Creationists

[newpolitics]

"These two meanings are worlds apart, and defenders of faith equivocate on these two definitions constantly to try and show that faith is justified. This is logically fallacious, because you are sneakily switching definitions of faith, interchanging them as needed."

Expect nothing else from intellectually and morally disingenuous douche-bags.

Who write this?

 

[ima]

Was Darwin a sientist?

Who cares? Let's say for the sake of argument he wasn't a scientist even though he correctly used the scientific method. Let's claim he was a quack.

Well, the countless credentialed scientists that came after him that also accurately utilized the scientific method and bias-free approaches to confirm and expand upon his work were scientists. So remind me what's your point again?

I dare you and the other defenders of the faith to take a look at your theory and predictions vs creationism. Everything on this site can be verified don't look unless you're willing to accept that Science better supports the creationist theory over the evolutionary theory.
It points out evolutionist and creationism Hypothesis supported or refuted through carefully crafted experimentation or observation, In other words the scientific method.
The Hypothesis of Evolution And Creation Science*
Part two.

The Age of the Earth

I don't get why creationists have to involve evolution when they want to prove their theory. Disproving a different theory doesn't prove yours right.
Do you have a link to a site that explains the proof of creation without involving evolution? I'd be interested to read how they prove creation scientifically on their own.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Who cares? Let's say for the sake of argument he wasn't a scientist even though he correctly used the scientific method. Let's claim he was a quack.

Well, the countless credentialed scientists that came after him that also accurately utilized the scientific method and bias-free approaches to confirm and expand upon his work were scientists. So remind me what's your point again?

I dare you and the other defenders of the faith to take a look at your theory and predictions vs creationism. Everything on this site can be verified don't look unless you're willing to accept that Science better supports the creationist theory over the evolutionary theory.
It points out evolutionist and creationism Hypothesis supported or refuted through carefully crafted experimentation or observation, In other words the scientific method.
The Hypothesis of Evolution And Creation Science*
Part two.

The Age of the Earth

I don't get why creationists have to involve evolution when they want to prove their theory. Disproving a different theory doesn't prove yours right.
Do you have a link to a site that explains the proof of creation without involving evolution? I'd be interested to read how they prove creation scientifically on their own.

To show which theory is more viable not to mention since the introduction of evolution and it has become widely accepted people of faith have been literally treated like they had a plague.God was Kicked out of the schools and atheist highjacked the theory and science trying to remove God from the public as well.Creationists thoughts have been a subject of ridicule in the fields of science even though it was creationist that got the scientific method going.

They are two theories that are at odds with each other. until the science community overwhelmingly rejects the theory you will always see these debates rage.

 

[Youwerecreated]

And you claimed atheism is not a religous view.

IT'S NOT in the same way that not collecting stamps is a hobby.

The problem with religious nutjobs is that they can't even fathom the concept that someone can procure knowledge without faith that is different but on par with their own. The very idea baffles them. So they assign faith where none existed to avoid addressing any other possibilities.

But this is ultimately the difference between science and religion. Science strives for bias-free examination, allowing for perspective to be changed based on that evidence, whereas religion requires bias to cherry pick evidence so that faith can be preserved.

I dare you and the other defenders of the faith to take a look at your theory and predictions vs creationism. Everything on this site can be verified don't look unless you're willing to accept that Science better supports the creationist theory over the evolutionary theory.

It points out evolutionist and creationism Hypothesis supported or refuted through carefully crafted experimentation or observation, In other words the scientific method.

The Hypothesis of Evolution And Creation Science*


Part two.

The Age of the Earth

And I dare you to make an argument of your own instead of copying and pasting the crap of others. I'm fairly certain I shot down these links previously. In this thread.

Yes, coherent arguments of your own! Crazy idea! You, who in this very thread have been shown to fabricate evidence and information on the topic. You who in this very thread has shown himself on countless occasion to have absolutely no understanding of the basis of evolution despite despising it. People have actually made lists of all the erroneous things you've said. How is it that you still believe, after being proven wrong so many times about the same things, that you never actually learn anything about evolution? How is that depth of ignorance humanly possible?

The only argument I can make is from data that has already been explained. This debate has been raging for many years there is nothing new to introduce to the debate that has not been introduced already.

As we do more study we can introduce new data to the debate but all the major areas of concern have been argued to ad nauseam.

I bring to light many things people are not being taught in school. They blindly accept many theories without knowing the facts.

If you look at this whole thread I have been here since it's start and we pretty much covered everything. I believe a creator or designer is definitely a more credible belief then naturalism. I also believe it is better supported by the evidence observed and put to the test.

My rejections of the theory are the same as many before me.

 

[ima]

I dare you and the other defenders of the faith to take a look at your theory and predictions vs creationism. Everything on this site can be verified don't look unless you're willing to accept that Science better supports the creationist theory over the evolutionary theory.
It points out evolutionist and creationism Hypothesis supported or refuted through carefully crafted experimentation or observation, In other words the scientific method.
The Hypothesis of Evolution And Creation Science*
Part two.

The Age of the Earth

I don't get why creationists have to involve evolution when they want to prove their theory. Disproving a different theory doesn't prove yours right.
Do you have a link to a site that explains the proof of creation without involving evolution? I'd be interested to read how they prove creation scientifically on their own.

To show which theory is more viable not to mention since the introduction of evolution and it has become widely accepted people of faith have been literally treated like they had a plague.God was Kicked out of the schools and atheist highjacked the theory and science trying to remove God from the public as well.Creationists thoughts have been a subject of ridicule in the fields of science even though it was creationist that got the scientific method going.

They are two theories that are at odds with each other. until the science community overwhelmingly rejects the theory you will always see these debates rage.

The debate goes on, that's cool. But what I'm saying is that evolutionists don't try to prove their theory by discrediting someone else's. Do you have a site that tries to prove creation without attacking something else? Like proof with real scientific facts? Is there even such a site?

 

[Youwerecreated]

I don't get why creationists have to involve evolution when they want to prove their theory. Disproving a different theory doesn't prove yours right.
Do you have a link to a site that explains the proof of creation without involving evolution? I'd be interested to read how they prove creation scientifically on their own.

To show which theory is more viable not to mention since the introduction of evolution and it has become widely accepted people of faith have been literally treated like they had a plague.God was Kicked out of the schools and atheist highjacked the theory and science trying to remove God from the public as well.Creationists thoughts have been a subject of ridicule in the fields of science even though it was creationist that got the scientific method going.

They are two theories that are at odds with each other. until the science community overwhelmingly rejects the theory you will always see these debates rage.

The debate goes on, that's cool. But what I'm saying is that evolutionists don't try to prove their theory by discrediting someone else's. Do you have a site that tries to prove creation without attacking something else? Like proof with real scientific facts? Is there even such a site?

There are but you can't have one without the other. The atheistic evolutionist do the same thing.

 

[ima]

To show which theory is more viable not to mention since the introduction of evolution and it has become widely accepted people of faith have been literally treated like they had a plague.God was Kicked out of the schools and atheist highjacked the theory and science trying to remove God from the public as well.Creationists thoughts have been a subject of ridicule in the fields of science even though it was creationist that got the scientific method going.

They are two theories that are at odds with each other. until the science community overwhelmingly rejects the theory you will always see these debates rage.

The debate goes on, that's cool. But what I'm saying is that evolutionists don't try to prove their theory by discrediting someone else's. Do you have a site that tries to prove creation without attacking something else? Like proof with real scientific facts? Is there even such a site?

There are but you can't have one without the other. The atheistic evolutionist do the same thing.

Atheists are just as deluded as theists. So you have ZERO sites where creation is proven on its own merits? Buddy, that's ridiculous. In other words, creationists have nothing.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

To show which theory is more viable not to mention since the introduction of evolution and it has become widely accepted people of faith have been literally treated like they had a plague.God was Kicked out of the schools and atheist highjacked the theory and science trying to remove God from the public as well.Creationists thoughts have been a subject of ridicule in the fields of science even though it was creationist that got the scientific method going.

They are two theories that are at odds with each other. until the science community overwhelmingly rejects the theory you will always see these debates rage.

Yeah cuz stupidity should be avoided like the plague. Religion has no place in schools. This is really simple watch this:
Libraries have books
Churches have religion
Firehouses have firefighters
Schools have.... religion? NO! Education. You teach whatever unsupported useless things you want at home. Keep your religion away from factual learning.

The only argument I can make is from data that has already been explained. This debate has been raging for many years there is nothing new to introduce to the debate that has not been introduced already.

As we do more study we can introduce new data to the debate but all the major areas of concern have been argued to ad nauseam.

I bring to light many things people are not being taught in school. They blindly accept many theories without knowing the facts.

If you look at this whole thread I have been here since it's start and we pretty much covered everything. I believe a creator or designer is definitely a more credible belief then naturalism. I also believe it is better supported by the evidence observed and put to the test.

My rejections of the theory are the same as many before me.

Blindly accept theories? When presented with evidence and asked for all the possible explanations, you can't provide any. None. You avoid such academic exercises at all cost. You avoid education like the plague and then wonder why religious nuts are treated like the plague?

Here, let's go over one of my favorite examples that you can't stand to look at. Why do you suppose two of our chromosomes look identical to two great ape chromosomes fused end to end? What are the possibilities? Evolution is one possibility. Having an intelligent designer trick people to test their faith is another. What explanation do you have.

 

[Hollie]

To show which theory is more viable not to mention since the introduction of evolution and it has become widely accepted people of faith have been literally treated like they had a plague.God was Kicked out of the schools and atheist highjacked the theory and science trying to remove God from the public as well.Creationists thoughts have been a subject of ridicule in the fields of science even though it was creationist that got the scientific method going.

They are two theories that are at odds with each other. until the science community overwhelmingly rejects the theory you will always see these debates rage.

The debate goes on, that's cool. But what I'm saying is that evolutionists don't try to prove their theory by discrediting someone else's. Do you have a site that tries to prove creation without attacking something else? Like proof with real scientific facts? Is there even such a site?

There are but you can't have one without the other. The atheistic evolutionist do the same thing.

It is a shame that in all the time you have spent in this thread, you refuse to learn a single thing. It’s as though fundamentalist Christianity is a disease that corrupts the mind.

As it has been pointed out to you repeatedly and tediously, there really isn’t a single case in the thread where creationist have made any attempt to offer data or relevant arguments in support of gawds.

The creationist argument is structured to attack science in lieu of offering positive support for gawds. Creationist attempt to discredit knowledge and scientific research by claiming that what they preach is aligned with science and of course it’s not. Creationist are explicit regarding their view that if scientific findings contradict the biblical record then science is wrong. In the fundamentalist mindset, science is defined as merely the search for principles of one or more gawds creation. In their twisted worldview of superstition and fear of angry gawds, such principles as reproducible experiments and all theories concerning the natural world must always be subjected to the test of the Bibles. Apart from the obvious absurdity and intellectual dishonesty of this approach, creationist conduct no experiments, submit to no peer review, propose no testable theories and publish no supported work with supportive evidence of their gawds. Instead their every effort amounts to (failed) attempts to undermine and discredit the proven foundations of evolutionary science by misrepresenting scientific findings and falsifying the words and writing of reputable scientists.

 

[LittleNipper]

The debate goes on, that's cool. But what I'm saying is that evolutionists don't try to prove their theory by discrediting someone else's. Do you have a site that tries to prove creation without attacking something else? Like proof with real scientific facts? Is there even such a site?

There are but you can't have one without the other. The atheistic evolutionist do the same thing.

It is a shame that in all the time you have spent in this thread, you refuse to learn a single thing. It’s as though fundamentalist Christianity is a disease that corrupts the mind.

As it has been pointed out to you repeatedly and tediously, there really isn’t a single case in the thread where creationist have made any attempt to offer data or relevant arguments in support of gawds.

The creationist argument is structured to attack science in lieu of offering positive support for gawds. Creationist attempt to discredit knowledge and scientific research by claiming that what they preach is aligned with science and of course it’s not. Creationist are explicit regarding their view that if scientific findings contradict the biblical record then science is wrong. In the fundamentalist mindset, science is defined as merely the search for principles of one or more gawds creation. In their twisted worldview of superstition and fear of angry gawds, such principles as reproducible experiments and all theories concerning the natural world must always be subjected to the test of the Bibles. Apart from the obvious absurdity and intellectual dishonesty of this approach, creationist conduct no experiments, submit to no peer review, propose no testable theories and publish no supported work with supportive evidence of their gawds. Instead their every effort amounts to (failed) attempts to undermine and discredit the proven foundations of evolutionary science by misrepresenting scientific findings and falsifying the words and writing of reputable scientists.

God is a personal experience and one must be willing to allow God to prove Himself on a personal level. That involves asking God to reveal Himself by the person seeking after God. If one isn't honestly seeking God, that one is lost to himself and no amount of imput by a believer will convince that one of anything. But the reality is that every older friend I know has found God when all other options were gone. So my prayer is that you soon run into that roadblock. However, one may also choose to take one's own life. I personally know of at least 2 cases of that nature...

 

[Hollie]

There are but you can't have one without the other. The atheistic evolutionist do the same thing.

It is a shame that in all the time you have spent in this thread, you refuse to learn a single thing. It’s as though fundamentalist Christianity is a disease that corrupts the mind.

As it has been pointed out to you repeatedly and tediously, there really isn’t a single case in the thread where creationist have made any attempt to offer data or relevant arguments in support of gawds.

The creationist argument is structured to attack science in lieu of offering positive support for gawds. Creationist attempt to discredit knowledge and scientific research by claiming that what they preach is aligned with science and of course it’s not. Creationist are explicit regarding their view that if scientific findings contradict the biblical record then science is wrong. In the fundamentalist mindset, science is defined as merely the search for principles of one or more gawds creation. In their twisted worldview of superstition and fear of angry gawds, such principles as reproducible experiments and all theories concerning the natural world must always be subjected to the test of the Bibles. Apart from the obvious absurdity and intellectual dishonesty of this approach, creationist conduct no experiments, submit to no peer review, propose no testable theories and publish no supported work with supportive evidence of their gawds. Instead their every effort amounts to (failed) attempts to undermine and discredit the proven foundations of evolutionary science by misrepresenting scientific findings and falsifying the words and writing of reputable scientists.

God is a personal experience and one must be willing to allow God to prove Himself on a personal level. That involves asking God to reveal Himself by the person seeking after God. If one isn't honestly seeking God, that one is lost to himself and no amount of imput by a believer will convince that one of anything. But the reality is that every older friend I know has found God when all other options were gone. So my prayer is that you soon run into that roadblock. However, one may also choose to take one's own life. I personally know of at least 2 cases of that nature...

People can believe whatever they choose to believe, but to evoke the coercive power of fear and superstition and seekt o impose ones personal fears and superstitions upon others seems antithetical to the notion of freedom of choice.

The notion that one can communicate with the denizens of a spirit world is commonplace amongst religionists. Perchance you feel you are in a unique position to intercede on behalf of the gawds and exert influence upon them from whom you seek a favour? In brief, influence peddling.

 

[daws101]

There are but you can't have one without the other. The atheistic evolutionist do the same thing.

It is a shame that in all the time you have spent in this thread, you refuse to learn a single thing. It’s as though fundamentalist Christianity is a disease that corrupts the mind.

As it has been pointed out to you repeatedly and tediously, there really isn’t a single case in the thread where creationist have made any attempt to offer data or relevant arguments in support of gawds.

The creationist argument is structured to attack science in lieu of offering positive support for gawds. Creationist attempt to discredit knowledge and scientific research by claiming that what they preach is aligned with science and of course it’s not. Creationist are explicit regarding their view that if scientific findings contradict the biblical record then science is wrong. In the fundamentalist mindset, science is defined as merely the search for principles of one or more gawds creation. In their twisted worldview of superstition and fear of angry gawds, such principles as reproducible experiments and all theories concerning the natural world must always be subjected to the test of the Bibles. Apart from the obvious absurdity and intellectual dishonesty of this approach, creationist conduct no experiments, submit to no peer review, propose no testable theories and publish no supported work with supportive evidence of their gawds. Instead their every effort amounts to (failed) attempts to undermine and discredit the proven foundations of evolutionary science by misrepresenting scientific findings and falsifying the words and writing of reputable scientists.

God is a personal experience and one must be willing to allow God to prove Himself on a personal level. That involves asking God to reveal Himself by the person seeking after God. If one isn't honestly seeking God, that one is lost to himself and no amount of imput by a believer will convince that one of anything. But the reality is that every older friend I know has found God when all other options were gone. So my prayer is that you soon run into that roadblock. However, one may also choose to take one's own life. I personally know of at least 2 cases of that nature...

so you're saying is, it's either god or death?
it must suck to be you..

 

[Youwerecreated]

It is a shame that in all the time you have spent in this thread, you refuse to learn a single thing. It’s as though fundamentalist Christianity is a disease that corrupts the mind.

As it has been pointed out to you repeatedly and tediously, there really isn’t a single case in the thread where creationist have made any attempt to offer data or relevant arguments in support of gawds.

The creationist argument is structured to attack science in lieu of offering positive support for gawds. Creationist attempt to discredit knowledge and scientific research by claiming that what they preach is aligned with science and of course it’s not. Creationist are explicit regarding their view that if scientific findings contradict the biblical record then science is wrong. In the fundamentalist mindset, science is defined as merely the search for principles of one or more gawds creation. In their twisted worldview of superstition and fear of angry gawds, such principles as reproducible experiments and all theories concerning the natural world must always be subjected to the test of the Bibles. Apart from the obvious absurdity and intellectual dishonesty of this approach, creationist conduct no experiments, submit to no peer review, propose no testable theories and publish no supported work with supportive evidence of their gawds. Instead their every effort amounts to (failed) attempts to undermine and discredit the proven foundations of evolutionary science by misrepresenting scientific findings and falsifying the words and writing of reputable scientists.

God is a personal experience and one must be willing to allow God to prove Himself on a personal level. That involves asking God to reveal Himself by the person seeking after God. If one isn't honestly seeking God, that one is lost to himself and no amount of imput by a believer will convince that one of anything. But the reality is that every older friend I know has found God when all other options were gone. So my prayer is that you soon run into that roadblock. However, one may also choose to take one's own life. I personally know of at least 2 cases of that nature...

so you're saying is, it's either god or death?
it must suck to be you..

We all will eventually die until the new kingdom comes in to power. Many are choosing everlasting death over everlasting life what is your point ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

The debate goes on, that's cool. But what I'm saying is that evolutionists don't try to prove their theory by discrediting someone else's. Do you have a site that tries to prove creation without attacking something else? Like proof with real scientific facts? Is there even such a site?

There are but you can't have one without the other. The atheistic evolutionist do the same thing.

It is a shame that in all the time you have spent in this thread, you refuse to learn a single thing. It’s as though fundamentalist Christianity is a disease that corrupts the mind.

As it has been pointed out to you repeatedly and tediously, there really isn’t a single case in the thread where creationist have made any attempt to offer data or relevant arguments in support of gawds.

The creationist argument is structured to attack science in lieu of offering positive support for gawds. Creationist attempt to discredit knowledge and scientific research by claiming that what they preach is aligned with science and of course it’s not. Creationist are explicit regarding their view that if scientific findings contradict the biblical record then science is wrong. In the fundamentalist mindset, science is defined as merely the search for principles of one or more gawds creation. In their twisted worldview of superstition and fear of angry gawds, such principles as reproducible experiments and all theories concerning the natural world must always be subjected to the test of the Bibles. Apart from the obvious absurdity and intellectual dishonesty of this approach, creationist conduct no experiments, submit to no peer review, propose no testable theories and publish no supported work with supportive evidence of their gawds. Instead their every effort amounts to (failed) attempts to undermine and discredit the proven foundations of evolutionary science by misrepresenting scientific findings and falsifying the words and writing of reputable scientists.

Talk origins is not guilty of these very things ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

To show which theory is more viable not to mention since the introduction of evolution and it has become widely accepted people of faith have been literally treated like they had a plague.God was Kicked out of the schools and atheist highjacked the theory and science trying to remove God from the public as well.Creationists thoughts have been a subject of ridicule in the fields of science even though it was creationist that got the scientific method going.

They are two theories that are at odds with each other. until the science community overwhelmingly rejects the theory you will always see these debates rage.

Yeah cuz stupidity should be avoided like the plague. Religion has no place in schools. This is really simple watch this:
Libraries have books
Churches have religion
Firehouses have firefighters
Schools have.... religion? NO! Education. You teach whatever unsupported useless things you want at home. Keep your religion away from factual learning.

The only argument I can make is from data that has already been explained. This debate has been raging for many years there is nothing new to introduce to the debate that has not been introduced already.

As we do more study we can introduce new data to the debate but all the major areas of concern have been argued to ad nauseam.

I bring to light many things people are not being taught in school. They blindly accept many theories without knowing the facts.

If you look at this whole thread I have been here since it's start and we pretty much covered everything. I believe a creator or designer is definitely a more credible belief then naturalism. I also believe it is better supported by the evidence observed and put to the test.

My rejections of the theory are the same as many before me.

Blindly accept theories? When presented with evidence and asked for all the possible explanations, you can't provide any. None. You avoid such academic exercises at all cost. You avoid education like the plague and then wonder why religious nuts are treated like the plague?

Here, let's go over one of my favorite examples that you can't stand to look at. Why do you suppose two of our chromosomes look identical to two great ape chromosomes fused end to end? What are the possibilities? Evolution is one possibility. Having an intelligent designer trick people to test their faith is another. What explanation do you have.

You show ignorance when you go on your fundie rants by claiming that believers are stupid. What really scares you is that you know creationist are well educated and well equipped to take on atheistic evolutionist. You know they are not ignorant of the facts.

 

[ima]

There are but you can't have one without the other. The atheistic evolutionist do the same thing.

It is a shame that in all the time you have spent in this thread, you refuse to learn a single thing. It’s as though fundamentalist Christianity is a disease that corrupts the mind.

As it has been pointed out to you repeatedly and tediously, there really isn’t a single case in the thread where creationist have made any attempt to offer data or relevant arguments in support of gawds.

The creationist argument is structured to attack science in lieu of offering positive support for gawds. Creationist attempt to discredit knowledge and scientific research by claiming that what they preach is aligned with science and of course it’s not. Creationist are explicit regarding their view that if scientific findings contradict the biblical record then science is wrong. In the fundamentalist mindset, science is defined as merely the search for principles of one or more gawds creation. In their twisted worldview of superstition and fear of angry gawds, such principles as reproducible experiments and all theories concerning the natural world must always be subjected to the test of the Bibles. Apart from the obvious absurdity and intellectual dishonesty of this approach, creationist conduct no experiments, submit to no peer review, propose no testable theories and publish no supported work with supportive evidence of their gawds. Instead their every effort amounts to (failed) attempts to undermine and discredit the proven foundations of evolutionary science by misrepresenting scientific findings and falsifying the words and writing of reputable scientists.

Talk origins is not guilty of these very things ?

Given what hollie just said (that I agree with), YWC you seem like a reasonably intelligent person, so does not having any real scientific facts about creation ever bother you?

 

[Hollie]

God is a personal experience and one must be willing to allow God to prove Himself on a personal level. That involves asking God to reveal Himself by the person seeking after God. If one isn't honestly seeking God, that one is lost to himself and no amount of imput by a believer will convince that one of anything. But the reality is that every older friend I know has found God when all other options were gone. So my prayer is that you soon run into that roadblock. However, one may also choose to take one's own life. I personally know of at least 2 cases of that nature...

so you're saying is, it's either god or death?
it must suck to be you..

We all will eventually die until the new kingdom comes in to power. Many are choosing everlasting death over everlasting life what is your point ?

Classic fundamentalist Christian tactics: the use fear and intimidation as a coercive effort.

As an Atheist, I’m not saddled with the compulsive admonition of “believe as you’re told or be consigned to everlasting pain and torment.” Think about it, what is the best way to get someone to believe as you wish for them to? FEAR. Scare the hell out of him. Tell the people that evolutionist are on a paved road to hell....and you will deter them (for a time) until they LEARN better.

Secondly, you make another of the typical fundamentalist Christian claims of some alleged “kingdom” established by some alleged gawds. Which gawd(s)?. You must first define your terms here. What do you mean by "gawd"? There are many conceptions of gawds, ranging from incorporeal entities to long haired hippies walking around in sandals. Additionally, there have been something on the order of 14,000 “versions” of gawd(s). Can you make the irrefutable case of your conception of gawds having primacy over all others?
No, obviously you can’t.

Your conception of gawds is simply one that has been hurled at you, using the same tactics of fear and intimidation that you now use to hurl at others. Effectively, you're just another hater, one who has been abused by tactics of fear and intimidation who now attempts to inflict that fear and intimidation on others.

 

[Hollie]

There are but you can't have one without the other. The atheistic evolutionist do the same thing.

It is a shame that in all the time you have spent in this thread, you refuse to learn a single thing. It’s as though fundamentalist Christianity is a disease that corrupts the mind.

As it has been pointed out to you repeatedly and tediously, there really isn’t a single case in the thread where creationist have made any attempt to offer data or relevant arguments in support of gawds.

The creationist argument is structured to attack science in lieu of offering positive support for gawds. Creationist attempt to discredit knowledge and scientific research by claiming that what they preach is aligned with science and of course it’s not. Creationist are explicit regarding their view that if scientific findings contradict the biblical record then science is wrong. In the fundamentalist mindset, science is defined as merely the search for principles of one or more gawds creation. In their twisted worldview of superstition and fear of angry gawds, such principles as reproducible experiments and all theories concerning the natural world must always be subjected to the test of the Bibles. Apart from the obvious absurdity and intellectual dishonesty of this approach, creationist conduct no experiments, submit to no peer review, propose no testable theories and publish no supported work with supportive evidence of their gawds. Instead their every effort amounts to (failed) attempts to undermine and discredit the proven foundations of evolutionary science by misrepresenting scientific findings and falsifying the words and writing of reputable scientists.

Talk origins is not guilty of these very things ?

You can't support your claim with evidence?

 

[Youwerecreated]

It is a shame that in all the time you have spent in this thread, you refuse to learn a single thing. It’s as though fundamentalist Christianity is a disease that corrupts the mind.

As it has been pointed out to you repeatedly and tediously, there really isn’t a single case in the thread where creationist have made any attempt to offer data or relevant arguments in support of gawds.

The creationist argument is structured to attack science in lieu of offering positive support for gawds. Creationist attempt to discredit knowledge and scientific research by claiming that what they preach is aligned with science and of course it’s not. Creationist are explicit regarding their view that if scientific findings contradict the biblical record then science is wrong. In the fundamentalist mindset, science is defined as merely the search for principles of one or more gawds creation. In their twisted worldview of superstition and fear of angry gawds, such principles as reproducible experiments and all theories concerning the natural world must always be subjected to the test of the Bibles. Apart from the obvious absurdity and intellectual dishonesty of this approach, creationist conduct no experiments, submit to no peer review, propose no testable theories and publish no supported work with supportive evidence of their gawds. Instead their every effort amounts to (failed) attempts to undermine and discredit the proven foundations of evolutionary science by misrepresenting scientific findings and falsifying the words and writing of reputable scientists.

Talk origins is not guilty of these very things ?

You can't support your claim with evidence?

All you have to do is go their and open your eyes why do you post so much from that site ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

This country is divided in politics and religous beliefs.