Dawkins doesn't debate with creationists because they are pig headed ignorant. he states,: would you expect a doctor who specialises in fertility treatment to spend hours of their time explaining fertility to some crank who believes a stork delivers babies to women?That a qualified geologist or geographer would spend hours debating with a flat earth advocate. Don't give creationist cranks a platform with intellect , it's what these creationist nugget head pine fo, i.e. to be taken seriously.
Stephen Meyer is an advocate of ID .."Intelligent design advocates ... have no research and no evidence, and have repeatedly shown themselves unwilling to formulate testable hypotheses; yet they complain about an imagined exclusion, even after having flunked the basics...the American Association for the Advancement of Science, which observes that there is no credible scientific evidence supporting ID.(Wikipedia) Meyer work falls into this category. In short he's a fruit cake.
@dionstrezlecki Intelligent design is no more than creationism by the back door which argues that life is too compex to have evolved. Why would an intelligent designer want to design us to have to shit out filthy dirty stinking turds? Can you or Meyer explain this. God created shit! Thankyou god.
@MetatronStudio ''You attacking the person '' ''as George Wald said in his book ''
Arguments from authority, please show some facts. We don't care if George does not want to believe in God or does not know the differenct between Spontanious Generation and Abiogenesis.
@MetatronStudio ''accept the evolutionary worldview without question''
I see you have never studied science. That is what people do, they study science. It is not told to you like 'bible study' where you are told what really means, you go and repeat the experiments and see for yourself.
@MetatronStudio Watch > watch?v=_sD_7rxYoZY to see the experiment. What it makes is NOT what we find in nature. Floods don't make distinct layers, floods don't make different kinds of rocks. Floods don't make ash layers.
Floods make ONE layer gradually going from big on the bottom to silt on top.
And you forgot about the fossils. How did a flood sort them simple to complex?
@MetatronStudio "just like we observe in geology" I'm afraid not. Learn some Geology and how science works in general. Not the bs parroted from a creatard website. You also mean creation.com and the "lack of evidence" section. It is their hope that you don't get an education and keep the faith. That original sedimentation hypotheses was tossed out by geologists close to 200 years ago through logic, reason, and problem solving skills and more recently the discovery of plate tectonics.
@MetatronStudio The creationist websites and fundamentalists have accomplished their purpose. They have convinced someone like you who is uneducated and scientifically illiterate that there is a conspiracy against Young Earth Biblical literalism and that everything relating to evolutionary biology and science in general is a lie.
There is no conspiracy. I work with Christians, Jews, Muslims who have no problems distinguishing the difference between faith and science. Now finish 6th grade.
Biology is real science. DNA is now the best proof evolution happens.
Creationists always say 'assumptions'' but never say what they are? Is a trilobite an assumption? T-Rex? Is the Cambrian Explosion an assumption? Neanderthals? Geology and Astonomy?
'' how you interpret evidence '' When did you study Paleontology?
@MetatronStudio There are over 250,000 peer-reviewed scientific studies on evolution, with full support from every related life science, including genetics. There has not been a single falsification to refute evolution in 150 years of relentless scrutiny!
It is the backbone of Biology, accepted by all scientists.
@MetatronStudio They do no absolutely NO scientifically peer reviewed research in any area of the sciences to support their conjectures. The only "research" they do is based upon their interpretation of the Bible and manufacturing outlandish pseudoscience to fit. The garbage on their website is intended for the scientific illiterates who won't question the absurdities of what they print.
Stereotype Creationists? You are doing a good job yourself in displaying your scientific ignorance.
@MetatronStudio Well then. What feeble pseuso-science that they do is only presented to the scientific illiterates at fundamentalist churches.
Science doesn't work that way. If *anyone* produces research that can withstand scrutiny in any field, it is worthwhile. So, why don't they even attempt to put forth into the scientific realm any research they do? It isn't a conspiracy, they don't do any worthwhile research, there is NO evidence and they know it. You are being played as a fool.
3. Leviticus 11:19: My Bible contains a footnote that reads “The precise identification of some of the bird’s insects and animals in this chapter is uncertain”. Also, the Hebrew word for bird in verse 13 also means winged or flying creatures, two criteria that bats certainly meet.
The problem is with the ignorant, stupid and brainwashed who have a certain literal, absolute interpretation of the Bible. For someone to cling to 6 Day creation, Noah's ark, Tower of Babel, etc., in light of the ongoing scientific discoveries over the past 400 years is just plain idiotic. I illogically "believe" that the Bible is the inspired word of God. No-one however, has any evidence to support that. Just as there is no scientific evidence to support the existence of Santa Claus.
@jknengr796 which scientific discovories are you referring to, that debunk the bible? Radio-carbon dating? I'd love to change your mind, because, I'm sorry but your wrong friend.
Some simple biology. Most crawling Insects have 6 legs, spiders 8, some insects have many. The Bible says 4 (Leviticus 11:21,22). Rabbits DON"T chew cud or have spit hooves (Leviticus 11:6) Bats are MAMMALS (Leviticus 11:19). Do some research.
Good luck. Any comment by a creationist on radiometric dating is fallacious and shows their ignorance of mathematics and particle physics. It usually comes down to a complete lack of any education.
2. The Bible does not say that Rabbits have split hooves. However, some do “chew there cud”. Hares use a process called refection, whereby they pass pellets that are only partly digested, and then chew them up again (their food passes through their digestive system twice, maximizing yield.). This may not be the modern scientific explanation of cud, it was the word that the Hebrew translators choose to use(some have said that it should be translated “partially digested food”).
4. “Good luck. Any comment by a creationist on radiometric dating is fallacious and shows their ignorance of mathematics and particle physics. It usually comes down to a complete lack of any education.” What sort of fallacious comments are you talking about?
@modomnoc1 Not just evolution. They have a problem with just about any area of science that has shown that the Genesis stories are faith/myth stories and an early mans interpretation of the world around him. I find it astounding that grown people can believe in and debate such absurdities as the "Tower of Babel", Noah's Ark, 6 day creation in 4004bc, etc. These people completely lack any problem solving and critical thinking skills.
@ssjL3g3nd I'm afraid not. I read it all the time for personal growth. The problem lies in taking too much of it literally (Genesis) and thinking it is in anyway a modern science book. It was fine by the standards and knowledge of the people who wrote parts of it 2500-3000 years ago. But to stick by those faith/myth stories and believe them as literal fact in the 21st century is just plain stupid, idiotic and utterly ignorant.
@jknengr796 It's amazing the arrogance and condescending attitude of u tiny minority. Gallup surveys "more than 3/4 of Americans believe the Bible is literally the word of God or inspired by the word of God, according to a trio of Gallup surveys, with 19 percent saying the Good Book is a compendium of myth and legend." God is real. If u don't believe it ask Him. If u r seeking Him He will reveal himself 2 u.
@PearlACT Kind of like that, except the last part. Science is based on facts, not faith. You need faith to believe there was a flood 4400 years ago, as none of the facts support it.
Anyone who openly and honestly studies the Grand Canyon knows the earth can indeed be a few thousand years old, and that a global flood is a distinct possibility. Really.
Explain the Grand Canyon Super Group, the tilted layers under the level layers at the east end, in front of Desert View. They were laid down flat, then block faulted into mountains, then worn flat and then the first level layer, the Teapeats Sandstone, was laid down over it. Then another 5000 feet of different rocks were laid down in a shallow sea, then the whole area was raised up to 8000 feet above sea level when the Rocky Mts. were formed, then the Colorado River cut the canyon.
Anyone who studies the Grand Canyon knows it took millions of years to lay down 5000 feet of distinct layers of different kinds of rock with different fossils in each layer.
@oneblueoneyellow So tell us what you found out about the Grand Canyon Super Group of rocks. The tilted layers under the first level layer, the Teapeats Sandstone. The Super Group was laid down level, block faulted into mountains and then eroded away BEFORE the Grand Canyon started to be formed.
@oneblueoneyellow The Super Group of rocks is below the level layers of the Grand Canyon. These layers were laid down level, block faulted into mountains, worn flat, and then the Teapeats Sandstone was laid down over it. Then another 5000 feet of sediments was laid down, some wind blown desert sands, some slow growing corals. Then the whole area was raised to 8000 feet above sea level. Finally the canyon was cut by water flowing down hill. How long do you think this took?
@oneblueoneyellow The Grand Canyon is the most studied place on earth. The people who study it say it took 5-7 million years to cut. It took much longer for 5000 feet of sediment to be laid down and then raised to 7000 feet above sea level.
@xXsakkelaoXx You will believe any shit. Come to think of it why would an intelligent designer design us to shit out filthy stinking turds? God created shit. Next time you tread in a lump of dog's turd remember it was god who designed it!
@xXsakkelaoXx What I have asked is a simple but very logical question. Again why would an intelligent designer design us to shit out filthy stinking turds? Car designers would love to be able to design an efficient pollution free car e.g. solar powered, they certainly wouldn't want human like turds dropping out of the exhaust. This simple but logical question has stumped you theists. Theists love to banter on about good and evil but never ask why their god created shit!
@DrMontague According to your worldwiev, why is shitt so bad? why would me killing you be wrong? if its just chemical reactions in the brain, if me torturing you makes me happy and evens out your bad feeling of pain, whats wrong with that? and these bad things in the world are a result of adams sin, god did not create it like that to begin with, but with adams sin, bad things came in to the world.
@DrMontague and asking that question is like asking, why are humans able to live? You see, thats how the human body works, we get the good stuff and get rid of the bad stuff, and there wouldnt be so many dogshitts if people picked up theyr shitt after their animals had been there! blame the owners, not gods creation.
@xXsakkelaoXx Back to the logical question.: Why make shit look and smell disgusting? An omnipotent god (according to theists) gave the laws of physics, if this is so then surely this omnipotent being could have made shit look nice, smell of roses and be harmless? Better still he could have designed life not to have to shit at all. If there is no god then this question disappears i.e. it just the the way things are,we are a product of evolution.
@DrMontague i'm going to quote myself in a hope that you will actually read it this time: "and these bad things in the world are a result of adams sin, god did not create it like that to begin with, but with adams sin, bad things came in to the world." It wasnt smelly and disgusting in the garden of eve. And there is never new information added to the genome witch is beneficial so we are NOT product of evolution.
@xXsakkelaoXx Adam and Eve ate of the fruit in the garden of Eden . We can therefore assume they had a digestive system. So are you claiming that their shit didn't look foul , disgusting, and didn't stink until they sinned? And that non of the other creatures shit stank? Further where did they shit, under the tree of knowledge? Surely god could have provided them with a decent shit house with flush toilets, soft toilet tissue and hot running water!
@DrMontague That is exactly want I am saying! Finally, why would they need flush toilets? They get rid of theyr shitt under a bush (although shitt would imply it was shitty, this it was not!) and it would disintergrate, we even know you can grow stuff out of "turds" like tomatoes.
@xXsakkelaoXx Logical question. Why would an intelligent designer designer design them to have to shit in the first place? Surely if he gave the laws of physics then he could have designed them not to have to shit, e.g. simply get energy from the air or the sun.
@DrMontague cause we're not plants :) But according to your worldview (i'm assuming its evolution) what is your basis for being able to make "logical" assuptions at all, when everything is a product of chance?
@xXsakkelaoXx Again nothing of what this god does is intelligent. Dozy git even plants a tree of knowledge right in the middle of his front lawn and creates a talking serpent. Come on you have to admit he's a bit of dick?
@DrMontague LOL! but no, you see god put man over his creation, we are ment to take care of, and rule, thats why he only gave man a tree of knowledge that he was not supposed to eat from, but we are the dicks, we dont give a shitt about what god our creator says, so we sin against him all the time. It's obvious that god created this world, check out how "abiogenesis" is impossible if there is not a god, and there are problems with all the hypothesis out there. We all need jesus' forgivness ;D
@DrMontague I haven't looked in to that, but we know it was the devil (wich was one of gods angels who desided he was better than god so god cast him down) so i guess the devil took the form of a snake, the snake couldnt talk without the devil and it is obviously just one snake, not all snakes can talk! But i could look into it if you want more detail?
@DrMontague but im just warning you, all that god talk sounds so untrue, but that is ur attitude cause im assuming you've only heard that the evolution story is true at school and stuff right? the belief that nothing exlpoded took shape as the earth and stars and everything and those rocks that crashed together and was earth became US! :D so yeah, sounds even worse come to think of it..
@DrMontague Does evolution even have a srew? but u didnt read what i answered? its the devil in the snake, god did not create it like that, but according to your worldveiw, who says that that would be absurd or abnormal? why would that seem weird to you, if everything is chance, why cant there be a fucking talking snake?
@xXsakkelaoXx Theists claim god is omniscient therefore he must have known before he created the universe that this angel he hadn't yet created l was going to turn against him in a power struggle and corrupt his creation yet he goes ahead creates him, this isn't a intelligent or clever thing to do. Surely you can see his stupidity? if god knows all our action before he created anything then this means we cannot have free will by default. Even the devil cannot have free will!
@DrMontague No, we have a free will, but this is a seperate and rather boring argument that doesnt consern me, and i cant be bothered having it with you, but you can look it up at c r e a t i o n . c o m ;D amazing site, made for the glory of god!
@xXsakkelaoXx My argument has you stumped. God knew that an angel (Lucifer) he hadn't created would turn against in a power struggle , yet he creates him. The baron Frankenstein could not know the future therefore he had no way of knowing how his creation would turn out. God is supposedly omniscient yet he fucks up. Conclusion: god has to have a screw loose. Creationist websites cannot explain or justify god's stupidity
@DrMontague It's a good question, I agree, but try to understand that god isnt a superman, this world is fallen, sin occurs, god doesnt stop every bad deed of man, but it is wrong to say that god has a screw loose, cause he has an answer to the problem, jesus died on the cross for the sin of the whole world so that we can be saved, and have eternal life, cause god loves us, god loves us and knew we would be sinfull (i think, im no theologian)but he has an answer, and thats eternal life in heaven
@DrMontague let me ask you a question: If life and everything on this earth comes from chance, what is your foundation to account for logical explanations ?
@xXsakkelaoXx Are you admitting that my question has theists stumped i.e. god knew the devil would turn against him in a power struggle yet he goes ahead and creates him thus his creation becomes corrupted because of god's own actions?
@DrMontague No, not stumped, its the sort of question our human minds cant take, like we have no idea how god created life, HOW did he do it? and a gave you a fair answer to the question as well, btw, there are far more problems with evolution (or that entire worldview), life from non life impossible, you never gain DNA from nothing, and I could go on and on, but i reccomend you check out this site: c r e a t i o n . c o m and thetrue origins as an answer to talkorigins website
@xXsakkelaoXx I have read creationists info they are full of lies,deceit and straw man arguments.If evolution was on shaky ground then it would not be taught at all the top and accredited universities e.g. Oxford. Cambridge, Harvard. Further people like Dr ken Miller is an evolutionary biologist and a Roman Catholic. John Polkinghorne prof. of theoretical physics at Cambridge is a an ordained catholic priest, he accepts the overwhelming evidence for evolution.
@DrMontague What evidence might that be? AND that it is taught doesnt have a shitt to say, im sry, that argument is just plain stupid, btw, all the major scientists like newton and gallileo believed creation by a supernatural GOD.
@xXsakkelaoXx My question does have you stumped. Your nutty god created the devil who he knew would turn against him in a power struggle even before he had even created him! Then this god has the audacity to blame his creation for his own folly. Yep this argument has stumped theists. They worship a demented god.
@xXsakkelaoXx Of course my question has stumped you. You worship a demented i.e. insane god, insane because he created an angel which he knew would turn against him in a power struggle before he even created him, and you call him an intelligent creator! I have already told that even some scientists can be deluded because like you they have a psychological yearning for the gods.
@DrMontague Its quite incredible, that despite gods amazing creation, stars, moon, whole universe, atoms, cells with amazing machinery, and say that god is stupid, ive answered your question too, god loves us and he wants us to have a free will like the angels have free will, so despite god knowing he thought it better (and god knows all) to go forth with creation knowing that jesus would die for our sins and we would all be saved, and the devil cast into fiery hell for eternity!
@xXsakkelaoXx The angels didn't have free will because god knew what they were going to do before he brought them into existence. Again free will would have to be an illusion e.g. child murders cannot be responsible for their actions because god would know their actions before he created anything therefore god is the real murderer, after all he did murder children in his flood! He's evil.
@DrMontague First of all: i would not agree with you that god murders people, thats the devil, second: according to your worldview (please answer this one) why would it be wrong to murder a child, if everything is random chance, why would it be wrong if someone kills someone else? if its just chemicals reacting, how can you call god evil, when u dont have a basis for wright or wrong?
@xXsakkelaoXx God drowned babies and children in his flood therefore he is evil.If he was a loving and forgiving god then he would not have got rid of his creation in an evil way.He's sick. You worship evil. The Devil and god are one.
@xXsakkelaoXxAnd the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.”(Genesis 3:22) Therefore we are able to know good from evil. God drowned babies and children .Pity you weren't at the flood to watch the children screaming for their lives, along with god you would have enjoyed such a spectacle.You worship evil.
@DrMontague You yet hav'nt answered my question, are you even human, or are you just an evolution designed computer to waste creationists time? ANSWER: WHAT IS YOUR BASIS OF MORALITY, and god saw that the world had gone wicked and deserved punishment, god is just, he is not evil, everyone had the chance to get on the ark, but noone did except for Noah and his family, that were rightious
@xXsakkelaoXx My human emotions my inner being tells me that what god did to those children was evil. Do you not find drowning babies and children evil?! Wouldn't it have make your stomach churn inside to have witnessed such evil. Amazing it doesn't affect you at all, indeed you approve of god's evil actions then you have the audacity to talk of god's love and forgiveness!
do you know why your stomach churns? because if we are product of randomness, noone would of given a shitt, but no, god desides right from wrong, you are asuming innocent babies die, yet you use god can predict the future as an argument, god does not punish innocent babies, this is an assumption on your behalf.
@xXsakkelaoXx He didn't have to use evil and cruel way to exterminate his creation, he could have simply made them cease to exist without causing suffering. But god like you is sadistic, he enjoyed watching them suffer.
@xXsakkelaoXx Logical question. Why would an intelligent designer designer design them to have to shit in the first place? Surely if he gave the laws of physics then he could have designed them not to have to shit, e.g. simply get energy from the air or the sun.
Dawkins doesn't debate with creationists because they are pig headed ignorant. he states,: would you expect a doctor who specialises in fertility treatment to spend hours of their time explaining fertility to some crank who believes a stork delivers babies to women?That a qualified geologist or geographer would spend hours debating with a flat earth advocate. Don't give creationist cranks a platform with intellect , it's what these creationist nugget head pine fo, i.e. to be taken seriously.
DrMontague 4 months ago
@DrMontague pfft lol google stephen meyer and be prepared to have your mind blown
dionstrezlecki 3 months ago
Stephen Meyer is an advocate of ID .."Intelligent design advocates ... have no research and no evidence, and have repeatedly shown themselves unwilling to formulate testable hypotheses; yet they complain about an imagined exclusion, even after having flunked the basics...the American Association for the Advancement of Science, which observes that there is no credible scientific evidence supporting ID.(Wikipedia) Meyer work falls into this category. In short he's a fruit cake.
I
DrMontague 3 months ago
@dionstrezlecki Intelligent design is no more than creationism by the back door which argues that life is too compex to have evolved. Why would an intelligent designer want to design us to have to shit out filthy dirty stinking turds? Can you or Meyer explain this. God created shit! Thankyou god.
DrMontague 3 months ago
@MetatronStudio ''You attacking the person '' ''as George Wald said in his book ''
Arguments from authority, please show some facts. We don't care if George does not want to believe in God or does not know the differenct between Spontanious Generation and Abiogenesis.
gregrutz 10 months ago
@MetatronStudio ''accept the evolutionary worldview without question''
I see you have never studied science. That is what people do, they study science. It is not told to you like 'bible study' where you are told what really means, you go and repeat the experiments and see for yourself.
gregrutz 10 months ago
@MetatronStudio Watch > watch?v=_sD_7rxYoZY to see the experiment. What it makes is NOT what we find in nature. Floods don't make distinct layers, floods don't make different kinds of rocks. Floods don't make ash layers.
Floods make ONE layer gradually going from big on the bottom to silt on top.
And you forgot about the fossils. How did a flood sort them simple to complex?
gregrutz 10 months ago
@MetatronStudio "just like we observe in geology" I'm afraid not. Learn some Geology and how science works in general. Not the bs parroted from a creatard website. You also mean creation.com and the "lack of evidence" section. It is their hope that you don't get an education and keep the faith. That original sedimentation hypotheses was tossed out by geologists close to 200 years ago through logic, reason, and problem solving skills and more recently the discovery of plate tectonics.
jknengr796 10 months ago
@MetatronStudio The creationist websites and fundamentalists have accomplished their purpose. They have convinced someone like you who is uneducated and scientifically illiterate that there is a conspiracy against Young Earth Biblical literalism and that everything relating to evolutionary biology and science in general is a lie.
There is no conspiracy. I work with Christians, Jews, Muslims who have no problems distinguishing the difference between faith and science. Now finish 6th grade.
jknengr796 10 months ago
@MetatronStudio ''evidence for creation is huge''
Which creation story does the evidence support, the Hindu cration story? Muslim?
gregrutz 10 months ago
@MetatronStudio Show you: Feathers on dinosaurs.
Biology is real science. DNA is now the best proof evolution happens.
Creationists always say 'assumptions'' but never say what they are? Is a trilobite an assumption? T-Rex? Is the Cambrian Explosion an assumption? Neanderthals? Geology and Astonomy?
'' how you interpret evidence '' When did you study Paleontology?
gregrutz 10 months ago
@MetatronStudio Science won the evolution debate 150 years ago.
gregrutz 10 months ago
@MetatronStudio Have you been to the Grand Canyon? Carlsbad Caverns? Zion Nat. Park?
Ever read a Geology book?
gregrutz 10 months ago
@MetatronStudio You might start by showing some evidence for creation or a global flood.
gregrutz 10 months ago
@MetatronStudio There are over 250,000 peer-reviewed scientific studies on evolution, with full support from every related life science, including genetics. There has not been a single falsification to refute evolution in 150 years of relentless scrutiny!
It is the backbone of Biology, accepted by all scientists.
gregrutz 10 months ago
@MetatronStudio They do no absolutely NO scientifically peer reviewed research in any area of the sciences to support their conjectures. The only "research" they do is based upon their interpretation of the Bible and manufacturing outlandish pseudoscience to fit. The garbage on their website is intended for the scientific illiterates who won't question the absurdities of what they print.
Stereotype Creationists? You are doing a good job yourself in displaying your scientific ignorance.
jknengr796 11 months ago 2
@MetatronStudio Well then. What feeble pseuso-science that they do is only presented to the scientific illiterates at fundamentalist churches.
Science doesn't work that way. If *anyone* produces research that can withstand scrutiny in any field, it is worthwhile. So, why don't they even attempt to put forth into the scientific realm any research they do? It isn't a conspiracy, they don't do any worthwhile research, there is NO evidence and they know it. You are being played as a fool.
jknengr796 11 months ago
3. Leviticus 11:19: My Bible contains a footnote that reads “The precise identification of some of the bird’s insects and animals in this chapter is uncertain”. Also, the Hebrew word for bird in verse 13 also means winged or flying creatures, two criteria that bats certainly meet.
C12Joshua 1 year ago
The problem is with the ignorant, stupid and brainwashed who have a certain literal, absolute interpretation of the Bible. For someone to cling to 6 Day creation, Noah's ark, Tower of Babel, etc., in light of the ongoing scientific discoveries over the past 400 years is just plain idiotic. I illogically "believe" that the Bible is the inspired word of God. No-one however, has any evidence to support that. Just as there is no scientific evidence to support the existence of Santa Claus.
jknengr796 1 year ago
@jknengr796 which scientific discovories are you referring to, that debunk the bible? Radio-carbon dating? I'd love to change your mind, because, I'm sorry but your wrong friend.
uswestons 1 year ago
@uswestons You don't even want to go there.
Some simple biology. Most crawling Insects have 6 legs, spiders 8, some insects have many. The Bible says 4 (Leviticus 11:21,22). Rabbits DON"T chew cud or have spit hooves (Leviticus 11:6) Bats are MAMMALS (Leviticus 11:19). Do some research.
Good luck. Any comment by a creationist on radiometric dating is fallacious and shows their ignorance of mathematics and particle physics. It usually comes down to a complete lack of any education.
jknengr796 1 year ago
@jknengr796
Hello there,
1. Leviticus 11:21-22: The Hebrew idiom “on all fours” simply means “on feet”, it is not saying that these winged creatures had to have four legs.
C12Joshua 1 year ago
2. The Bible does not say that Rabbits have split hooves. However, some do “chew there cud”. Hares use a process called refection, whereby they pass pellets that are only partly digested, and then chew them up again (their food passes through their digestive system twice, maximizing yield.). This may not be the modern scientific explanation of cud, it was the word that the Hebrew translators choose to use(some have said that it should be translated “partially digested food”).
C12Joshua 1 year ago
@jknengr796
4. “Good luck. Any comment by a creationist on radiometric dating is fallacious and shows their ignorance of mathematics and particle physics. It usually comes down to a complete lack of any education.” What sort of fallacious comments are you talking about?
C12Joshua 1 year ago
@modomnoc1 Not just evolution. They have a problem with just about any area of science that has shown that the Genesis stories are faith/myth stories and an early mans interpretation of the world around him. I find it astounding that grown people can believe in and debate such absurdities as the "Tower of Babel", Noah's Ark, 6 day creation in 4004bc, etc. These people completely lack any problem solving and critical thinking skills.
jknengr796 1 year ago
@jknengr796 No you just lack knowledge of what is really in the Bible so instead choose to be stupid and not real
ssjL3g3nd 1 year ago
@ssjL3g3nd I'm afraid not. I read it all the time for personal growth. The problem lies in taking too much of it literally (Genesis) and thinking it is in anyway a modern science book. It was fine by the standards and knowledge of the people who wrote parts of it 2500-3000 years ago. But to stick by those faith/myth stories and believe them as literal fact in the 21st century is just plain stupid, idiotic and utterly ignorant.
jknengr796 1 year ago
@jknengr796 It's amazing the arrogance and condescending attitude of u tiny minority. Gallup surveys "more than 3/4 of Americans believe the Bible is literally the word of God or inspired by the word of God, according to a trio of Gallup surveys, with 19 percent saying the Good Book is a compendium of myth and legend." God is real. If u don't believe it ask Him. If u r seeking Him He will reveal himself 2 u.
string1248 1 year ago
@PearlACT So if science finds out God made the first cell, then you will 'believe' in evolution?
Theories are open to interpretation, Facts are facts.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@PearlACT Kind of like that, except the last part. Science is based on facts, not faith. You need faith to believe there was a flood 4400 years ago, as none of the facts support it.
gregrutz 1 year ago
Creation.com must think they won the debate, sad.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@PearlACT 'plastic deformation'??? LOL The layers are all flat. Most from a shallow ocean.
There arae 21 distinct layers of different kinds of rock, floods don't do that.
There are only trilobites fossils at the bottom. Not one bunny fossils has ever been found in the many layers.
Honest examination? I have hiked to the bottom 4 times, how about you?
You don't understand uniformitarianism either,
it says nothing about no catastrophies or grandual or uniform.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@PearlACT ID lost in court. bush's judge ruled. Science is what scientists do, and they don't do ID.
ID is an argument, not a hypotheses. It has not evidence to support it.
''It is complex, I don't understand, so god musta dun it.''
You should lose your job if your answer to nature is, 'god dun it that way''
You are wasting your time as a scientist.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@PearlACT ID....has to be done in secret ''
NO it doesn't, this is a free country, you can do any religious activity you want.
ID is an agrument, not a hypotheses, it is not science.
gregrutz 1 year ago
why would Creation.com post a debate they lost?
gregrutz 1 year ago
Comment removed
gregrutz 1 year ago
@AudioRedemption search Ken Miller, a christian scientist. He helped prove ID is creationism.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@PearlACT 'believe' what ever you want.
Science will progress without you.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@PearlACT there is no such thing as a 'creation scientist'
Science does not comment on the supernatural.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@PearlACT The courts ruled: Science is what scientists do, and they don't do ID.
ID = Creationism = bible story
gregrutz 1 year ago
1 month later, your post is still here. Proven wrong?
DeusMisericordia 2 years ago
Ian Plimer is a liar, as are many evolutionary evangelists. Read the responses to Plimer's book...
oneblueoneyellow 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Any one who studies the Grand Canyon knows the earth is millions of years old and there was no global flood.
gregrutz 2 years ago
Anyone who openly and honestly studies the Grand Canyon knows the earth can indeed be a few thousand years old, and that a global flood is a distinct possibility. Really.
oneblueoneyellow 2 years ago
Explain the Grand Canyon Super Group, the tilted layers under the level layers at the east end, in front of Desert View. They were laid down flat, then block faulted into mountains, then worn flat and then the first level layer, the Teapeats Sandstone, was laid down over it. Then another 5000 feet of different rocks were laid down in a shallow sea, then the whole area was raised up to 8000 feet above sea level when the Rocky Mts. were formed, then the Colorado River cut the canyon.
gregrutz 2 years ago
Anyone who studies the Grand Canyon knows it took millions of years to lay down 5000 feet of distinct layers of different kinds of rock with different fossils in each layer.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@oneblueoneyellow So tell us what you found out about the Grand Canyon Super Group of rocks. The tilted layers under the first level layer, the Teapeats Sandstone. The Super Group was laid down level, block faulted into mountains and then eroded away BEFORE the Grand Canyon started to be formed.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@oneblueoneyellow You have never even seen the Grand Canyon, let alone studied it's geology.
gregrutz 1 year ago
@oneblueoneyellow The Super Group of rocks is below the level layers of the Grand Canyon. These layers were laid down level, block faulted into mountains, worn flat, and then the Teapeats Sandstone was laid down over it. Then another 5000 feet of sediments was laid down, some wind blown desert sands, some slow growing corals. Then the whole area was raised to 8000 feet above sea level. Finally the canyon was cut by water flowing down hill. How long do you think this took?
gregrutz 10 months ago
@oneblueoneyellow The Grand Canyon is the most studied place on earth. The people who study it say it took 5-7 million years to cut. It took much longer for 5000 feet of sediment to be laid down and then raised to 7000 feet above sea level.
A global flood is impossible.
gregrutz 10 months ago
@gregrutz This flood would have gone higher than everest. Where did all the water go to. Did god pull the plug out?!
DrMontague 4 months ago
@DrMontague The bible says the water ''receeded''.
To where? Where DID 29,029 feet of water go?
gregrutz 4 months ago
@DrMontague its in the oceans, its enough water in the oceans to cover the earths landmass 3 times over!
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXx You will believe any shit. Come to think of it why would an intelligent designer design us to shit out filthy stinking turds? God created shit. Next time you tread in a lump of dog's turd remember it was god who designed it!
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague U R an idiot, come back when you actually have something to say, fucktard
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXx What I have asked is a simple but very logical question. Again why would an intelligent designer design us to shit out filthy stinking turds? Car designers would love to be able to design an efficient pollution free car e.g. solar powered, they certainly wouldn't want human like turds dropping out of the exhaust. This simple but logical question has stumped you theists. Theists love to banter on about good and evil but never ask why their god created shit!
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague According to your worldwiev, why is shitt so bad? why would me killing you be wrong? if its just chemical reactions in the brain, if me torturing you makes me happy and evens out your bad feeling of pain, whats wrong with that? and these bad things in the world are a result of adams sin, god did not create it like that to begin with, but with adams sin, bad things came in to the world.
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@DrMontague and asking that question is like asking, why are humans able to live? You see, thats how the human body works, we get the good stuff and get rid of the bad stuff, and there wouldnt be so many dogshitts if people picked up theyr shitt after their animals had been there! blame the owners, not gods creation.
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXx Back to the logical question.: Why make shit look and smell disgusting? An omnipotent god (according to theists) gave the laws of physics, if this is so then surely this omnipotent being could have made shit look nice, smell of roses and be harmless? Better still he could have designed life not to have to shit at all. If there is no god then this question disappears i.e. it just the the way things are,we are a product of evolution.
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague i'm going to quote myself in a hope that you will actually read it this time: "and these bad things in the world are a result of adams sin, god did not create it like that to begin with, but with adams sin, bad things came in to the world." It wasnt smelly and disgusting in the garden of eve. And there is never new information added to the genome witch is beneficial so we are NOT product of evolution.
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
Comment removed
DrMontague 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xXsakkelaoXx Adam and Eve ate of the fruit in the garden of Eden . We can therefore assume they had a digestive system. So are you claiming that their shit didn't look foul , disgusting, and didn't stink until they sinned? And that non of the other creatures shit stank? Further where did they shit, under the tree of knowledge? Surely god could have provided them with a decent shit house with flush toilets, soft toilet tissue and hot running water!
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague That is exactly want I am saying! Finally, why would they need flush toilets? They get rid of theyr shitt under a bush (although shitt would imply it was shitty, this it was not!) and it would disintergrate, we even know you can grow stuff out of "turds" like tomatoes.
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXx Logical question. Why would an intelligent designer designer design them to have to shit in the first place? Surely if he gave the laws of physics then he could have designed them not to have to shit, e.g. simply get energy from the air or the sun.
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague cause we're not plants :) But according to your worldview (i'm assuming its evolution) what is your basis for being able to make "logical" assuptions at all, when everything is a product of chance?
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXx Again nothing of what this god does is intelligent. Dozy git even plants a tree of knowledge right in the middle of his front lawn and creates a talking serpent. Come on you have to admit he's a bit of dick?
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague LOL! but no, you see god put man over his creation, we are ment to take care of, and rule, thats why he only gave man a tree of knowledge that he was not supposed to eat from, but we are the dicks, we dont give a shitt about what god our creator says, so we sin against him all the time. It's obvious that god created this world, check out how "abiogenesis" is impossible if there is not a god, and there are problems with all the hypothesis out there. We all need jesus' forgivness ;D
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXx Why did he create a talking serpent?
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague I haven't looked in to that, but we know it was the devil (wich was one of gods angels who desided he was better than god so god cast him down) so i guess the devil took the form of a snake, the snake couldnt talk without the devil and it is obviously just one snake, not all snakes can talk! But i could look into it if you want more detail?
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@DrMontague but im just warning you, all that god talk sounds so untrue, but that is ur attitude cause im assuming you've only heard that the evolution story is true at school and stuff right? the belief that nothing exlpoded took shape as the earth and stars and everything and those rocks that crashed together and was earth became US! :D so yeah, sounds even worse come to think of it..
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXx He creates a talking serpent that tempts Eve. Has god got a screw loose?!
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague Does evolution even have a srew? but u didnt read what i answered? its the devil in the snake, god did not create it like that, but according to your worldveiw, who says that that would be absurd or abnormal? why would that seem weird to you, if everything is chance, why cant there be a fucking talking snake?
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXx Who created the devil? Answer: your intelligent god!
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague yeah, im just gonna stop bothering, i told you this already, he was an angel first, but he turned bad and god cast him down
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXx Theists claim god is omniscient therefore he must have known before he created the universe that this angel he hadn't yet created l was going to turn against him in a power struggle and corrupt his creation yet he goes ahead creates him, this isn't a intelligent or clever thing to do. Surely you can see his stupidity? if god knows all our action before he created anything then this means we cannot have free will by default. Even the devil cannot have free will!
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague No, we have a free will, but this is a seperate and rather boring argument that doesnt consern me, and i cant be bothered having it with you, but you can look it up at c r e a t i o n . c o m ;D amazing site, made for the glory of god!
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXx My argument has you stumped. God knew that an angel (Lucifer) he hadn't created would turn against in a power struggle , yet he creates him. The baron Frankenstein could not know the future therefore he had no way of knowing how his creation would turn out. God is supposedly omniscient yet he fucks up. Conclusion: god has to have a screw loose. Creationist websites cannot explain or justify god's stupidity
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague It's a good question, I agree, but try to understand that god isnt a superman, this world is fallen, sin occurs, god doesnt stop every bad deed of man, but it is wrong to say that god has a screw loose, cause he has an answer to the problem, jesus died on the cross for the sin of the whole world so that we can be saved, and have eternal life, cause god loves us, god loves us and knew we would be sinfull (i think, im no theologian)but he has an answer, and thats eternal life in heaven
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@DrMontague let me ask you a question: If life and everything on this earth comes from chance, what is your foundation to account for logical explanations ?
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXx Are you admitting that my question has theists stumped i.e. god knew the devil would turn against him in a power struggle yet he goes ahead and creates him thus his creation becomes corrupted because of god's own actions?
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague No, not stumped, its the sort of question our human minds cant take, like we have no idea how god created life, HOW did he do it? and a gave you a fair answer to the question as well, btw, there are far more problems with evolution (or that entire worldview), life from non life impossible, you never gain DNA from nothing, and I could go on and on, but i reccomend you check out this site: c r e a t i o n . c o m and thetrue origins as an answer to talkorigins website
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXx I have read creationists info they are full of lies,deceit and straw man arguments.If evolution was on shaky ground then it would not be taught at all the top and accredited universities e.g. Oxford. Cambridge, Harvard. Further people like Dr ken Miller is an evolutionary biologist and a Roman Catholic. John Polkinghorne prof. of theoretical physics at Cambridge is a an ordained catholic priest, he accepts the overwhelming evidence for evolution.
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague What evidence might that be? AND that it is taught doesnt have a shitt to say, im sry, that argument is just plain stupid, btw, all the major scientists like newton and gallileo believed creation by a supernatural GOD.
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXx My question does have you stumped. Your nutty god created the devil who he knew would turn against him in a power struggle even before he had even created him! Then this god has the audacity to blame his creation for his own folly. Yep this argument has stumped theists. They worship a demented god.
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague your question doesnt have me stumped, but this is now a yes/no debate, and i believe i have given you a good answer :) maybe read it???
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXx Of course my question has stumped you. You worship a demented i.e. insane god, insane because he created an angel which he knew would turn against him in a power struggle before he even created him, and you call him an intelligent creator! I have already told that even some scientists can be deluded because like you they have a psychological yearning for the gods.
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague Its quite incredible, that despite gods amazing creation, stars, moon, whole universe, atoms, cells with amazing machinery, and say that god is stupid, ive answered your question too, god loves us and he wants us to have a free will like the angels have free will, so despite god knowing he thought it better (and god knows all) to go forth with creation knowing that jesus would die for our sins and we would all be saved, and the devil cast into fiery hell for eternity!
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXx The angels didn't have free will because god knew what they were going to do before he brought them into existence. Again free will would have to be an illusion e.g. child murders cannot be responsible for their actions because god would know their actions before he created anything therefore god is the real murderer, after all he did murder children in his flood! He's evil.
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague First of all: i would not agree with you that god murders people, thats the devil, second: according to your worldview (please answer this one) why would it be wrong to murder a child, if everything is random chance, why would it be wrong if someone kills someone else? if its just chemicals reacting, how can you call god evil, when u dont have a basis for wright or wrong?
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXx God drowned babies and children in his flood therefore he is evil.If he was a loving and forgiving god then he would not have got rid of his creation in an evil way.He's sick. You worship evil. The Devil and god are one.
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague i asked you a question, please answer it.
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXxAnd the LORD God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.”(Genesis 3:22) Therefore we are able to know good from evil. God drowned babies and children .Pity you weren't at the flood to watch the children screaming for their lives, along with god you would have enjoyed such a spectacle.You worship evil.
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague You yet hav'nt answered my question, are you even human, or are you just an evolution designed computer to waste creationists time? ANSWER: WHAT IS YOUR BASIS OF MORALITY, and god saw that the world had gone wicked and deserved punishment, god is just, he is not evil, everyone had the chance to get on the ark, but noone did except for Noah and his family, that were rightious
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXx My human emotions my inner being tells me that what god did to those children was evil. Do you not find drowning babies and children evil?! Wouldn't it have make your stomach churn inside to have witnessed such evil. Amazing it doesn't affect you at all, indeed you approve of god's evil actions then you have the audacity to talk of god's love and forgiveness!
DrMontague 2 months ago
@DrMontague yet, you fail to answer my question,
do you know why your stomach churns? because if we are product of randomness, noone would of given a shitt, but no, god desides right from wrong, you are asuming innocent babies die, yet you use god can predict the future as an argument, god does not punish innocent babies, this is an assumption on your behalf.
xXsakkelaoXx 2 months ago
@xXsakkelaoXx He didn't have to use evil and cruel way to exterminate his creation, he could have simply made them cease to exist without causing suffering. But god like you is sadistic, he enjoyed watching them suffer.
DrMontague 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@xXsakkelaoXx Logical question. Why would an intelligent designer designer design them to have to shit in the first place? Surely if he gave the laws of physics then he could have designed them not to have to shit, e.g. simply get energy from the air or the sun.
DrMontague 2 months ago
The Genesis Debate: Part 1
lps45s8tracks 2 years ago
Thank for coming to our Church.Enjoy reading your books
lps45s8tracks 2 years ago