6 edits
Originally posted by RJHinds
I did not say we should ignore scientific facts obtained rationally from evidence and sound scientific method. However, scientists should consider all evidence and not just those parts that fits their worldview as the evilutionists do today. We should also look at the evidence from a creationists world view as well.
The Instructor
I did not say we should ignore scientific facts obtained rationally from evidence and sound scientific method.
so you believe evolution and old Earth then?
However, scientists should consider all evidence and not just those parts that fits their worldview as the evilutionists do today.
...and ALL the evidence points to evolution and old Earth.
We should also look at the evidence from a creationists world view as well.
yes, we should, for we should note that, when we look, we see none -unless you are a creationist because creationists are delusional and see whatever they want to see even though it isn't there. I assume if you had a religious reason to believe the Earth is flat then you would also deny the mountain of evidence that it is round and 'see evidence' that it is flat despite there being no such evidence.
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindswe have EVIDENCE that many stalagmites are thousands of years old.
Earth is 6,000 Years Old
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1msS71xL00
It does not take thousands of years to form stalagmite as is proved from the video.
The Instructor
just watch the whole of this excellent concise short video that explains just some of the totally irrefutable evidence that the Earth is very old:
Surely the hardest thing you would have to explain is the first bit of the video about the calculation about the minimal time, which would be millions of years, it would take for that vast quantity of fossil fuels known to exist in the Earth's crust to be naturally deposited and formed in the Earths crust -there is no way you can explain that one!
2 edits
Originally posted by humyDon't worry, he won't be able to come up with anything from his own mind, he will post some more creationist apologist crap. Let him explain why we can MAKE plutonium but there is no naturally occurring deposits of plutonium. Plutonium has a half life of 88 million years or thereabouts so if the Earth was 10K years old we would have a plentiful supply of that element. Where is it?
we have EVIDENCE that many stalagmites are thousands of years old.
just watch the whole of this excellent concise short video that explains just some of the totally irrefutable evidence that the Earth is very old:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v-uvh_KWkg
Surely the hardest thing you would have to explain is the first bit of the video about the calcul e naturally deposited and formed in the Earths crust -there is no way you can explain that one!
But, not to worry, he will come up with 'they don't know that, they are deluding themselves', 'they can't know the time line, were they there 88 million years ago', etc., etc., etc., ad nauseum.
Originally posted by humyI believe the evilutionists, like yourself, are blinded by assumptions.I did not say we should ignore scientific facts obtained rationally from evidence and sound scientific method.
so you believe evolution and old Earth then?However, scientists should consider all evidence and not just those parts that fits their worldview as the evilutionists do today.
...and ALL the evidence poi ...[text shortened]... nce that it is round and 'see evidence' that it is flat despite there being no such evidence.
The Instructor
1 edit
Originally posted by humyhttp://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
we have EVIDENCE that many stalagmites are thousands of years old.
just watch the whole of this excellent concise short video that explains just some of the totally irrefutable evidence that the Earth is very old:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3v-uvh_KWkg
Surely the hardest thing you would have to explain is the first bit of the video about the calcul e naturally deposited and formed in the Earths crust -there is no way you can explain that one!
The rapid formation of coal and oil
http://www.creationworldview.org/articles_view.asp?id=51
The instructor
5 edits
Originally posted by sonhouse
Don't worry, he won't be able to come up with anything from his own mind, he will post some more creationist apologist crap. Let him explain why we can MAKE plutonium but there is no naturally occurring deposits of plutonium. Plutonium has a half life of 88 million years or thereabouts so if the Earth was 10K years old we would have a plentiful supply of th know the time line, were they there 88 million years ago', etc., etc., etc., ad nauseum.
Don't worry, he won't be able to come up with anything from his own mind, he will post some more creationist apologist crap.
yes, and that's exactly what he just did.
One small example out of many:
http://www.creationworldview.org/articles_view.asp?id=51
“...Coal and oil are found sandwiched between sedimentary rock layers. Sedimentary rock layers are basically layers of dried out mud. This MEANS that all the layers, including the layers of coal and oil, were laid down primarily by the action of water in A flood. ...(my emphasis)”
-which makes no logical sense because one obviously does not logically follow from the other because, just for starters, you can have not just "A" flood but many floods over millions of years laying down sediment. But, in addition, you don't necessarily need a flood for sedimentary layer of rock to form for they often form at the bottom of permanent oceans or in very shallow swamp water etc over millions of years. Also, as if that was not enough, if all that rock was made in a single flood, there would be no distinct layers in the rock but rather all the components of the rock would have been jumbled up by the single flood.
All his links are just stuffed full of lies, illogic and total crap like that and I do not have the time to tediously iterate through the lot to say all what is wrong with them.
He is obviously incapable of coming up with any intelligent argument all on his own and instead gives links clearly made by the unintelligent.
Originally posted by humyYou don't have to tell sunhouse about it, because he believes just as you do. You are both blinded in the same way. I am sorry that I am not Jesus, for then I might be able to heal your blindness.Don't worry, he won't be able to come up with anything from his own mind, he will post some more creationist apologist crap.
yes, and that's exactly what he just did.
One small example out of many:
http://www.creationworldview.org/articles_view.asp?id=51
“...Coal and oil are found sandwiched between sedimentary rock layers. Sedime ...[text shortened]... lligent argument all on his own and instead gives links clearly made by the unintelligent.
The Instructor
6 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsYou get more pathological by the day. Have you taken your meds today?
You don't have to tell sunhouse about it, because he believes just as you do. You are both blinded in the same way. I am sorry that I am not Jesus, for then I might be able to heal your blindness.
The Instructor
I really liked this bit:
In addition, almost all coal and oil is derived from vegetation.
Coal (charred animal remains), etc.
Hmm, I don't see a contradiction there, do you?🙂
And that is in the first paragraph.
Another good one:
Coal and oil are the obvious result of the activity of Noah's Flood. During the Flood of Noah (about 4,350 years ago) great amounts of superheated water came up out of the earth and mixed with the waters that were on the surface and those that rained down from above. In addition, the hot rock and hot ash from thousands of volcanoes was available to generate many layers of heated sedimentary materials. Ground makes a very good insulator capable of maintaining heat for long periods of time. - See more at: http://www.creationworldview.org/articles_view.asp?id=51#sthash.jXnh1rYo.dpuf
Coal and oil are OBVIOUSLY from Noah's flood. It just gets better and
better🙂
And this:
At the beginning of the Flood thousands of volcanoes mowed down forests all over the world. Volcanic ash fell on top of huge floating log mats. When those log mats were buried in-between the heated sedimentary layers deposited by the Flood, coal and oil were formed in a short amount of time. - See more at: http://www.creationworldview.org/articles_view.asp?id=51#sthash.zwTV5p3Z.dpuf
Wow, I did not know there were THOUSANDS of volcanoes when the flood started. Amazing what you can learn from creationists, eh.
2 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsSo why don't we see the scientific reports about this amazing find in a real science journal, peer reviewed and such? If the evidence was SO strong, there should be no refuting it and there should be a Nobel prize in it.
Earth is 6,000 Years Old
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1msS71xL00
It does not take thousands of years to form stalagmite as is proved from the video.
The Instructor
You don't even know how many people are getting a GREAT belly laugh at your expense over all this utter BULLSHYTE.
How does it feel to be the laughing stock?
Originally posted by sonhouseCreation scientists are barred from getting Nobel prizes these days. Too many evil-lution jerks around.
So why don't we see the scientific reports about this amazing find in a real science journal, peer reviewed and such? If the evidence was SO strong, there should be no refuting it and there should be a Nobel prize in it.
You don't even know how many people are getting a GREAT belly laugh at your expense over all this utter BULLSHYTE.
How does it feel to be the laughing stock?
The Instructor
5 edits
Originally posted by RJHinds
Creation scientists are barred from getting Nobel prizes these days. Too many evil-lution jerks around.
The Instructor
Creation scientists are barred from getting Nobel prizes these days.
yes, they bar themselves from Nobel prizes by their choice to be confused by science as well as their general lack of intelligence which means very few these days if any have the mental capacity to do something intelligent enough to get a Nobel prize for it.
None of the most intelligent and best scientists these days are Creationists for you cannot have both have a believe in such Creationist rubbish and be one of the most intelligent scientists.
Originally posted by humyThe choose to believe in the truth from the creator God rather than the lies of evil-lutionists.Creation scientists are barred from getting Nobel prizes these days.
yes, they bar themselves from Nobel prizes by their choice to be confused by science as well as their general lack of intelligence which means very few these days if any have the mental capacity to do something intelligent enough to get a Nobel prize for it.
Non ...[text shortened]... e both have a believe in such Creationist rubbish and be one of the most intelligent scientists.
The Instructor