Total Posts:41|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

What is the evidence?

bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2013 6:39:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
What is the evidence and testable hypoteses of Creationism?

By evidence, I don't mean:

The Bible
The "Kinds" argument, which does not directly support Creationism.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
DoubtingDave
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2013 6:54:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/8/2013 6:39:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
What is the evidence and testable hypoteses of Creationism?

By evidence, I don't mean:

The Bible
The "Kinds" argument, which does not directly support Creationism.

All the evidence is located here in this museum https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com... and at this prestigious college here
https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com...
The Great Wall of Fail

"I have doubts that anti-semitism even exists" -GeoLaureate8

"Evolutionists think that people evolved from rocks" -Scotty

"And whats so bad about a Holy war? By Holy war, I mean a war which would aim to subdue others under Islam." -Ahmed.M

"The free market didn't create the massive wealth in the country, WW2 did." -malcomxy

"Independant federal regulators make our capitalist society possible." -Erik_Erikson
matt.mcguire88
Posts: 1,137
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2013 7:00:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/8/2013 6:39:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
What is the evidence and testable hypoteses of Creationism?

By evidence, I don't mean:

The Bible
The "Kinds" argument, which does not directly support Creationism.

There could be no testable evidence for creationism, maybe theory and philosophy. But I do believe the scripture can be applied and tested.
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2013 7:06:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/8/2013 7:00:58 PM, matt.mcguire88 wrote:
At 6/8/2013 6:39:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
What is the evidence and testable hypoteses of Creationism?

By evidence, I don't mean:

The Bible
The "Kinds" argument, which does not directly support Creationism.

There could be no testable evidence for creationism, maybe theory and philosophy. But I do believe the scripture can be applied and tested.

When tested, of course, it fails that test. (I haven't seen any believers moving mountains, lately...)

But that's not really what I asked for. I hear a lot of creationists saying that their theory is equal to evolution, for which we have both evidence, and testable hypotheses.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2013 7:20:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/8/2013 6:54:02 PM, DoubtingDave wrote:
At 6/8/2013 6:39:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
What is the evidence and testable hypoteses of Creationism?

By evidence, I don't mean:

The Bible
The "Kinds" argument, which does not directly support Creationism.

All the evidence is located here in this museum https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com... and at this prestigious college here
https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com...

Is that second one Patriot Bible University?
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2013 7:24:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/8/2013 7:00:58 PM, matt.mcguire88 wrote:
At 6/8/2013 6:39:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
What is the evidence and testable hypoteses of Creationism?

By evidence, I don't mean:

The Bible
The "Kinds" argument, which does not directly support Creationism.

There could be no testable evidence for creationism, maybe theory and philosophy. But I do believe the scripture can be applied and tested.

Which parts of scripture? Can we apply and test Leviticus 14:49-53? Or how about Mark 16:17-18?
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2013 7:29:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/8/2013 7:24:37 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 6/8/2013 7:00:58 PM, matt.mcguire88 wrote:
At 6/8/2013 6:39:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
What is the evidence and testable hypoteses of Creationism?

By evidence, I don't mean:

The Bible
The "Kinds" argument, which does not directly support Creationism.

There could be no testable evidence for creationism, maybe theory and philosophy. But I do believe the scripture can be applied and tested.

Which parts of scripture? Can we apply and test Leviticus 14:49-53? Or how about Mark 16:17-18?

Matthew 18:19's another good, testable claim...
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2013 7:54:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I'd like to add to that, evidence of the nature of any proposed deities.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2013 8:15:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/8/2013 7:29:23 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 6/8/2013 7:24:37 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 6/8/2013 7:00:58 PM, matt.mcguire88 wrote:
At 6/8/2013 6:39:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
What is the evidence and testable hypoteses of Creationism?

By evidence, I don't mean:

The Bible
The "Kinds" argument, which does not directly support Creationism.

There could be no testable evidence for creationism, maybe theory and philosophy. But I do believe the scripture can be applied and tested.

Which parts of scripture? Can we apply and test Leviticus 14:49-53? Or how about Mark 16:17-18?

Matthew 18:19's another good, testable claim...

Or Judges 1:19.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2013 8:43:13 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/8/2013 8:15:33 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 6/8/2013 7:29:23 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 6/8/2013 7:24:37 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 6/8/2013 7:00:58 PM, matt.mcguire88 wrote:
At 6/8/2013 6:39:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
What is the evidence and testable hypoteses of Creationism?

By evidence, I don't mean:

The Bible
The "Kinds" argument, which does not directly support Creationism.

There could be no testable evidence for creationism, maybe theory and philosophy. But I do believe the scripture can be applied and tested.

Which parts of scripture? Can we apply and test Leviticus 14:49-53? Or how about Mark 16:17-18?

Matthew 18:19's another good, testable claim...

Or Judges 1:19.

Eh, that one's funny, no doubt, but I don't know if it really makes a testable claim, per se.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2013 8:55:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/8/2013 8:43:13 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 6/8/2013 8:15:33 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 6/8/2013 7:29:23 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 6/8/2013 7:24:37 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 6/8/2013 7:00:58 PM, matt.mcguire88 wrote:
At 6/8/2013 6:39:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
What is the evidence and testable hypoteses of Creationism?

By evidence, I don't mean:

The Bible
The "Kinds" argument, which does not directly support Creationism.

There could be no testable evidence for creationism, maybe theory and philosophy. But I do believe the scripture can be applied and tested.

Which parts of scripture? Can we apply and test Leviticus 14:49-53? Or how about Mark 16:17-18?

Matthew 18:19's another good, testable claim...

Or Judges 1:19.

Eh, that one's funny, no doubt, but I don't know if it really makes a testable claim, per se.

Well, we could possibly test Matthew 18:19 and it at the same time. Just ask god to appear before us, and then see if he has any kind of weakness to iron.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
Harbinger
Posts: 778
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2013 11:09:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Universal Decay and Conservation of Matter/Energy
Law of Biogenesis/Origins
Natural Selection and Extinction
Erosional Features of a Worldwide Flood
Presence of Tightly Bent Strata Without Cracking
Presence of Sharp Contact Bedding Planes
Lack of Soil Layers and Bioturbation
Presence of Cross-Bedding and Fragile Surface Features
Presence of Polystrate Fossils
Presence of Clastic Dikes
Origin of Coal and Oil
Rapid magnetic field reversals and decay,
Less erosion of the continents and less sediments in the ocean,
Less salt in the sea,
Carbon-14 found in coal and diamonds,
Scarcity of human fossils,
Soft tissue and blood cells found in dinosaur fossils.

Just to name some.
Psalm 118:8, "It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man."
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2013 11:11:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/8/2013 11:09:16 PM, Harbinger wrote:
Universal Decay and Conservation of Matter/Energy
Law of Biogenesis/Origins
Natural Selection and Extinction
Erosional Features of a Worldwide Flood
Presence of Tightly Bent Strata Without Cracking
Presence of Sharp Contact Bedding Planes
Lack of Soil Layers and Bioturbation
Presence of Cross-Bedding and Fragile Surface Features
Presence of Polystrate Fossils
Presence of Clastic Dikes
Origin of Coal and Oil
Rapid magnetic field reversals and decay,
Less erosion of the continents and less sediments in the ocean,
Less salt in the sea,
Carbon-14 found in coal and diamonds,
Scarcity of human fossils,
Soft tissue and blood cells found in dinosaur fossils.

Just to name some.

Hey, could you go into more detail about Natural Selection and Extinction. A conversation about that would be interesting. By the way, nice list. Most of these guys won't be able to respond to most of these.
Harbinger
Posts: 778
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2013 11:21:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/8/2013 11:11:32 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 6/8/2013 11:09:16 PM, Harbinger wrote:
Universal Decay and Conservation of Matter/Energy
Law of Biogenesis/Origins
Natural Selection and Extinction
Erosional Features of a Worldwide Flood
Presence of Tightly Bent Strata Without Cracking
Presence of Sharp Contact Bedding Planes
Lack of Soil Layers and Bioturbation
Presence of Cross-Bedding and Fragile Surface Features
Presence of Polystrate Fossils
Presence of Clastic Dikes
Origin of Coal and Oil
Rapid magnetic field reversals and decay,
Less erosion of the continents and less sediments in the ocean,
Less salt in the sea,
Carbon-14 found in coal and diamonds,
Scarcity of human fossils,
Soft tissue and blood cells found in dinosaur fossils.

Just to name some.

Hey, could you go into more detail about Natural Selection and Extinction. A conversation about that would be interesting. By the way, nice list. Most of these guys won't be able to respond to most of these.

Thanks. Here is an article for that: http://amazingdiscoveries.org...
Psalm 118:8, "It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man."
1Devilsadvocate
Posts: 1,518
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2013 11:32:25 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/8/2013 8:43:13 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 6/8/2013 8:15:33 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 6/8/2013 7:29:23 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 6/8/2013 7:24:37 PM, muzebreak wrote:
At 6/8/2013 7:00:58 PM, matt.mcguire88 wrote:
At 6/8/2013 6:39:16 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
What is the evidence and testable hypoteses of Creationism?

By evidence, I don't mean:

The Bible
The "Kinds" argument, which does not directly support Creationism.

There could be no testable evidence for creationism, maybe theory and philosophy. But I do believe the scripture can be applied and tested.

Which parts of scripture? Can we apply and test Leviticus 14:49-53? Or how about Mark 16:17-18?

Matthew 18:19's another good, testable claim...

Or Judges 1:19.

Eh, that one's funny, no doubt, but I don't know if it really makes a testable claim, per se.

What's funny about it? Also, Leviticus 14:49-53 doesn't either make a testable claim, how do you test for purity?
I cannot write in English, because of the treacherous spelling. When I am reading, I only hear it and am unable to remember what the written word looks like."
"Albert Einstein

http://www.twainquotes.com... , http://thewritecorner.wordpress.com... , http://www.onlinecollegecourses.com...
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2013 11:41:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/8/2013 11:09:16 PM, Harbinger wrote:
Universal Decay and Conservation of Matter/Energy

Even mentioning this lets me know that this is not going to go well. Conservation of energy refers to a closed system, which the earth is not. If you aren't aware of that, hope for the rest of this list is slim.

Law of Biogenesis/Origins

That's not any kind of "evidence" or testable hypothesis.

Natural Selection and Extinction

Doesn't support Creationism whatsoever.

Erosional Features of a Worldwide Flood

Aren't present. You're welcome to try to present some evidence of such, but even if you did it would support Creationism exactly not at all.

Presence of Tightly Bent Strata Without Cracking

Again, that has nothing to do with Creationism. It has to do with the general concept of the Young Earth hypothesis.

Presence of Sharp Contact Bedding Planes

Yeah, still not evidence for Creationism.

Lack of Soil Layers and Bioturbation

Ditto.

Presence of Cross-Bedding and Fragile Surface Features

Ditto ditto.

Presence of Polystrate Fossils

How does this support Creationism? What is testable about this hypothesis?

Presence of Clastic Dikes

Not Creationism.

Origin of Coal and Oil

That doesn't support Creationism, or a Young Earth.

Rapid magnetic field reversals and decay,

Not supportive of Creationism.

Less erosion of the continents and less sediments in the ocean,

Not supportive of Creationism.

Less salt in the sea,

I don't even know what this is.

Carbon-14 found in coal and diamonds,

Which means nothing as regards to Creationism, and has also been dealt with:
http://www.talkorigins.org...

Scarcity of human fossils,
This does nothing whatsoever to support Creationism or a Young Earth.

Soft tissue and blood cells found in dinosaur fossils.
Which means?


Just to name some.

Some what? Random pseudofacts?

This was a list, in response to a question. It doesn't answer the question at all, and that you seem to think it supports Creationism shows what appears to be very fundamental problems in your understanding of science. If it wasn't intended to answer the question, I can only ask what you thought it was supposed to answer?
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Harbinger
Posts: 778
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 12:52:23 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Universal Decay and Conservation of Matter/Energy
http://creationsciencetoday.com...
http://www.uark.edu...
http://mathpages.com...
http://www.astronomynotes.com...
Law of Biogenesis/Origins
http://creationsciencetoday.com...
http://www.uark.edu...
http://ebooks.cambridge.org...=
http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com...
Natural Selection and Extinction
http://creationsciencetoday.com...
http://www.understanding-creationism.com...
http://www.academia.edu...
Erosional Features of a Worldwide Flood
http://creationsciencetoday.com...
http://www.cs.unc.edu...
Presence of Tightly Bent Strata Without Cracking
http://creationsciencetoday.com...
http://www.icr.org...
http://geology.com...
Presence of Sharp Contact Bedding Planes
http://creationsciencetoday.com...
http://www.wvup.edu...
Lack of Soil Layers and Bioturbation
http://creationsciencetoday.com...
http://etd.lsu.edu...
http://dare.uva.nl...
Presence of Cross-Bedding and Fragile Surface Features
http://creationsciencetoday.com...
http://www.nature.nps.gov...
Presence of Polystrate Fossils
http://creationsciencetoday.com...
http://ianjuby.org...
Presence of Clastic Dikes
http://creationsciencetoday.com...
http://cgiss.boisestate.edu...
Origin of Coal and Oil
http://creationsciencetoday.com...
http://www.manicore.com...
http://www.planete-energies.com...
Rapid magnetic field reversals and decay,
http://www.talkorigins.org...
http://truedino.com...
http://orgs.usd.edu...
Less erosion of the continents and less sediments in the ocean,
http://www.icr.org...
http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com...
Less salt in the sea
http://creation.com...
http://www.organicauthority.com...
Carbon-14 found in coal and diamonds
http://www.talkorigins.org...
http://iooe.org...
Scarcity of human fossils
http://www.talkorigins.org...
Soft tissue and blood cells found in dinosaur fossils
http://creation.com...
http://www.smithsonianmag.com...
Psalm 118:8, "It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man."
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 1:04:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Harbinger, more links does not a point make. If you have an actual point, make it yourself.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 1:06:14 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
And seriously, trying to pretend that the law of conservation of energy matters regarding the creation of life on this planet, when we have supplemental energy coming directly at us from the bloody sun, makes me question your ability to discuss this subject rationally.
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 2:45:04 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/9/2013 1:04:10 AM, bladerunner060 wrote:
Harbinger, more links does not a point make. If you have an actual point, make it yourself.

Your response wasn't any better than the stuff he posted. All you said was ditto and not creationism.
Dan4reason
Posts: 1,168
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 3:00:08 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/8/2013 11:21:22 PM, Harbinger wrote:
At 6/8/2013 11:11:32 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 6/8/2013 11:09:16 PM, Harbinger wrote:
Universal Decay and Conservation of Matter/Energy
Law of Biogenesis/Origins
Natural Selection and Extinction
Erosional Features of a Worldwide Flood
Presence of Tightly Bent Strata Without Cracking
Presence of Sharp Contact Bedding Planes
Lack of Soil Layers and Bioturbation
Presence of Cross-Bedding and Fragile Surface Features
Presence of Polystrate Fossils
Presence of Clastic Dikes
Origin of Coal and Oil
Rapid magnetic field reversals and decay,
Less erosion of the continents and less sediments in the ocean,
Less salt in the sea,
Carbon-14 found in coal and diamonds,
Scarcity of human fossils,
Soft tissue and blood cells found in dinosaur fossils.

Just to name some.

Hey, could you go into more detail about Natural Selection and Extinction. A conversation about that would be interesting. By the way, nice list. Most of these guys won't be able to respond to most of these.

Thanks. Here is an article for that: http://amazingdiscoveries.org...

Natural selection is the process that removed genetic diversity, that is correct. However random mutations adds to this genetic diversity. In fact each one of us has gained 100 mutations at birth.

The process of speciation occurs when several groups in the same population become geographically isolated. Random mutations in each population builds up and they begin to mutate in different evolutionary directions. So while natural selection will destroy species, speciation will create new ones. As natural selection will destroy inferior genetic content, mutations will create new content.
Harbinger
Posts: 778
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 3:56:33 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/9/2013 3:00:08 AM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 6/8/2013 11:21:22 PM, Harbinger wrote:
At 6/8/2013 11:11:32 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 6/8/2013 11:09:16 PM, Harbinger wrote:
Universal Decay and Conservation of Matter/Energy
Law of Biogenesis/Origins
Natural Selection and Extinction
Erosional Features of a Worldwide Flood
Presence of Tightly Bent Strata Without Cracking
Presence of Sharp Contact Bedding Planes
Lack of Soil Layers and Bioturbation
Presence of Cross-Bedding and Fragile Surface Features
Presence of Polystrate Fossils
Presence of Clastic Dikes
Origin of Coal and Oil
Rapid magnetic field reversals and decay,
Less erosion of the continents and less sediments in the ocean,
Less salt in the sea,
Carbon-14 found in coal and diamonds,
Scarcity of human fossils,
Soft tissue and blood cells found in dinosaur fossils.

Just to name some.

Hey, could you go into more detail about Natural Selection and Extinction. A conversation about that would be interesting. By the way, nice list. Most of these guys won't be able to respond to most of these.

Thanks. Here is an article for that: http://amazingdiscoveries.org...

Natural selection is the process that removed genetic diversity, that is correct. However random mutations adds to this genetic diversity. In fact each one of us has gained 100 mutations at birth.

The process of speciation occurs when several groups in the same population become geographically isolated. Random mutations in each population builds up and they begin to mutate in different evolutionary directions. So while natural selection will destroy species, speciation will create new ones. As natural selection will destroy inferior genetic content, mutations will create new content.

Please show any percentage of mutations have found to produce anything good. You are aware that mutations are bad and 98% of them result in bad results, right?
Psalm 118:8, "It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man."
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 4:25:55 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/9/2013 3:56:33 AM, Harbinger wrote:
At 6/9/2013 3:00:08 AM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 6/8/2013 11:21:22 PM, Harbinger wrote:
At 6/8/2013 11:11:32 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 6/8/2013 11:09:16 PM, Harbinger wrote:
Universal Decay and Conservation of Matter/Energy
Law of Biogenesis/Origins
Natural Selection and Extinction
Erosional Features of a Worldwide Flood
Presence of Tightly Bent Strata Without Cracking
Presence of Sharp Contact Bedding Planes
Lack of Soil Layers and Bioturbation
Presence of Cross-Bedding and Fragile Surface Features
Presence of Polystrate Fossils
Presence of Clastic Dikes
Origin of Coal and Oil
Rapid magnetic field reversals and decay,
Less erosion of the continents and less sediments in the ocean,
Less salt in the sea,
Carbon-14 found in coal and diamonds,
Scarcity of human fossils,
Soft tissue and blood cells found in dinosaur fossils.

Just to name some.

Hey, could you go into more detail about Natural Selection and Extinction. A conversation about that would be interesting. By the way, nice list. Most of these guys won't be able to respond to most of these.

Thanks. Here is an article for that: http://amazingdiscoveries.org...

Natural selection is the process that removed genetic diversity, that is correct. However random mutations adds to this genetic diversity. In fact each one of us has gained 100 mutations at birth.

The process of speciation occurs when several groups in the same population become geographically isolated. Random mutations in each population builds up and they begin to mutate in different evolutionary directions. So while natural selection will destroy species, speciation will create new ones. As natural selection will destroy inferior genetic content, mutations will create new content.

Please show any percentage of mutations have found to produce anything good. You are aware that mutations are bad and 98% of them result in bad results, right?

Do you have a source to back this up with?
Harbinger
Posts: 778
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 4:33:24 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/9/2013 4:25:55 AM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
At 6/9/2013 3:56:33 AM, Harbinger wrote:
At 6/9/2013 3:00:08 AM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 6/8/2013 11:21:22 PM, Harbinger wrote:
At 6/8/2013 11:11:32 PM, Dan4reason wrote:
At 6/8/2013 11:09:16 PM, Harbinger wrote:
Universal Decay and Conservation of Matter/Energy
Law of Biogenesis/Origins
Natural Selection and Extinction
Erosional Features of a Worldwide Flood
Presence of Tightly Bent Strata Without Cracking
Presence of Sharp Contact Bedding Planes
Lack of Soil Layers and Bioturbation
Presence of Cross-Bedding and Fragile Surface Features
Presence of Polystrate Fossils
Presence of Clastic Dikes
Origin of Coal and Oil
Rapid magnetic field reversals and decay,
Less erosion of the continents and less sediments in the ocean,
Less salt in the sea,
Carbon-14 found in coal and diamonds,
Scarcity of human fossils,
Soft tissue and blood cells found in dinosaur fossils.

Just to name some.

Hey, could you go into more detail about Natural Selection and Extinction. A conversation about that would be interesting. By the way, nice list. Most of these guys won't be able to respond to most of these.

Thanks. Here is an article for that: http://amazingdiscoveries.org...

Natural selection is the process that removed genetic diversity, that is correct. However random mutations adds to this genetic diversity. In fact each one of us has gained 100 mutations at birth.

The process of speciation occurs when several groups in the same population become geographically isolated. Random mutations in each population builds up and they begin to mutate in different evolutionary directions. So while natural selection will destroy species, speciation will create new ones. As natural selection will destroy inferior genetic content, mutations will create new content.

Please show any percentage of mutations have found to produce anything good. You are aware that mutations are bad and 98% of them result in bad results, right?

Do you have a source to back this up with?

Most mutations are silent (cause no real change) or neutral (cause a change that doesn't make any real difference); of those that do make a difference, most are harmful (at least in the organism's current circumstances), but a small percentage simply cause an alteration in function for good. http://www.cod.edu...
Psalm 118:8, "It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man."
Harbinger
Posts: 778
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 4:34:41 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I did mean ones that cause change, sorry.
Psalm 118:8, "It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man."
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 4:43:43 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/9/2013 12:52:23 AM, Harbinger wrote:
Universal Decay and Conservation of Matter/Energy
http://creationsciencetoday.com...

"Age, disease and death of all living things are tied directly to the Second Law of Thermodynamics (sometimes referred to as the Law of Increasing Entropy), which states that usable energy in the universe available for work is decaying or running down to a state of inert uniformity, or heat death."

I didn't realize that someone could be so stupid, as to take rationalizations this far.

http://www.uark.edu...
http://mathpages.com...
http://www.astronomynotes.com...
Law of Biogenesis/Origins
http://creationsciencetoday.com...

"Teachers, scientists, and journalists talk as if evolution were observed fact"but the fact is, no one has ever observed evolution and no one really has any scientific explanation of how the immensely complex, information - bearing molecules could have arisen from "nonlife" without preprogrammed design and outside intelligence. Also, as mentioned in the previous section, the property of a cell that "makes it alive" cannot be explained by just referring to its chemical or genetic properties."

Seriously, do these people have the ability to understand the things they're talking about?

http://www.uark.edu...
http://ebooks.cambridge.org...=
http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com...
Natural Selection and Extinction
http://creationsciencetoday.com...

"Contrary to popular belief, natural selection, survival of the fittest, or microevolution is Not Evolution. It is merely a genetic process within populations which selects gene traits from an existing "gene pool" in the original "kind" of animal best suited for a specific environment. A gene pool for a particular "kind" of animal is genetic information already present in the "kind" population. Gene shuffling (reshuffling or genetic recombination) of the same information in many different ways in response to a specific environment (or as a result of artificial breeding) will result in much variation or speciation in any "kind" of plant or animal population."

Is there a limit to how stupid they can be? It certainly doesn't look like it.

http://www.understanding-creationism.com...
http://www.academia.edu...
Erosional Features of a Worldwide Flood
http://creationsciencetoday.com...
http://www.cs.unc.edu...
Presence of Tightly Bent Strata Without Cracking
http://creationsciencetoday.com...
http://www.icr.org...
http://geology.com...
Presence of Sharp Contact Bedding Planes
http://creationsciencetoday.com...
http://www.wvup.edu...
Lack of Soil Layers and Bioturbation
http://creationsciencetoday.com...
http://etd.lsu.edu...
http://dare.uva.nl...
Presence of Cross-Bedding and Fragile Surface Features
http://creationsciencetoday.com...
http://www.nature.nps.gov...
Presence of Polystrate Fossils
http://creationsciencetoday.com...
http://ianjuby.org...
Presence of Clastic Dikes
http://creationsciencetoday.com...
http://cgiss.boisestate.edu...
Origin of Coal and Oil
http://creationsciencetoday.com...

"Keep in mind that no one has ever viewed the supposed gradual change of peat into coal under natural conditions"old-age theorists have merely assumed the process based on the old earth model. Research has shown the creation of coal does not take millions of years of heat and pressure but, as demonstrated in the laboratory, it can develop in just a matter of days with just a few essential ingredients"

Seriously? Even you have to see how they are equating perfect laboratory conditions, with natural process'. It's just idiotic rationalization.

http://www.manicore.com...
http://www.planete-energies.com...
Rapid magnetic field reversals and decay,
http://www.talkorigins.org...
http://truedino.com...
http://orgs.usd.edu...
Less erosion of the continents and less sediments in the ocean,
http://www.icr.org...
http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com...
Less salt in the sea
http://creation.com...
http://www.organicauthority.com...
Carbon-14 found in coal and diamonds
http://www.talkorigins.org...
http://iooe.org...
Scarcity of human fossils
http://www.talkorigins.org...

Did you seriously just provide a talkorigins link?

Soft tissue and blood cells found in dinosaur fossils
http://creation.com...

Since you provided us with some talkorigins links, here's one for you.

http://www.talkorigins.org...

http://www.smithsonianmag.com...
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
Harbinger
Posts: 778
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 4:50:49 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/9/2013 4:43:43 AM, muzebreak wrote:

See the key is, the creation sites, offer the aim. You did not go in to the other links though. They have the real evidence, not that the creation sites dont, but I know no one will listen to creations sites. Funny the talkorigins site support the lack of human fossils or corpses for the earth being as old as it is. They do not agree with the later but hey they admit lack of them.
Psalm 118:8, "It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man."
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 4:56:46 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/9/2013 4:50:49 AM, Harbinger wrote:
At 6/9/2013 4:43:43 AM, muzebreak wrote:

See the key is, the creation sites, offer the aim. You did not go in to the other links though. They have the real evidence, not that the creation sites dont, but I know no one will listen to creations sites.

I didn't go to the other sites, because there is no point. The paragraphs I posted, were essentially summations of the point that what trying to be made. The reason I posted those paragraphs, is because they display that point in its full idiocy. For instance, like I said, even you must realize they were equating perfect laboratory conditions, with imperfect natural process'

Funny the talkorigins site support the lack of human fossils or corpses for the earth being as old as it is. They do not agree with the later but hey they admit lack of them.

No, they say nothing about a lack there of. They say there is a small amount, which is perfectly in line with what we understand of fossilization, and the process' surrounding it.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.
Harbinger
Posts: 778
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 5:10:35 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/9/2013 4:56:46 AM, muzebreak wrote:

I didn't go to the other sites, because there is no point.

What can one say to that, IDK. To remark, you mite have to, but cares about honest investigation.

The paragraphs I posted, were essentially summations of the point that what trying to be made. The reason I posted those paragraphs, is because they display that point in its full idiocy.

Yep, if there is evidence against your point of view, it is idiocy. I see that trend here.

For instance, like I said, even you must realize they were equating perfect laboratory conditions, with imperfect natural process'

That is a mouth full of some smelly stuff. Are you not suggesting that conditions today were there billions of years ago? Is that not essential for dating?

No, they say nothing about a lack there of. They say there is a small amount, which is perfectly in line with what we understand of fossilization, and the process' surrounding it.

My point is underlined and said by YOU. This leads into the lack of evidence for human kind be to billions of years which is another point to be made. Recorded human history(with no dating methods) go back only about 6,000 years.
Psalm 118:8, "It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man."
muzebreak
Posts: 2,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/9/2013 5:23:39 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 6/9/2013 5:10:35 AM, Harbinger wrote:
At 6/9/2013 4:56:46 AM, muzebreak wrote:

I didn't go to the other sites, because there is no point.

What can one say to that, IDK. To remark, you mite have to, but cares about honest investigation.

The paragraphs I posted, were essentially summations of the point that what trying to be made. The reason I posted those paragraphs, is because they display that point in its full idiocy.

Yep, if there is evidence against your point of view, it is idiocy. I see that trend here.

Good, so you should get out now, rather than fall further into idiocy.


For instance, like I said, even you must realize they were equating perfect laboratory conditions, with imperfect natural process'

That is a mouth full of some smelly stuff. Are you not suggesting that conditions today were there billions of years ago? Is that not essential for dating?

Ok, I'm going to ask you this as a straight question. Yes or no, do you understand that there is a difference between perfect laboratory conditions, and imperfect natural process'?


No, they say nothing about a lack there of. They say there is a small amount, which is perfectly in line with what we understand of fossilization, and the process' surrounding it.

My point is underlined and said by YOU.

No, your point is that we are lacking in human fossils, compared to what we should have due to the age of the earth as we propose it. But that couldn't be less true. We would expect a small amount of fossils, because fossilization is extremely rare.

This leads into the lack of evidence for human kind be to billions of years which is another point to be made.

I agree, there is a huge lack of evidence for human kind being billions of years old. The question is, who said that human kind is billions of years old?

Recorded human history(with no dating methods) go back only about 6,000 years.

Prove it.
"Every kid starts out as a natural-born scientist, and then we beat it out of them. A few trickle through the system with their wonder and enthusiasm for science intact." - Carl Sagan

This is the response of the defenders of Sparta to the Commander of the Roman Army: "If you are a god, you will not hurt those who have never injured you. If you are a man, advance - you will find men equal to yourself. And women.