(February 22, 2012 at 6:55 am)Zen Badger Wrote:

(February 21, 2012 at 6:59 pm)chipan Wrote:

(February 21, 2012 at 10:21 am)Zen Badger Wrote: You are correct that it returns to nitrogen(sorry my bad) but how can it run out if it is being constantly renewed?

Uv rays In the atmosphere enrich the carbon atoms in carbon dioxide. It gets absorbed by plants and we eat the plants. Don't take my word for it, look up how carbon dating works.

---

In this you are wrong, nitrogen is converted to C14 which is then along with stable C12 absorbed by plants which are in turn eaten by animals.

C14(as you correctly pointed out) then decays back into nitrogen.
It is the ratio of remaining C14 to C12 that allows science to determine the time of death of an organism.

(February 21, 2012 at 1:19 pm)Minimalist Wrote: So I ran through Chippy's list of "doctors" and found a geologist, a biochemist, a mathematician and a physicist all of whom are members in good standing of the creation institute except the two who are dead.
So once again, Chippy, creationism is not science...it is religion. Try to come up with an evolutionary biologist who thinks that all life was created 6,000 years ago in the middle east.

And while you're at it blow jesus out your ass.

Quote:Irrelevant. All I was asked to do was point out those who have a phd in the subject and don't believe evolutionary theories which I did. It doesn't matter about their religion. Is an athiest any smarter than a deist? My point is that they know way more than you do about the subject and they don't believe it.

It very does matter about their religion.
AnswersinGenesis have a statement of Faith that declares that evidence is secondary to scripture. And that if said evidence contradicts the bible then it is the evidence that is wrong.

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&...NOTcqZQ0bA

With that sort of attitude how can it be real science?

(February 22, 2012 at 8:11 am)chipan Wrote: No religion does not matter when it comes to individual scientists. There are Christian scientists that believe in evolution. Christian does not equal creationism and vice versa. Tell me what benefit a scientist has to leave their job and be a part of AIG? None, they do it cuz they believe it and that's my point that all of you lack understanding. I'm not talking about the organization im talking about the individuals.

(February 22, 2012 at 8:23 am)Zen Badger Wrote:

(February 22, 2012 at 8:11 am)chipan Wrote: No religion does not matter when it comes to individual scientists. There are Christian scientists that believe in evolution. Christian does not equal creationism and vice versa. Tell me what benefit a scientist has to leave their job and be a part of AIG? None, they do it cuz they believe it and that's my point that all of you lack understanding. I'm not talking about the organization im talking about the individuals.

And they put their belief BEFORE evidence.

(February 22, 2012 at 8:40 am)chipan Wrote:

(February 22, 2012 at 8:23 am)Zen Badger Wrote: And they put their belief BEFORE evidence.

You don't know that. They have seen all the evidence and made a decision but you don't know why they choose to believe that. I don't think you have the right to speak for them. My point stands that they know more than you do on the subject and still disagree.

Kurt Wise PhD Wrote:I am a young-age creationist because that is my understanding of the Scripture. As I shared with my professors years ago when I was in college, if all the evidence in the universe turned against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate.

(February 22, 2012 at 1:04 am)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:I've never claimed the earth is 6000 years old and have stated it could be 50,0000.

I can't keep track of all of your silly claims...and they are legion.

BTW, are you trying to say 50,000 or 500,000 ( oh what a difference a little comma makes) which would be an improvement but still incredibly wrong.

(February 22, 2012 at 9:25 am)Phil Wrote:

(February 22, 2012 at 8:40 am)chipan Wrote:

(February 22, 2012 at 8:23 am)Zen Badger Wrote: And they put their belief BEFORE evidence.

You don't know that. They have seen all the evidence and made a decision but you don't know why they choose to believe that. I don't think you have the right to speak for them. My point stands that they know more than you do on the subject and still disagree.

No, he knows it and most thinking humans know that, you on the other hand are a Pan Troglodyte that is nothing more than a waste of good oxygen. Read this and you will see the vast majority of scientists that believe in creation do so not because of any evidence for creation (they admit there is evidence for evolution) they believe because that is the way they were raised. Here is a quote from a PhD who actually studied fossils and geology.

Kurt Wise PhD Wrote:I am a young-age creationist because that is my understanding of the Scripture. As I shared with my professors years ago when I was in college, if all the evidence in the universe turned against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate.

Not a belief based on evidence and considering NOTHING could change his mind, his belief is faith based and has nothing to do with science. This is the type of "scientists" you are proud to have on your side? Do me a favor, keep them.

(February 22, 2012 at 8:48 pm)Phil Wrote:

(February 22, 2012 at 9:25 am)Phil Wrote:

(February 22, 2012 at 8:40 am)chipan Wrote:

(February 22, 2012 at 8:23 am)Zen Badger Wrote: And they put their belief BEFORE evidence.

You don't know that. They have seen all the evidence and made a decision but you don't know why they choose to believe that. I don't think you have the right to speak for them. My point stands that they know more than you do on the subject and still disagree.

No, he knows it and most thinking humans know that, you on the other hand are a Pan Troglodyte that is nothing more than a waste of good oxygen. Read this and you will see the vast majority of scientists that believe in creation do so not because of any evidence for creation (they admit there is evidence for evolution) they believe because that is the way they were raised. Here is a quote from a PhD who actually studied fossils and geology.

Kurt Wise PhD Wrote:I am a young-age creationist because that is my understanding of the Scripture. As I shared with my professors years ago when I was in college, if all the evidence in the universe turned against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate.

Not a belief based on evidence and considering NOTHING could change his mind, his belief is faith based and has nothing to do with science. This is the type of "scientists" you are proud to have on your side? Do me a favor, keep them.

Guess chiapet ran from the thread like a little girl after he saw this post. Maybe someone should email it to him and maybe he will run away from the forum.

(February 22, 2012 at 10:58 pm)chipan Wrote: No I'm simply ignoring your empty claims

Quote:‘In other words, Bill, Christianity is not a blind faith, it is an objective faith—a rational logical faith based on facts. It is not like the blind, subjective faith of the evolutionist. Although we can’t scientifically prove our faith, because we can’t scientifically PROVE anything in relation to the past, none the less, we can logically defend our faith.