This free seminar defines the classical Darwinian Theory of Evolution and shows that it is absolutely unscientific from every angle, being totally contradicted by mathematics, genetics, thermo-dynamics, anthropology, geology, biology, zoology and the fossil record.
http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1081
Originally posted by checkbaiterSend them a message, if it's that easy to falsify the theory it shouldn't take too long to write a paper and have it peer reviewed.
This free seminar defines the classical Darwinian Theory of Evolution and shows that it is absolutely unscientific from every angle, being totally contradicted by mathematics, genetics, thermo-dynamics, anthropology, geology, biology, zoology and the fossil record.
http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1081
Originally posted by Proper KnobThere have been peer reviewed papers written and published. However, most of the scientific magazines and journals are controlled by atheists who will not allow the publishing of scientific papers by creation scientists.
Send them a message, if it's that easy to falsify the theory it shouldn't take too long to write a paper and have it peer reviewed.
The Instructor
Understanding the difference between historical and operational science helps to clear up some of the confusion in the Creation/Evolution debate. The origin of life on earth and the origin of all species of animals and plants are historical events. They cannot be observed. Any conclusions we draw about how these events occurred will depend on assumptions that we must make. If our assumptions are wrong then our conclusions are wrong. The underlying assumption of Creation is that there is a God. The underlying assumption of Evolution is that there is no God.
http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=644
Originally posted by RJHindsI like this one...
Understanding the difference between historical and operational science helps to clear up some of the confusion in the Creation/Evolution debate. The origin of life on earth and the origin of all species of animals and plants are historical events. They cannot be observed. Any conclusions we draw about how these events occurred will depend on assumptions tha ...[text shortened]... there is no God.
http://www.truthortradition.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=644
For example, radiometric dating methods [2] are often used to date the age of rocks but all of these dating methods have two important assumptions – the amount of material being measured started with a particular amount when the rock was first formed and the rate of radioactive decay has always been the same. These are two very big assumptions that are virtually unknowable and yet these methods are used to “prove” the age of the rock. In actuality, they are not capable of proving anything because the underlying assumptions are un-provable.
Originally posted by checkbaiterthe rate of radioactive decay has, in fact, always been the same.
I like this one...
[b]For example, radiometric dating methods [2] are often used to date the age of rocks but all of these dating methods have two important assumptions – the amount of material being measured started with a particular amount when the rock was first formed and the rate of radioactive decay has always been the same. These are two very big ...[text shortened]... they are not capable of proving anything because the underlying assumptions are un-provable.[/b]
you can't assume that at one point in the vast history that is 6000 years, gravity didn't exist, the electromagnetic force behaved differently, and a god magically willed the universe into being, in 6 days. if i use that same reasoning, i can assume anything and you can't stop me. nobody can. however, the rational people may choose to ignore me and everyone making these unfounded claims.
fundamental laws of physics , being fundamental, do not change.
and for all retards out there claiming scientists are part of a huge conspiracy to keep the truth from reaching the masses:
you have to have a purpose, something to gain, from forming a conspiracy. do atheists sell more "i'm an atheist" shirt? is there a booming economy for atheist thongs? do they get richer, more powerful if they manage to get you to understand (not believe) evolution?
Originally posted by checkbaiterDo you yourself understand the arguments in question, or are you just passing them on because they support your religion? If the latter, you are in danger of making yourself and your religion look bad when it turns out that the arguments are badly flawed.
This free seminar defines the classical Darwinian Theory of Evolution and shows that it is absolutely unscientific from every angle, being totally contradicted by mathematics, genetics, thermo-dynamics, anthropology, geology, biology, zoology and the fossil record.
If the former, would you care to discuss any of them in detail?
I, for example, would be interested to know where the Theory of Evolution is contradicted by mathematics, but I am only interested in discussing it if you yourself claim to understand the argument.
I also feel compelled to point out that anyone who can substantiate those claims in a scientific setting is in for some Nobel prizes. If they are really good they might get one for Physics and one for Biology and maybe even some more. That's several million dollars and some serious bragging rights.