Silly Creationist

[5thHorseman]

[quote='Cinjin' pid='145770' dateline='1308163301']

---

lol - I assumed neither of us would drop it even when I wrote that.

To your #1 response: Again I'm curious what your definition of 'the truth' is? And what evidence you have of evolutionists suppressing it?
Even if you find the 'proof' to be unsatisfactory, it is still more substantial than no proof. As has been stated many times before, the Bible cannot be used as legitimate 'proof' of creation.
To your #2 response: Are we going to get into another debate about "what is Logic"?

---

Yes we agree, we are both a bit stubborn

1. Scripture says that creation itself attests to God's existence and work, unbelievers suppress this truth. So that would be the truth I am referring to.
2. Well that's just it though Cinjin, because the "proof" that evolutionists use to support their theory is structurally invalid, it can just as easily and often is used to support Creation because it fits both models. You really don't think that the Creation guys have a model that explains the fossil record? They do and it works just as well as the evolutionary model. Just out of curiosity, why can't the Bible be used as proof? If it really is inerrant as I believe it is, what better proof could you ask for?

---

"Speed dating Actually, speciation can occur very rapidly. Creation Scientists do not believe all life came from a single ancestor (Common Descent), so they do not require nearly as much time. In fact, even the 3.5 billion years hypothesized by evolutionists is not nearly enough time to derive all life on earth from a single ancestor via Natural Selection."

It ain't all mutation, my friend.

Explain what you mean please...

---

---

Only a fucking moron like Ham would make a comment like this:

A new exhibit at the Answers in Genesis Creation Museum argues that natural selection — Darwin's explanation for how species develop new traits over time — can coexist with the creationist assertion that all living things were created by God just a few thousand years ago.

"We wanted to show people that creationists believe in natural selection," said Ken Ham, founder of the Christian ministry Answers in Genesis and frequent Darwin critic.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,5098...z1PN5qFqVl

And where is the evidence for "all living things" having been created by their fuckwit god a few thousand years ago? Um, they have none. They insist that Evolution is wrong but have nothing but fairy tales to fall back on.

---

So you have read all 7,000+ articles on AIG's website in order to come to the conclusion that they have "no evidence"? Seems like a pretty bold claim to me.


[/quote]

Statler. I don't understand how you can give any credit to evolution deniers. Evolution is a fact, there is no evidence to say otherwise. Ken Ham is an idiot. Please find me a Phd Biologist who is a creationist. If the greatest minds of biology and related fields say evolution happened/happening, why should anyone take the word of a man like Ken Ham, Mick Huckabee or Palin?

A new exhibit at the Answers in Genesis Creation Museum argues that natural selection — Darwin's explanation for how species develop new traits over time — can coexist with the creationist assertion [b]that all living things were created by God just a few thousand years ago.

What? Is this for real? The Chinese already had a written language 15000 years ago. I doubt they were born with the ability to write/read etc.

Come on Statler, actually show some evidence for creationism, as evolution has plenty of evidence.

---

[quote='Epimethean' pid='145763' dateline='1308162185']
If the operators of the creatoon museum accept natural selection but believe that the earth is less than 10,000 years old, the process must be akin to speed dating.

Speed dating Actually, speciation can occur very rapidly. Creation Scientists do not believe all life came from a single ancestor (Common Descent), so they do not require nearly as much time. In fact, even the 3.5 billion years hypothesized by evolutionists is not nearly enough time to derive all life on earth from a single ancestor via Natural Selection.

Says who Statler? Show something to back your claims please.

Creation Scientists do not believe all life came from a single ancestor

Maybe because they have an agenda that doesn't conform to this. Science is the search of truth.

Creationism is for people who are scared of the truth, and struggle to believe that we have no point in this world.

As my Mormon friend says. 'There must be something else'(with a large hint of desperation in his voice) He can't accept this isn't a dress rehearsal. Unsurprisingly he too is a creationist.