RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Science & Origins



Message

PROPHETSONG -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/4/2008 9:11:38 AM)

NOW THIS DOES PROVOKE THOUGHT
quote:

ORIGINAL: unclemonkey

ORIGINAL:Real_Solitude
quote:

And that from the man that stopped slavery in America.

That’s some slick selective quoting.
Why did you delete the heart of Lincoln’s statement: “and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality.” – your cite (emphasis mine)

Prior to Darwin many believed physical differences between the races existed making some races superior to others. The explanatory power of Darwinian evolution provided “scientific support” for such belief.



mcp -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/4/2008 9:13:13 AM)

quote:



Given that Christianity posits that everyone is a sinner, except for Jesus, how could he not?

Care to explain what in particular you feel are Darwin's sins?


Decent of Man

"Those who
do not admit the principle of evolution, must look at species as
separate creations, or in some manner as distinct entities; and they
must decide what forms of man they will consider as species by the
analogy of the method commonly pursued in ranking other organic beings
as species."

I declare his sin of false reason. [:)]



gluadys -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/4/2008 9:28:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mcp

quote:



Given that Christianity posits that everyone is a sinner, except for Jesus, how could he not?

Care to explain what in particular you feel are Darwin's sins?


Decent of Man

"Those who
do not admit the principle of evolution, must look at species as
separate creations, or in some manner as distinct entities; and they
must decide what forms of man they will consider as species by the
analogy of the method commonly pursued in ranking other organic beings
as species."

I declare his sin of false reason. [:)]



Where is the false reasoning there? The question of whether the various races of humanity constituted distinct species had not yet been answered in the 19th century and many creationists of the time hypothesized that in fact the biblical creation referred to only one of several creations of humans, each distinct race of human being a separate creation. You will find this thesis, for example, in the writings of Louis Agassiz, a notable opponent of Darwin's theory.

In fact, racists of that day (and Agassiz was also a racist) frequently opposed evolution because it posited that the races were not separate creations and therefore even the most "primitive" of humans were biological cousins of the "superior" white race. In short, they had the same horror of being related to e.g. Australian aboriginals, as many modern creationists have in respect to being related to chimpanzees.

So, Darwin is quite right in the context of his time. If there is no evolution, and every species is a separate creation, it is incumbent on those who hold this belief to consider how that belief applies to humans: one species or several? And the method to determine this must be the same applied in determining how many species there are of squirrels, sparrows, or any other creature.



unclemonkey -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/4/2008 2:16:12 PM)

ORIGINAL:drj11
quote:

Only those parts which one would have reason to believe accounts are in fact historical.

What reason would a pantheist have for believing any of the Bible?



unclemonkey -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/4/2008 2:24:31 PM)

ORIGINAL:swan42
quote:

Is none of the Bible intended to be believed as historical fact?

Which Bible?
I happen to prefer the KJV. The TOS doesn’t allow me to explain why in this thread. However, there is a large thread on KJV only if you care to check it out.

quote:

For the Bible used by Catholics, the Book of Judith appears to contain historical errors.

“The Book of Judith is a deuterocanonical book, included in the Septuagint and in the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christian Old Testament of the Bible, but excluded by Jews and Protestants.” - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Judith
Maybe the errors you mention have something to do with its rejection by Jews and Protestants. BTW, I am neither of the Jewish persuasion nor Protestant but I reject the Apocrypha also.

quote:

If this account of Judith contains anachronisms,
isn't it possible that pre-human history described in Genesis might be slightly less than historically accurate?

“All scripture is given by inspiration of God,” – 2nd Timothy 3:16a
Are you suggesting that God is unable to provide an historically accurate account?

How about quiting with the distraction tactics and answer my question? “Is none of the Bible intended to be believed as historical fact?”



drj11 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/4/2008 2:25:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: unclemonkey

ORIGINAL:drj11
quote:

Only those parts which one would have reason to believe accounts are in fact historical.

What reason would a pantheist have for believing any of the Bible?


I think the better question is why do you impose requirements upon science for questioning interpretations (incidentally, scientific interpretations are questioned constantly, every day) and then simply refuse to apply the same standards to your own belief?



swan42 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/4/2008 4:01:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: unclemonkey


quote:

If this account of Judith contains anachronisms,
isn't it possible that pre-human history described in Genesis might be slightly less than historically accurate?

“All scripture is given by inspiration of God,” – 2nd Timothy 3:16a
Are you suggesting that God is unable to provide an historically accurate account?


I'm suggesting that man is unable to accurately record God's word. Man is imperfect, thus the specific Bible we read is imperfect. I prefer to rely on God, and not the specific interpretation, choice of Canon, or translation between English, Hebrew, Latin and Greek.

quote:


How about quiting with the distraction tactics and answer my question? “Is none of the Bible intended to be believed as historical fact?”

This is not a distraction. It is pivotal. It is key.
Just as you reject the Apocrypha, some reject Genesis, but not other books.



swan42 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/4/2008 4:20:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: unclemonkey
Maybe the errors you mention have something to do with its rejection by Jews and Protestants.
BTW, I am neither of the Jewish persuasion nor Protestant but I reject the Apocrypha also.

Uncle Monkey, I think you are confused. If you prefer KJV and reject the Apocrypha, then you are most likely Protestant.



hfr -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/4/2008 11:09:49 PM)

"Biologists are simply naive when the talk about experiments designed to test the theory of evolution. It is not testable." Professor Whitten, Genetics Professor, University of Melbourne, Australia.

"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever." T.N. Tahmisian, physiologist for the Atomic Energy Commission.

"Nine-tenths of the talk of evolution is sheer nonsense, not founded on observation and wholly unsupported by fact." Dr. Ethridge of the British Museum of Science.

"People believe in evolution because they choose to do so. It has nothing to do with evidence. There is not a shred of evidence for the evolution of life on earth." Physical chemist Dr. A.J. Monty White, Ph.D. in gas kinetics, University of Wales.

Physicist Dr. Russell Humphrey of Sandia National Labs, New Mexico estimated "there are 10,000 practicing professional scientists in the USA alone who openly believe in a six-day recent creation.

It's obvious this type of movie is long overdue. But I'll stop with this quote:
"I am quite conscious that my speculations run quite beyond the bounds of true science." Charles Darwin in a letter to Asa Gray, Harvard Professor of Biology.



drj11 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/4/2008 11:51:38 PM)

Hehe, I love posts like these. I know you got these quotes from a site you trust and think shares your Christian morals... but almost all of these are false or misrepresented to a tragic degree. Things like this illustrate the dishonesty that is so characteristic of the creationist movement. By true christian standards, the creationist movement has been polluted to the core by satan, with the amount of untruths that come out of their mouths. I couldn't find information on all these quotes, but here is commentary on the ones that have been documented.

quote:


"Nine-tenths of the talk of evolution is sheer nonsense, not founded on observation and wholly unsupported by fact." Dr. Ethridge of the British Museum of Science.


Dr. Etheridge, world-famous paleontologist of the British Museum is commonly quoted by evolution deniers but turns out to have been an obscure nineteenth century figure who was an assistant at the British Museum and was never famous at all.

quote:


"People believe in evolution because they choose to do so. It has nothing to do with evidence. There is not a shred of evidence for the evolution of life on earth." Physical chemist Dr. A.J. Monty White, Ph.D. in gas kinetics, University of Wales.


This guy is a young earth creationist not an evolutionist. He jumped on the crazy train long ago. A professor of 'gas kinetics' also really isn't one to be the best qualified to judge evolution... at least with any more credibility than you or I would be able to judge.

quote:


It's obvious this type of movie is long overdue. But I'll stop with this quote:
"I am quite conscious that my speculations run quite beyond the bounds of true science." Charles Darwin in a letter to Asa Gray, Harvard Professor of Biology.


It might behoove you to look at the true context of this quote... which was written a full two years before Darwin proposed his theory of evolution!!!! Creationism is synonymous with the word "lie" at this point... every single argument you can find in favor of it, has been shown to be false. More info here.



mcp -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/5/2008 8:36:42 AM)

quote:

gluadys: Where is the false reasoning there? The question of whether the various races of humanity constituted distinct species had not yet been answered in the 19th century and many creationists of the time hypothesized that in fact the biblical creation referred to only one of several creations of humans, each distinct race of human being a separate creation. You will find this thesis, for example, in the writings of Louis Agassiz, a notable opponent of Darwin's theory.

In fact, racists of that day (and Agassiz was also a racist) frequently opposed evolution because it posited that the races were not separate creations and therefore even the most "primitive" of humans were biological cousins of the "superior" white race. In short, they had the same horror of being related to e.g. Australian aboriginals, as many modern creationists have in respect to being related to chimpanzees.

So, Darwin is quite right in the context of his time. If there is no evolution, and every species is a separate creation, it is incumbent on those who hold this belief to consider how that belief applies to humans: one species or several? And the method to determine this must be the same applied in determining how many species there are of squirrels, sparrows, or any other creature.


I am aware of the Agassiz types that existed then. This assumption in reasoning by Darwin doesn't allow for other concepts. Granted at that time, there were many ways in which people rejected Darwin's theories; and Darwin's understanding differs from that which evolutionists subscribe to today. So, I think Darwin's reason of either you accept evolutionary explanations [which, of course, must be defined] or separate creations of man-entities leaves out the possibility of any other oppositional stance (like Blythe/Paley). Of course, I disagree in the separate creations concept as well; some of it has to do with the question of 'if there is a creator, then when and how did he intervene?'

This is just a point of contention to use as an example of everyone today accepting the level of science that Darwin supposedly represented, when as a 19th century naturalist, he more represents a glorified natural philosopher like his counterparts who builds a whole theory on trends in observations and addressing how a God may fit in. Granted his style as a naturalist is a sign of his times, but again many of his ideas were not new, just adjusted.



gluadys -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/5/2008 9:26:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mcp

So, I think Darwin's reason of either you accept evolutionary explanations [which, of course, must be defined] or separate creations of man-entities leaves out the possibility of any other oppositional stance (like Blythe/Paley).


But that is not what Darwin is saying here. He is not saying you must accept evolutionary explanations. Nor is he saying that one must accept the separate creation of human races. There were certainly people of his time who believed in separate creation of species, but also held that the whole of humanity was one species. Darwin is not telling them they are wrong.

What he is saying is that this question---of whether humans constitute one or several species--must be decided by those who hold to separate creations in the same way they settle the question for other biological groups--IOW scientifically, not ideologically.

Evolution, per se, does not tell us that all humans are the same species. That is a separate question to be settled by the criteria used to define species. As we now know, the criteria used by scientists today do not even justify the division of humanity into races much less species.



1dblthnk02 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/5/2008 10:08:38 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: drj11
Creationism is synonymous with the word "lie" at this point... every single argument you can find in favor of it, has been shown to be false.

. . . Which is precisely why I am dead set against creationism. I have no problem with someone believing that life is a special creation, strictly as a religious tenet or personal belief. But to call such a belief science is, in effect, a lie. It is also a lie to call science (e.g. evolution) a belief.



unclemonkey -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/5/2008 10:15:28 AM)

ORIGINAL:swan42
quote:

Uncle Monkey, I think you are confused. If you prefer KJV and reject the Apocrypha, then you are most likely Protestant.

The confusion is all yours. You evidently think that all Christians are either Catholic or Protestant and that is simply not true.



unclemonkey -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/5/2008 10:22:09 AM)

ORIGINAL:swan42
quote:

I'm suggesting that man is unable to accurately record God's word.

Then you don't believe that "all scripture is given by inspiration of God"?
Please explain how you determine what parts of the Bible are "inspiration of God"(therefore an accurate record of God's word) and which parts are not.



jbow -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/5/2008 10:42:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PromiseLander

Many people don't like what I have to say, but I'll say it anyway because it MUST be said. I can no longer sit idle while senseless debates go on like this. You MUST see it as it is.

Look folks, it all boils down to this. You are either on one of two sides on this issue - not both.

Either we believe that God is God, and His word to us is infallable and a testament to us of His glory, therefore the creation story in Genesis is true as revealed - knowing that God is NOT the God of confusion, and had He done His creation by evolution, He would have told us. Instead He told us "God created man in his OWN image," NOT a lower life form. God tells us that each thing was created "according to it's own kind." His text is unambiguous.

OR... We believe that God did not really mean what He said when he told us that "God created man in his OWN image," NOT a lower life form, or that each thing was created "according to it's own kind." If we are in this latter camp of thought, then we believe that the writings ARE actually ambiguous - therefore your god IS the god of confusion, and you are NOT believing in the God of the Bible and you are on your way to Hell!

Friend you need to get saved. This issue is MUCH more serious than ANYONE has ever made it out to be. You think because some scientific observations seem to point to a different conclusion than what is portrayed in the Bible, and you believe those conclusions rather than the Bible, you'd better wake up people. How dare anyone question the Bible before they question their own conclusions.

Anyone who would be willing to do such a thing HAS NO IDEA WHO GOD IS, and you have no idea how sinful it is to turn from Him.

I'm TIRED of playing it gentle. I don't CARE if I offend folks, this IS NOT A LITTLE ISSUE. IT NEVER WAS.

Either God IS who He says He is, or He isn't. What do YOU believe?



Very good. It is an issue of believers and unbelievers. I was really troubled by people I thought were Christians who believe in evolution, now I realize that they are not Christians and it helps me to not be upset by it all. There is no such thing as a Christian unbeliever. There are those who fool themselves but at the bottom of it all... God does not lie. Those who call Him a liar are not His.

J



jbow -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/5/2008 10:53:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: unclemonkey

ORIGINAL:essentialsaltes
quote:

Tiktaalik is a 'missing link', a fossil embodying the transition of a fish species into land-dwelling tetrapod species.

HERE is a more in-depth coverage.


They are always coming up with some "missing link" or another only to later have to admit that is is not a "missing link". Same thing with "Lucy"... an extinct pygmy chimp. Tiktaalik is merely another extinct fish...

J



drj11 -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/5/2008 10:59:44 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbow

quote:

ORIGINAL: unclemonkey

ORIGINAL:essentialsaltes
quote:

Tiktaalik is a 'missing link', a fossil embodying the transition of a fish species into land-dwelling tetrapod species.

HERE is a more in-depth coverage.


They are always coming up with some "missing link" or another only to later have to admit that is is not a "missing link". Same thing with "Lucy"... an extinct pygmy chimp. Tiktaalik is merely another extinct fish...

J


So in your own words, exactly what claims did science make about "Lucy" that you disagree with?



Jhud -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/5/2008 11:16:10 AM)

quote:

This is not a distraction. It is pivotal. It is key.
Just as you reject the Apocrypha, some reject Genesis, but not other books.


I think it cases are quite different. If one rejects Genesis, and by reject I don't mean have a different idea about it's meaning, but reject as being unneccesary because it is untrue, then little of the rest of the Bible makes sense, including the NT.



mcp -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/5/2008 11:30:27 AM)

quote:

But that is not what Darwin is saying here. He is not saying you must accept evolutionary explanations. Nor is he saying that one must accept the separate creation of human races. There were certainly people of his time who believed in separate creation of species, but also held that the whole of humanity was one species. Darwin is not telling them they are wrong.

What he is saying is that this question---of whether humans constitute one or several species--must be decided by those who hold to separate creations in the same way they settle the question for other biological groups--IOW scientifically, not ideologically.

Evolution, per se, does not tell us that all humans are the same species. That is a separate question to be settled by the criteria used to define species. As we now know, the criteria used by scientists today do not even justify the division of humanity into races much less species.


You brought into the argument the theories of man as separate creation of human races. He merely alluded to the struggle in classification of certain forms of man as species, which is a separate thought. But his first point is an either/or statement. While he doesn't state that mankind must be subdivided per se. He does state that you either have to approach life as evolution-driven or separate created species. He assumes something about creation/classification of species for those who don't accept evolution. There are other ways to hypothesize/philosophize on species and their potential interconnections.



PromiseLander -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/5/2008 11:50:29 AM)

An elephant has a butt. I have a butt. I am related to elephants.
This is irrefutable, scientific evidence of man's decent from elephants.

Can you not see how ridiculous the pill is that "scientists" try to get you to swallow? Becuase there are similarities between seperate species, they MUST be related. Never mind that we've never found a missing link when we should be tripping over them when we walk out the back door- says Darwin. Never mind that we've found "living fossils" such as the Coelecanth (spell?) that are supposedly millions of years old, yet remain ABSOLUTELY UNCHANGED from their fossil records that have been recovered. Does that mean that "evolution" is choosy about who gets to change and who doesn't? I thought those nubby flippers were in the process of turning into feet? Oh, I guess he hasn't had enough time yet. Never mind that over 99% of the earth clocks used to determine the age of the universe point to a young earth. Never mind that there is not one single shred of evidence that points to evolution.

Friends, it's all speculation. There is absolutely NO evidence for evolution. It's merely a fairy tale concocted by man to attempt to explain the universe sans God. Why? Becuase the Bible tells us that before a man is called by God into salvation, he HATES God. Everything he does is in opposition to Him. I suppose the question should be, why hasn't man come up with more ways of explaining life without God? Becuase if scientists had multiple theories without God, then it would be well known that they are con-men. If the devil comes up to you and says "Hi, I'm the devil, I'm here to deceive you" we'd be scared to death and no one would believe him. Yet if the lie is told based on physical observations - just twist the conclusions with a little imagination and have some brainiac explain it in technical terms, and he will fool BILLIONS...

Many people are aching for an explaination of this world outside of God because they are looking for ways to rid their conscience of their knowledge of God. The Bible tells us that they knew God, but did not glorify Him as God, therefore God gave them up to a depraved mind... They are given over to grand delusions because they don't want God, and they'll believe anything as long as it doesn't remind them that they are accountable for their actions. Amen.



jbow -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/5/2008 12:39:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbow
Again, the idea that only a scientist and criticize a scientist is completely weird. It is a way to avoid discussion. It is like saying that only a chef can criticize another chefs cooking. It is foolishness.

That's funny: I was just told in another thread that only a scientist can support that there is global warming, and that none do.
Now that's weird.

quote:

I am really glad that Ben has done something to bring the farse of evolution and the tactics of evolutionists into the light.

But he didn't. He made ersatz martyrs out of a handful of teachers who were dismissed because of their inadequate work, not because of their personal beliefs.

quote:

All of evolution theory is based solely on assumptions, it is a faith based system that is in place because men do not want t acknowledge their creator, the Lord Jesus. Evolution sceince is completely flawed.

It is arduous to reason with this level of nescience. You are not just misguided; you are 100% wrong.

quote:

Evolutionary scientists supress the truth in unrighteousness. They consistantly throw out test results that do not support their assumptions that the universe is billions of years old because they are obviously erronious... this is science?

Wrong. If they actually did this, the theory would not have gone through the last 150 years of refining and reproving that is has gone through (which is not based on the age of the universe, btw).

quote:

NASA did this years ago when they dated the moon rocks. First they said that they were 4 to 4.5 billion years old then a few years later they published that the rocks were 3 to 5.5 billion years old.

The oldest rocks were dated at 4.5 billion, while newer rocks dated as late as 3.16 billion. So what? And what does any of this have to do with "Expelled?"

quote:

Mt. Saint Helens... in eleven years after the eruption 600' of strata formed. Of course geologists have taught that this takes hundreds of thousands of years, but it took eleven.

It takes relatively little time for strata to layer itself out, but it takes far more time for compacted limestone to form.

quote:

There were trees deposited in Spirit lake, roots down, at different levels just like petrified forests on other places that "science" tells us are millions of years old

Again, none have yet compacted into limestone.

quote:

... but there they are in Spirit lake randomly placed, like a forest. Some are buried in the sediment up their trunks and some just a few feet. Spirit lake is showing a fossil forest in production and it is happening very fast.

No it isn't. No limestone, no petrification. What is your point?

quote:

Science based on assumptions is not science...

Well, at least we agree on this one point.
However, I must point out that your belief in the bible over hard science is based entirely on assumptions as well. But, faith isn't a science, so you're okay.

quote:

That is the problem with evolutionary science, it is not provable, it is not science, it is a faith based system of assumptions.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong. But thanks for playing.


You are wrong. I hope you will one day come to the truth.

J



essentialsaltes -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/5/2008 12:40:53 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PromiseLander

An elephant has a butt. I have a butt. I am related to elephants.
This is irrefutable, scientific evidence of man's decent from elephants.


Don't be absurd. It is evidence that humans and elephants have a common ancestor. And this common ancestor presumably lived more recently than our common ancestor with buttless critters.

quote:

Never mind that we've found "living fossils" such as the Coelecanth (spell?) that are supposedly millions of years old, yet remain ABSOLUTELY UNCHANGED from their fossil records that have been recovered.


They are not absolutely unchanged: "The coelacanths found in the past two decades off the coast of Africa belong to a group of fishes thought to be extinct a long time ago. However, it must be noted that the species has not survived unchanged. While basically coelocanths, the modern species has evolved sufficiently to be considered as belonging to a distinct family."

quote:

Never mind that over 99% of the earth clocks used to determine the age of the universe point to a young earth.


This is untrue, as I already told you. Either provide evidence or stop spreading this falsehood.



PromiseLander -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/5/2008 1:12:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: essentialsaltes

quote:

ORIGINAL: PromiseLander

An elephant has a butt. I have a butt. I am related to elephants.
This is irrefutable, scientific evidence of man's decent from elephants.


Don't be absurd. It is evidence that humans and elephants have a common ancestor. And this common ancestor presumably lived more recently than our common ancestor with buttless critters.

quote:

Never mind that we've found "living fossils" such as the Coelecanth (spell?) that are supposedly millions of years old, yet remain ABSOLUTELY UNCHANGED from their fossil records that have been recovered.


They are not absolutely unchanged: "The coelacanths found in the past two decades off the coast of Africa belong to a group of fishes thought to be extinct a long time ago. However, it must be noted that the species has not survived unchanged. While basically coelocanths, the modern species has evolved sufficiently to be considered as belonging to a distinct family."

quote:

Never mind that over 99% of the earth clocks used to determine the age of the universe point to a young earth.


This is untrue, as I already told you. Either provide evidence or stop spreading this falsehood.


Friend, using the same logic as to how the coelacanth has evolved is using the same logic that a Basset Hound evolved from a Wolf... Look, genetic changes occur due to mutations - no new information is generated from these changes, most importantly, it is STILL a DOG. You can have many different KINDS of dogs (God created everything according to it's "own kind") Just as simply, you can have many different varieties of the KINDS of any animal. It's not evolution - it's mutations. I heard a veterinarian tell me one time that he makes a fortune in keeping these various freaks alive. Mutations can be VERY harmful.

As to the earth clocks - I'll be the first to admit to you that I'm no scientist, and if you aren't either, if you haven't actually delt with aging the earth based upon un-bias scientific methodology, then you too are going by what you read from sources you can trust. So as far as I am concerned it isn't personal knowledge. The bottom line is, neither one of us was there during the beginning of everything to be able to give a first hand account, BUT I do know the One who was there. God revealed His plan to us, and since God is God, He CANNOT lie. Based upon that Word of God, any form of evolution is a lie from the very bowels of Hell. It spits in the very face of God as it contradicts His revealed knowledge to us. Any idea of evolution says: "I don't CARE what your Bible says, my observations tell me 'thus ans such' and my observations trump your 'word' any day of the week because I am man, and I am god." What the evolutionist doesn't understand is that "man's wisdom is but FOOLISHNESS in the eyes of God."

The evolutionist, along with every other man on this planet falls under condemnation of God if they do not repent. "Every knee shall bow, and every tounge confess that Jesus Christ is Lord." Either you willingly bow to God now, or you will pleadingly bow later.

If you want mercy you may have it, but you MUST have it now. If you want forgiveness then you may have it, but you MUST have it now.

Jesus said: "Deny yourself, take up your cross daily, and follow me."
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you SHALL be saved."



essentialsaltes -> RE: Ben Stein is right! Darwinists are tyrants. (5/5/2008 1:39:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PromiseLander
As to the earth clocks - I'll be the first to admit to you that I'm no scientist, and if you aren't either, if you haven't actually delt with aging the earth based upon un-bias scientific methodology, then you too are going by what you read from sources you can trust. So as far as I am concerned it isn't personal knowledge.


Although I am not a working scientist, I have a background in physics and I am comfortable saying that, of my own personal knowledge and experience, un-biased scientific methodology leads us to the conclusion that the earth is billions of years old.

quote:

Any idea of evolution says: "I don't CARE what your Bible says, my observations tell me 'thus ans such' and my observations trump your 'word' any day of the week


I'm afraid the scientific method does require that we base scientific conclusions on evidence and observation, rather than on arguments from authority.



Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI