't watch the second video either, which makes your comment look very foolish.

False! As with all these silly videos promoting religion, the underlying assumption is "the gods didi it". Attempting to force even inconsequential amounts of data to fit a preconceived view is dishonest. Religious claims to supernaturalism is not science.

Only because they lack faith in a creator while closing their minds to the evidence.

since you have no evidence of a creator your statement is false.
as always you have shown no quantifiable evidence for either claim.

 

[daws101]

The process of subjecting children to complex initiation rituals before they are able to critically assess the event is seen by Dawkins and other critics of religion as cruel.

evolution is never taught that way, the information is presented and the students decided for themselves, unlike religion where the the believe this or you're going to hell rule applies.

I have to disagree. Go watch Expelled. Darwinism is religiously taught and any one who objects is immediately silenced. Children are not taught to think about opposing viewpoints or question the evidence when it comes to their Darwinian indoctrination in the Nanny State Public schools. They are tricked with old lies even though new evidence abounds and immersed in assumptive language at every turn.

bullshit [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUB8Mv1SaKQ]Jesus in my School - YouTube[/ame]

Richard Sternberg
Summary
Expelled claims that Sternberg was “terrorized” and that “his life was nearly ruined” when, in 2004, as editor of Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, he published a pro-intelligent design article by Stephen C. Meyer. However, there is no evidence of either terrorism or ruination. Before publishing the paper, Sternberg worked for the National Institutes of Health at the National Center for Biotechnology Information (GenBank) and was an unpaid Research Associate – not an employee – at the Smithsonian. He was the voluntary, unpaid editor of PBSW (small academic journals rarely pay editors), and had given notice of his resignation as editor six months before the Meyer article was published. After the Meyer incident, he remained an employee of NIH and his unpaid position at the Smithsonian was extended in 2006, although he has not shown up there in years. At no time was any aspect of his pay or working conditions at NIH affected. It is difficult to see how his life “was nearly ruined” when nothing serious happened to him. He was never even disciplined for legitimate violations of policy of PBSW or Smithsonian policy.

The Claim
“The paper ignited a firestorm of controversy merely because it suggested intelligent design might be able to explain how life began.” (Ben Stein, Expelled)

The Facts
Expelled doesn’t even get the paper’s subject right. The paper was not about how life began; it was about the Cambrian Explosion, which occurred about three billion years later. The greater error is claiming that the discussion of ID generated the controversy. There was an understandable outcry from members of the Biological Society of Washington over the embarrassing publication of what they recognized as poorly-written, inaccurate science in their journal. The argument presented in the Meyer paper had previously been reviewed and rejected by scientists. Seeing this shoddy science in their journal indeed “ignited a firestorm”, but not for the reasons given in Expelled. For more on why the paper was bad science, see the review published on the Panda’s Thumb blog and the review in the Palaeontological Society Newsletter.

Expelled Exposed: Why Expelled Flunks » Richard Sternberg

 

[Youwerecreated]

Did you somehow miss that you are describing the results of evolutionary processes?

No i'm not, domesticated animals are products of selective breeding. Now why does it happen in the wild ? maybe they were simply created the way they appear in the wild but some may be the result of cross breeding.

I certainly have every reason to accept that Zeus had a hand in creating creatures in the wild. What can you offer to suggest that it was your gods who created wild creatures?

And which ones? I want a list.

Baby steps Hollie but his name is not zeus.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I certainly have every reason to accept that Zeus had a hand in creating creatures in the wild. What can you offer to suggest that it was your gods who created wild creatures?

And which ones? I want a list.

I say YAHWEH created all things and gave organisms the limited ability to adapt. You have been presented with plenty of evidence for design with your side having no explanation for complexity.

Intelligence creates and design,we know of no natural method of the beginning of life. We know cars ,homes,and communication systems were designed by a intelligent mind.

You can make any claim you wish regarding your religious views. I'm also free to advise that your claims are totally unsupported and substanceless.

I've learned to expect dishonesty from Christian fundies and in concert with those expectations I have to advise that you have offered no evidence of anything. Posting canned YouTube videos is pointless as we know that Christian fundies have an agenda of pressing Christianity, not truth or facts.

And yes, mechanical components show design intent. Nothing in nature shows design. Everything in nature shows clear evidence of fitness for survival. Your silly comparisons are the standard boilerplate nonsense on Christian fundie websites. Your claims are neither original nor true. They're just tired cliches used by Christian creationists for lack of a defendable argument.

You can't prove my views wrong concerning God, Nor my views in science.

 

[daws101]

No i'm not, domesticated animals are products of selective breeding. Now why does it happen in the wild ? maybe they were simply created the way they appear in the wild but some may be the result of cross breeding.

I certainly have every reason to accept that Zeus had a hand in creating creatures in the wild. What can you offer to suggest that it was your gods who created wild creatures?

And which ones? I want a list.

Baby steps Hollie but his name is not zeus.

and why not? since all references to a god or gods are subjective not objective.