Creationism vs. Evolution...and Global Warming: An update

Three short talks from NCSE staffers: Executive Director Genie Scott provides a bit of Creationism 101. Deputy Director Glenn Branch delves into where we are today and how we got there. Programs and Policy Director Josh Rosenau explores the linkage between creationists and climate change deniers. Where: SkeptiCal-11 Conference, Berkeley, CA. When: 5/29/2011

Category:

Education

Tags:

• NCSE
• Genie Scott
• Josh Rosenau
• Glenn Branch
• SkeptiCal
• evolution
• creationism
• intelligent design
• global warming
• climate change

[TheMessiersAndromeda]

@Mogley52

Any evidence to back this up? Or maybe the scientists who understand the field much better than you are right when they say that the rocks could have ONLY come from Mars?

[TheMessiersAndromeda]

@Mogley52 The hypotheses about the origins of life are a different field called Abiogenesis. Cells do not evolve in halves. The only thing necesary for life is a self replicating molecule, like RNA. RNA can be three proteins long, not a difficult thing to do. The beginning of life most likely happened more than once in different places.

[TheMessiersAndromeda]

@Mogley52

Mutations produce new information all the time. Explain the arrival of naturally arising nylon eating bateria. Bear in mind that nylon is synthetic and has been around for the last 80 years.

[TheMessiersAndromeda]

@Mogley52

I won't even both with dogma. There is plenty of evidence. Go to a museum and look at it yourself. You ever wondered why ape babies are born with the ability to walk and ours are not? That's because we straigtened up from them. The women's pelvis only allowed a certain sized body and head through and we can see this in the fossil record.

[TheMessiersAndromeda]

@Mogley52

Idiocy knows no bounds. Believing in "microevolution" and not "macroevolution" is like beliving in words and not sentences. A liver doesn't half evolve like some sort of retarded horror movie. An eye doesn't evolve in quarters. Each part just gets a little bit more complex as time goes on. An eye was once a patch of light sensitive cells, which just got curved (into a pinhole camera) and then secreted a transparent chemical which produced a lense.

[TheMessiersAndromeda]

@Mogley52 The usual "taken out of context" and "misinterpreted" rubbish.

[TheMessiersAndromeda]

@Mogley52

"I received your letter of June 10th. I have never talked to a Jesuit priest in my life and I am astonished by the audacity to tell such lies about me. From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist."

-Albert Einstein, - Albert Einstein, letter to Guy H. Raner Jr, July 2, 1945, responding to a rumor that a Jesuit priest had caused Einstein to convert from atheism; quoted by Michael R. Gilmore in Skeptic, Vol. 5, No. 2

[TheMessiersAndromeda]

@Mogley52

Well, what refreshingly new bullshit. Just kidding, old news. Oh and great work on the caps, now I'm convinced. The Big Bang created all of space and time, as you said, which would imply that time didn't exist before the Big Bang. Therefore the Big Bang had no cause, because cause and effect are governed by time. So unfortunately for you, the trail ends there. No need for any supernatural bullshit to explain the cause of something that was never caused.

[1empathy]

@Mogley52 If science points to god why are 93% of the national academy atheist? (that's in the US, it's even higher in the royal societies and elite science groups in more secular countries). It is possible that the universe was created (the truth is NOBODY knows) but how do you get from a creator to yahweh/jesus the all powerful (unless you have iron chariots or need to heal an amputee etc) author of the scientifically inaccurate and self-contradictory bible?

[hksin11186]

Sweet Mama Kent Mogley you need to stay the hell away from AIG.