Interviews with Leading Creation Biologists: Dr. Gordon Wilson Part 2

[FiverBeyond]

I'm sad to use such harsh language against this man, but Baraminology is simply word-play, and not real science at all.

For example, I cannot find a single source on Baraminology who provides a negative test for baramin identification (if I give you two animals, how can you know if they're NOT the same baramin?).

This means that, as far as baraminology officially is concerned, mice and jellyfish could be in the same Holobaramin.

[kut77less]

//Wow you have given a deaf ear to the contraversies that have been going on youtube. //

Because it is complete BS. If you look at the real world you will see how evolutionist attempt to silence creationism. Why not defend freedom of speech on that issue?

[kut77less]

//Lol, ok some examples: Kent Hovind, VFX, and just about every creationists I can//

since when did we start talking about "censorship"

[NephilimFree]

"That's not what your news source says"

NO KIDDING.

"most of the interior of the planet is heavy metals"

Most secualr geologists believe the mantles are comprised of solid granite.

What magma that exists is rock which was ground and heated by frinction until it melted by the continental plates sliding apart during the Noachian Flood. The core isn't molten. Oceans worth of water wrap around it. if it were molten Earth would be too hot for life and all that water could not be lthere.

[kut77less]

//creationists have good arguments why are most of them spread lies and misniformation? //

100 percent assertions. you don't even provide an example

[NephilimFree]

The sun produces C-14 in the upper atmosphere, and at the same time it decays which removes it from the Earth. Because the Earth has not acheived C-14 equalibrium but is instead still increasing, which would take approximately 30,000 yrs, C-14 verifies the fact that the Earth is less than 30,000 yrs old.

[NephilimFree]

Physicist Melvin Cook, Nobel Prize Association medalist found that helium-4 enters our atmosphere from solar wind and radioactive decay of uranium. At present rates our atmosphere would accumulate current helium-4 amounts in less than 10,000 years.

[NephilimFree]

"there are a mountains of dishonesty and outright lies."

Only amongst evolutionists.

"Like the fact that plants came after the sun, birds came along with fish"

You do not understand the science behind Genesis. You talk of ignorance but have not investigated it.

against the fossil record regardless of the date assigned for them.

[NephilimFree]

"other methods verify it."

No method verifies anyh claim of evolutionism, whether cosmic or biological, All radiometric dating methods use a material of ASSUMED AGE as a control to calibrate the process, renfering the result to the control, and to circular logic and worthlessness. Rocks are dated by fossils which are dated by rocks which are dated by fossils which...

[NephilimFree]

" Ocean Circulation Velocities over the

Continents during Noahs Flood"

Yes, I've read that. It verifies that the waterd of the flood caused the directional flow of sediment when the waters receeded from the continents. Look up methane hydrates at USGS as well.

[NephilimFree]

"So you don't accept the radon formation model of halos?"

I accept that P218 created them because they match P218 halos because they are P218 halos.

[kut77less]

///I accept that P218 created them because they match P218 halos because they are P218 halos//

I agree I think it is the model that has the most evidence supporting it.

[kut77less]

//One question: Do you think Kent hovinds arguments and arguments like moon dust are good? Because I know some creationists are a lot more wacky then others. ///

I disagree (including this one) with most of the arguments proposed by Kent Hovind.

[NephilimFree]

"Why do you insist the earth is around 6000 years old? Maybe it is 100,000 or a million years old, maybe a billion or more."

1) radiometric dating relies on circular logic ans is worthless

2) there is a mountain of evidence which directly contradicts evolutionist claims of the Earth's age,

=3) there is a mountain of evidence that verifies the biblical account of creation

[NephilimFree]

If the Earth's outer core barrier were 4,000 degrees like evos claim, there couldn't be an Arctic Ocean's worth of water wrapped around the edge of the outer core:

ht tp : / / news . nationalgeographic . com / news / 2007 / 02 / 070227-ocean-asia . h t m l

Water doesn't sink to a place that's 4,000 degrees. It becomes steam. Obviously, the outer core is not 4,000 deg. At it's edge like the evos have been telling us in geology classes for the last 150 yrs.

[NephilimFree]

See, the evos have been claiming this for a century:

w w w . seismo . unr . edu / ftp / pub / louie / class / 100 / interior . h t m l

But today we know the Earth's mantles are cool, in fact, the earth is filled with massive oceans (from which the Noachian Flood came) inside BOTH mantles!:

ht tp : // news-info . wustl . edu / news / page / normal / 8222 . h t m l

So you see, evo science is pseiudoscience! The Earth was never molten! God created it from cold stone!

[Hooya2]

"But today we know the Earth's mantles are cool, in fact, the earth is filled with massive oceans..."

That's not what your news source says; in fact, the same method they used to find that underground ocean continues to show that most of the interior of the planet is heavy metals

And how can anyone say the earth's mantles are cool? I mean, for crying out loud, have you never heard of a volcano?

[NephilimFree]

How does creation answer the fact that the Earth's mantles are so highly oxydized? Easy:

Genesis 1

[7] And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

[8] And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

[9] And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

[NephilimFree]

These scientists got it partly right, partly wrong. Had the Earth, Moon, and Mars ever been magma, they could not be highly oxydized in their mantles! This is a fine example of how evolutionist scientists will admit data but deny the only possible conclusion, simply because it points to creation and defeats their claims of cosmic evolution.

Do they know this? Yes, ofcourse they do. Every evolutionist scientist lives a life of lies and brainwashing. Evolutionism is not science. It's lies.

[NephilimFree]

"The interiors of the Moon and Mars are highly reduced and by inference the interior of the early Earth was as well Oxidation by means of aqueous alteration and hydrogen loss is likely responsible for the more oxidized nature of the martian crust..."

Universities Space Research Association (membership consists of 102 universities):

w w w . lpi . usra . edu / meetings / lpsc2004 / pdf / 2137 . p d f

[NephilimFree]

"Thus, the oxidized character of the clinopyroxenes possibly reflects a high-level oxidized state of the lower mantle"

w w w . agu . org / meetings / fm04 / fm04-sessions / fm04_V43A . h t m l

it would be impossible for the Earth's mantles to be oxidized granite if the Earth had ever been a ball of molten magma.

[NephilimFree]

The Earth IS covered with an ave. of over 1/2 mi. of sediment, like it or not:

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Laboratory for Nuclear Science, U.S.A.

w w w . iop . o r g / EJ / abstract / 1126-6708 / 2007 / 02 / 077

w w w . google . c o m / search?hl=en&sa=X&oi=spell&res­num=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=%22dept­h+of+sedimentary+material%22&s­pell=1

[kut77less]

//The Earth IS covered with an ave. of over 1/2 mi. of sediment, like it or not://

BTW I just read an intersting paper called " Ocean Circulation Velocities over the

Continents during Noahs Flood" that talks about how sediments were transported over the flood. Really good read.

[NephilimFree]

"Do you think that the gantie contain them are prmindal (created rocks), or do you think that the formed during the flood "

The upper and lower mantles are believed to be comprised of virtually solid granite, so pressurized that water cannot seep more than 5 miles into the Earth, and the pressure closes even microfissures where water could pass. The foundation of the Earth is created stone. All that is above it is created, but the sedimentary material has turned to stone because of water.

[kut77less]

//The upper and lower mantles are believed to be comprised of virtually solid granite, so pressurized that water cannot seep more than 5 miles into the Earth,//

So you don't accept the radon formation model of halos?

[kut77less]

//Define peer review. I don't think they go through the same peer review process as what regular scientists do. ///

peer review is when scientist in the same field goes over your work and makes sure that the work presented is scientifically accurate. Furthermore if we can go back to zicrons. I believe (not certain) that Humpherys presented his work to secular scientist for review.

[kut77less]

//I'm fair though. I really do want to hear your argume//

Be specif do you want to hear argument for a young earth?

[kut77less]

//Creationists rarely do peer review; I don't know//

Sorry to say but this is a complete lie. Most of the articles of CMI or AIG are peer review form their journals. They just reprint it. Also take a look at the ICC (which just happened this august.) they do double peer review (Only a few publication have started doing this.)

[kut77less]

//I love how creationists sit on the sidelines telling us how wrong all the scientists are.///

No I agree with the data they collect.

[kut77less]

//I know you hate it since it debunks just about any argument you have. //

It does no such thing. The funny thing is not of talk orgins things are in peer review, but creationist articles are.

[kut77less]

//nt, but if it is rejected by scientists as valid I can't complain that people are ignoring me. //

That depends on what merit it is rejected

[kut77less]

//Yea, but the implications are not peer reviewed that it proves the falsity of an old earth//

What do you tell that to Galileo. Your implying the majority is truth, but this is not so.

//rguments from ignorance //

Instead of pure assertions why don't you show my "argument from ignorance".

[kut77less]

//The problem with these arguments is they are regarded has having holes///

By all means go to talk orgins and attempt to point out the holes

//for dismissing all the continuity with dating methods that are scientifically solid.//

Why not?

//The pure review process is important because laymen can't replicate and carefully examine the experiment themselves. //

And the result for Zircon containing helium was in peer review, and it was not written by layman's.

[kut77less]

//You don't have good explanations for the evidence though.//

I have time and time again. Please I offer Zircon that contain helium for the evidence of a young earth and it offers evidence for accelerated nuclear decay.

[awormyourhonor]

No no no, I am a sane person. Sorry if you took my comment the wrong way. I am for education in any case.

kut77less reminds me of the coyote with the dynamite in this video. Not knowing exactly the power of what he's holding. Seeing as how education will eradicate his paradigm within the next American century, if there is such a thing.

[NephilimFree]

Here's just one example of how evo scientists are liars. Preston Ercelle Cliud, one of the most famous paleontologists in the world, former member of the Academy of Sciences. He lies about the fossils, then when realizing he's being interviewed by creationists, he does a 180 and states the truth. He retired in embaressment:

Watch him do it for yourself!

ht tp : // home . comcast . net / ~internationalhero / lies2 . w m v

[NephilimFree]

Evolutionists contend that fish evolved into tetrapods. If evolution were true why are there no examples of transition between the basal stumps (parapopheses and diapopheses) of fish and the capitulum of tetrapods? Where's your evolution? Not one of the imagined transitional forms claimed by evolutionist "scientists" demonstrates this. If evolution were true, there should be countless examples. But none exist. Why is that?

[NephilimFree]

The Earth is covered with over 1/2 mi. of sediment with much coal 1 mi. down and the Bible states the Earth was flooded, the Tower of Babel still exists, King David is proven by a Hebrew tablet recently found in Egypt (evidence of the exodus also), Jesus appeared 90 mi. from His tomb less than 24 hrs after ressurection which would takes 2 days by horse, they've dicovered the city of Jericho's walls fell outward like the Bible says. So, yes, it looks like the Bible is literally true afterall eh?

[NephilimFree]

"If you have other more intelectually honest answers explaining all the evidence for a young earth I would love to hear it."

P218 radiohalos, polystyrate plant and animal fossils, the geology of the Earth matches the Noachian Flood precicely, even down to it's core, the list goes on. Spooky eh?

"I'm open minded"

Oh great Scotts. How many times have Christians heard that one.

[kut77less]

//P218 radiohalos//

Hey I am intersted to know what model do you accept for the formation of P218? Do you think that the gantie contain them are prmindal (created rocks), or do you think that the formed during the flood (thus in support of accelerated nuclear decay).

[NephilimFree]

"saying God did it or the flood did it isn't a good answer."

It beats saying "We don't know, but it could not have been God!" We know this: God said He did it.

[NephilimFree]

"As for godhaters as you call those who believe differently to you, you have to believe in something to be able to hate it"

Yes, they hate God. it is the motivation of most atheists. They hate God because they are guilty of sin before Him. Just like a small child hates a parent who catches them red-handed doing sdomething wrong. The difference is, the child gets over it in a few minutes. The atheist never will.

[oliesbw]

They hate God because they are guilty of sin "before Him. Just like a small child hates a parent "

perhaps the parents of the children that hate should show more love and understanding, then the child will hate the fact that they have been caught and not the parents. And again.. I ask how can you hate that which is non existent?

[oliesbw]

"Yes, they hate God. it is the motivation of most atheists."

Aww sweet. you presume to think for all of us. how nice. Some of us do not need a god to define moral rights and wrongs you know.. some of us can think for ourselves. This word sin is just a way for fundamentalists to control and place fear into the hearts of followers much like a cult that has got out of hand. Perhaps encouraging freedom of thought would be more appropriate, not indoctranating children.

[bigwhammyRocks]

evolution: the failed hypothesis that won't leave...

[smaakjeks]

"evolution: the failed hypothesis that won't leave... "

Have you ever visited the planet earth? You should go, it's a nice place.

[NephilimFree]

lol Amen brother. It sticks around. It can't leave bro, then the evos would have to say, "Oh ok, you're right, I'm a sinner. I need to ask God to... WHAT THE HECK ANM I DOING! I CAN'T SAY THAT!"

[NephilimFree]

"With a lifespan of what 20"

Man has never had such a lifespan. All living things, including man, are DEVOLVING. We have grown smaller, weaker, and dumber. The fossil reocrd proves it. Look up "megafauna". Even rats were gigantic in the past. Sloths weighed tons, dragonflies had a wingspan of 4-5 ft, wolves were the size of tigers, roaches were 2 ft. long, and man was 8-10 ft. tall - back when he lived to be hundreds of yrs old that is, before the flood.

Gotta love the fossil record eh?

[NephilimFree]

"Stoneage man was more interested in making fire and finding food to invent gods."

"Stoneage" man lasted for about 100 yrs. Then he was taught the arts and sciences by angesl. That is why art, technologies, and all of the civilizations of the ancient exploded around the world virtually AT VIRTUALLY THE SAME TIME.

[oliesbw]

"Stoneage" man lasted for about 100 yrs. Then he was taught the arts and sciences by angesl. That is why art, technologies, and all of the civilizations of the ancient exploded around the world virtually AT VIRTUALLY THE SAME TIME."

thanks I haven't laughed so hard for ages.. shows how lacking your education has been. (personally I would sue your school)I am sorry for you. still laughing my head off though. It's unkind to be mean to those without a brain cell. so . treat yourself to a candy...

[NephilimFree]

"how are evolutionary biologists not adhering to scientific methodology?"

Since when has any evolutionary change been observed? Since when is it necessary to learn about evo theory to understand how anything about an organism, much less the cell, functions?

IT'S NOT It's not even applicable.

It's humanist religious dogma injected into science..

[NephilimFree]

"Roffelcopter! "

So, you believe the prominant evo scientists of the world have not stated in their own books that the fossils appear without clrear transition and without predecessors?

Which of the many dozens of scientists would you like to see make this statement first? Got a favorite? Dawkins? Gould? Eldridge? Who's YOUR favorite evo hero?.

[NephilimFree]

Amatuer evos. Sheesh Remeber what I said about having to inform them to debate them? 0o

"and when philosophy proves there is a First Cause?"

Also lol."

More homework. If there were no First Cause, it would be impossible to arive at the current moment in time, and time therefore could not exist, Therefore, there was a First Cause for all things that exist. And that includes the universe.

[NephilimFree]

"What's that supposed to be, Big Bang theory?"

Do your homework. Even secular scientists agree that there is not enough matter in the universe for it to have exploded. This is why they are building the biggest particle accellerator in the world right now - to try to find physical evidence of dark matter, which they think will provide the missing matter.

[NephilimFree]

"But just to remind you, science can't include any gods"

Nonsence. Science is explaination of the natural world. Whatever the evidence for it's origin is, it cannot be contradictory to science. Science is, afterall, study of the creation.

[NephilimFree]

"Scientists do have an overall goal."

Evo scientists do. It's clear from how hard they world to put forth falicy, knowing lies, and their articles and videos that claim God does not exist.

Science has always been congruent with creation, but in recent history humanism took over the minds of the God haters, and they began trying to make science depict creation without God..

But it doesn't work. They can't make it fit.

[oliesbw]

"Science has always been congruent with creation," Stoneage man was more interested in making fire and finding food to invent gods. That was their science. With a lifespan of what 20 why waste time inventing gods?. They were interested in the science of living.

[oliesbw]

.."but in recent history humanism took over the minds of the God haters, and they began trying to make science depict creation without God.."

As for godhaters as you call those who believe differently to you, you have to believe in something to be able to hate it. it's as difficult to hate that which doesn't exist as it is to believe in something which doesn't. For the rational mind at least.

[NephilimFree]

"This is why the scientific method and the Age of Enlightenment came to be."

No, it's not. Humanism is why.

"By excluding God or magic or any other preconceived idea from the equation, you can get more reliable results."

By attempting to convey that science provides an explaination of the natural world without creation, one ends up fabricating science to fit humanism.

[NephilimFree]

"many people are not interested in real research (one that involves checking the sources)."

That's a good example of why most amatuer evos are not even aware of the mountains of information in science which destroys evolutionism and supports creation! I'm contantly having to inform them whenever I debate them! They're lost in denial so deeply, that examining the facts is painful to thier mind, and they simply refuse. They just shut the door to knowledge and keep swallowing the hegmony..

[oliesbw]

"They're lost in denial so deeply, that examining the facts is painful to thier mind, and they simply refuse. They just shut the door to knowledge"

Are you certain you are not looking in a mirror when you make those statements.. I think you should remove the God blinkers when discussing science, come to think of it you should begin opening the gateway to real knowledge.

[oliesbw]

"That's a good example of why most amatuer evos are not even aware of the mountains of information in science which destroys evolutionism and supports creation!"

But just to remind you, science can't include any gods , if you want knowledge then science is the best method for aquiring it. proof is in the pudding! I have climbing equipment feel free to borrow it might help you reach the summit of reality.

[NephilimFree]

"Hypotheses can of course be contradictory to previous data, but they are discarded when not supported by data."

It's shameful that evolutionists don't adhere to the Scientific Method and do that. But then, they can't. They'd have to toss evolutionism out the window completely.

[smaakjeks]

"It's shameful that evolutionists don't adhere to the Scientific Method and do that. But then, they can't. They'd have to toss evolutionism out the window completely."

Reply to me so that I can respond, will you? Just quoting me without letting me know you've got some problem is dishonest. Anyway, how are evolutionary biologists not adhering to scientific methodology? I know sure as hell that creationists aren't, so why don't we compare notes?

[NephilimFree]

Real science? You mean like claiming the universe explodes and imploded eternally when we now know there wasn't enough matter for it to explode in the first place and when philosophy proves there is a First Cause? Or do you mean claiming transitions when every prominant evo scientist has admitted in their own books that fossils appear without clear transition and without predecessors in thier own books? Or do you mean...

Well, it would be pointless to keep going on and one and on.

[smaakjeks]

"Real science? You mean like claiming the universe explodes and imploded eternally when we now know there wasn't enough matter for it to explode in the first place"

Lol. What's that supposed to be, Big Bang theory?

"and when philosophy proves there is a First Cause?"

Also lol.

"Or do you mean claiming transitions when every prominant evo scientist has admitted in their own books that fossils appear without clear transition and without predecessors in thier own books?"

Roffelcopter!

[awormyourhonor]

This stupid theory that elegantly ties together all of the world around us. The piece of the puzzle that fits perfectly.

Yes, young creationists. PLEASE gain a grasp on real science. Go to college, educate yourselves. Help us climb out of this hole.

[kut77less]

//Yes, young creationists. PLEASE gain a grasp on real science. Go to college, educate yourselves//

I would tell you the same thing.

[Atriviality]

I agree with what Gordon Wilson is saying.

Unfortunately, many people are not interested in real research (one that involves checking the sources). They'd prefer latching onto what they already believe and proclaim or dismiss it without checking it's validity.

[kut77less]

//many people are not interested in real researc///

And I would say that about evolutionist to.

[Atriviality]

"And I would say that about evolutionist to. "

- I assume you are a young earth creationist. It is my experience that only they possess such a grasp of the written language as to misread the evidence that they themselves have copied to support their argument.

If you are not, I apologize for the inference.

In the meantime re-read what I wrote. Take special note of the word "people".

[kut77less]

//If you are not, I apologize for the inference.//

I would advise you not to stereotype creationist. I am a Yec, and i don't think that I "misread" the evidence

[Atriviality]

"//many people are not interested in real researc///

And I would say that about evolutionist to. "

- To which I replied...

"Take special note of the word "people". "

Why would I deliberately write "people" instead of, say... "creationists". Could I possibly mean that many PEOPLE are not interested in real research (one that involves checking the sources) and that they'd prefer latching onto what they already believe and proclaim or dismiss it without checking it's validity?

[busymartian]

If you begin with your conclusion, research is futile and not science.

[kut77less]

//If you begin with your conclusion, research is futile and not science. ///

When scientist do research they do it because they have a goal. They don't just go randomly test stuff and collect data. There is a hypothesis first

[smaakjeks]

"When scientist do research they do it because they have a goal. They don't just go randomly test stuff and collect data. There is a hypothesis first"

Yes. Hypotheses are usually based on good data from previous studies... Not the bible. Hypotheses can of course be contradictory to previous data, but they are discarded when not supported by data. That is something many people can't take. They want to find THEIR conclusion. That's why there are "journals" on homeopathy, for example.

[busymartian]

The conclusion that the Bible is true cover to cover can't and won't be falsified. This is why the scientific method and the Age of Enlightenment came to be. By excluding God or magic or any other preconceived idea from the equation, you can get more reliable results.

Scientists do have an overall goal. It's called verisimilitude. Verisimilitude is the closeness to the truth. Factors outside nature don't help with this goal.

[kut77less]

//Is it supposed to be 1.45 long? ///

Yes, but this is the conclusion from the other interview. I will also be uploading the rest of the interviews from the BSG (there are 4 all together).