Creationism: Still crazy after all these years

Dr. Eugenie Scott's presentation at the AAI 2009 Convention in Burbank, California. Event date: 10/4/2009

Category:

Education

Tags:

• AAI
• NCSE
• Genie Scott
• evolution
• creationism
• intelligent design
• Darwin

[rkyeun]

@5tonyvvvv

17 March 1977

Recently we reported syntheses of amino acids from aliphatic carboxylic acids and ammonia, and from aliphatic amines and formic acid by means of contact glow discharge electrolysis (CODE). We describe here the formation of amino acids and urea from elemental carbon in the presence of aqueous ammonia by CODE. By this reaction and the following process, the elemental carbon of the electrode was converted into the bio-organic compounds.

You have been wrong for a long time.

[AtheistinFundyLand]

@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 Um, yeah. That's whole point. It was the punchline of a joke and you didn't get it.

Hint:

1. Americans are really stupid when it comes to evolution. As the owner of a fossil-based business, I see it constantly. It makes my head hurt.

2. The people watching this video can understand English.

Understand English + Stupid About Evolution = American

Quite elementary.

[disquisition73]

The evolutionist is a biogenesis denier.

[disquisition73]

@RaustBD biogenesis is a ladder, abiognesis is spontaneous generation. There is no tree.

[disquisition73]

@RaustBD Wrong, evolution believes that spontaneous generation is the spark of the fictitious tree. There is no spontaneous generation. There is no tree, there is no evidence.

[RaustBD]

@disquisition73 You're right. an australian shepherd will always give birth to an australian shepherd.

Just like it will always give birth to a dog.

Just like it will always give birth to a caniform.

Just like it will always give birth to a mammal.

Just like it will always give birth to a vertebrate.

Just like it will always give birth to an animal.

Evolution is NOT a ladder, it's a TREE.

[dkthg]

@disquisition73 Once again, you have just proved the point of this video.

[disquisition73]

@dkthg Therefore, nature can not be the cause for life. Something beyond nature created life. Logical conclusion. You would have to disprove biogenesis, show an example of spontaneous generation in nature to defeat my argument. In all of recorded history, there is none. So a belief in pure naturalism is not logical, given the scientific data. Belief in spontaneous generation is belief in things not seen, and false into the category of religion, and philosophy. But it is not science

[disquisition73]

@dkthg My claim, is that biogenesis is a law. Life only arises from life after its kind. Therefore science has shown that life did not originate due to spontaneous generation. So I take these as facts. So that rules out evolution. next deduction. mankind either

always existed, or came after nature. In nature we presume uniformity. So the laws of nature are unchanging. There is a paradox that life is here, yet spontaneous generation is impossible.

[disquisition73]

A kind is an animal that can reproduce for successive generations. For example a dog will have a dog. Biogenesis is a law. Therefore we can make predictions. Evolution is based on inference. Which is just imagining backwards. Then they look for evidence in nature to fill the links in the chain. If there is no evidence then they will say its still a working model. The hypothesis never gets thrown out. The only reason I say anything is absolute certainty evolution did not happen.

[dkthg]

@disquisition73 Thank you for proving the point of this video.

[rkyeun]

@pjpopper

> They have a world view based on naturalism. not science.

You do not know what science is.

> They believe nature itself is a sentient entity.

Nobody believes this, liar.