A simple question for creationists.

[McBell]

Methinks the ToE faithful protest too much...quote from Sagan too damaging to your world view? Your outrage over the quote does not change what he said. Sagan admitted the fossil evidence could be consistent with creation. Personal attacks will not change that, but personal attacks are a prime weapon used by propagandists.

As I stated, methinks the ToE faithful protest too much. I do agree you guys have to somehow turn attention from what Sagan said about the fossil evidence. Attacking the messenger is often effective, as long as people don't think too hard, or simply read the quote for themselves.

The really sad, yet totally hilarious, thing is that you have presented a quote that says the exact opposite of you claim it says.

And to making it even funnier is the fact that even after it has been explained to you, more than once to boot, you STILL hold onto it.

 

[orcel]

It lists the precise ages of all of the ancestors of Jesus, IIRC.

But does not list the age of the planet, merely a lineage. Though you are right that many use this a a proof of age argument it truely is not.

 

[outhouse]

Wow, he must be a really strong anti-Creationist to say that.

No just a desperate one lol

when logic and reason fail, quote mine and throw assertions

 

[rusra02]

Like I said...

Example of Quote Mining

(Originally Posted by rusra02)
Anyone who doesn't believe in the ToE must be a liar, a knave, and a dolt.

Apparently, Rusra believes that anyone who fails to accept the empirical evidence contained within the Theory of Evolution is a "liar, a knave, and a dolt".

After all, I pulled a direct quote from a past statement made by Rusra! This must be an example of Rusras true feelings on the subject!

And like I said, you took my quote out of context, which is dishonest. Sagan's quote was not taken out of context. Nice try at misdirection though. The original question raised in this thread was: how is the fossil evidence explained by those who believe in creation? The answer is the fossil evidence supports creation, evolutionists claims notwithstanding.

 

[McBell]

And like I said, you took my quote out of context, which is dishonest. Sagan's quote was not taken out of context. Nice try at misdirection though. The original question raised in this thread was: how is the fossil evidence explained by those who believe in creation? The answer is the fossil evidence supports creation, evolutionists claims notwithstanding.

Sagan's Quote, at least the version of it YOU presented, was in fact taken out of context.

Creationists claim all manner of nonsense as being true.
Even when flat out shown that it is not true.

You have thoroughly demonstrated this creationist technique right here in this very thread.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

And like I said, you took my quote out of context, which is dishonest.

Are you serious....?

Give us the context to what Sagan said from the quote you presented. I've given you mine which is why you won't respond to me.

Sagan's quote was not taken out of context. Nice try at misdirection though.

It was out of context.

The whole quote is here....try reading it ALL to see if he still agrees with your assertion.
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2645892-post199.html

The original question raised in this thread was: how is the fossil evidence explained by those who believe in creation? The answer is the fossil evidence supports creation, evolutionists claims notwithstanding.

Talk about misdirection....Yes, you want us all to forget the fact that you presented an blatant quote-mind.

The fact of the matter is...the fossil record does not explain or support "creation"...as Sagan pretty much says in that quote you butchered. You can't even explain why 99% of organisms on this planet over the millions upon millions of years have gone extinct. Nothing in the bible give us a clue.

 

[tumbleweed41]

And like I said, you took my quote out of context, which is dishonest.

Exactly.

Sagan's quote was not taken out of context.

You still don"t get it, do you?

 

[Alceste]

It's probably like this. He had never read sagan and doesn't know who sagan is. His entire familiarity with sagan's writing is that "gotcha" quote-mine which was provided and interpreted for him by some rubbish JW magazine. As far as he is concerned, the correct "context" is the JW article, not the original source of the quote.

 

[Matthew78]

It's probably like this. He had never read sagan and doesn't know who sagan is. His entire familiarity with sagan's writing is that "gotcha" quote-mine which was provided and interpreted for him by some rubbish JW magazine. As far as he is concerned, the correct "context" is the JW article, not the original source of the quote.

Of course! Jehovah would never allow those precious, saintly JWs to be in error nor his precious Word. And, of course, we know that Jehovah needs precious saints like Rusra02 to set us poor sods right. We should be thankful to him, become JWs, and praise Jehovah for sending him to us.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

[FONT=&quot]Every time you will feel stressed because no two interviews can ever be same. The questions asked in them are most of the times different.

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]tell me about yourself interview[/FONT]

First: Welcome to the form.

Second: This has nothing to do with the thread topic.

 

[rusra02]

Are you serious....?

Give us the context to what Sagan said from the quote you presented. I've given you mine which is why you won't respond to me.



It was out of context.

The whole quote is here....try reading it ALL to see if he still agrees with your assertion.
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2645892-post199.html



Talk about misdirection....Yes, you want us all to forget the fact that you presented an blatant quote-mind.

The fact of the matter is...the fossil record does not explain or support "creation"...as Sagan pretty much says in that quote you butchered. You can't even explain why 99% of organisms on this planet over the millions upon millions of years have gone extinct. Nothing in the bible give us a clue.

I invite each person to check the quote for themselves. When someone does tell the truth about the fossil record, anyone quoting them is called a "quote miner" and worse. At the same time, ToE propagandists challenge those who believe in creation to present evidence. Here's another 'quote mined' for you:
"Instead of finding the gradual unfolding of life, what geologists in Darwin's time and geologists of the present day actually find is a highly uneven or jerky record; that is, species appear in the sequence very suddenly, show little or no change during their existence in the record, then abruptly go out of the record."
David Raup-field museum of natural history bulletin 1/79 p.23
National Geographic likened the fossil record to "a film of evolution from which 999 of every 1,000 frames have been lost on the cutting-room floor." (11/04 p.25)
The 1 out of 1,000 frames found in the fossil record displays sudden appearance of living things, and stability with little or no change in these plants and animals. Yet, these facts are routinely ignored by the evolutionist faithful.

The Bible is not a science book. It is God's Word, but when it deals with any subject, including science, it is accurate and true.

 

[Krok]

David Raup-field museum of natural history bulletin 1/79 p.23 .

You mean the same David Raup who suggested that a cycle of mass extinctions occurred every 26 million years? How does this fit in with a creation less than 10 000 years ago? David M. Raup - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They suggested that the extinction of dinosaurs 65 mya was part of a cycle of mass extinctions that may have occurred every 26 million years.

 

[rusra02]

You mean the same David Raup who suggested that a cycle of mass extinctions occurred every 26 million years? How does this fit in with a creation less than 10 000 years ago? David M. Raup - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Who said the earth was created less than 10,000 years ago? Not I.

 

[outhouse]

The Bible is not a science book. It is God's Word, but when it deals with any subject, including science, it is accurate and true.

it has been proven false over and over and at this point it is considered mythical in nature when dealing with the creation part.


Evolution is backed by facts that have been obsered.


you study is backed by myth and fantasy




the sooner you drop your myth and start to follow kowledge, logic and reason, the sooner your education can develop. :yes:

 

[outhouse]

what geologists in Darwin's time and geologists of the present day actually find is a highly uneven or jerky record; that is, species appear in the sequence very suddenly, show little or no change during their existence in the record, then abruptly go out of the record."

correct


your ignorance in the science of evolution is noted

Life has never evolved like a ladder


Life does however evolve like a tree, many species will not change due to stable enviroments while otheres may need to evolve faster to meet the needs of a constantly changing enviroment.


The world has gone through many changes since life started and thus you will see these changes exactly as the played out on the fossil recond matching the enviromental changes.



please get a education on the subject, you embarress yourself

 

[outhouse]

Who said the earth was created less than 10,000 years ago? Not I.

correct

BUT you have no real explanation that replaces the origins of man let alone all other life.



If you cannot replace the current scientific theory with a alternitive version that makes sense,,, you simply fail

 

[Krok]

Who said the earth was created less than 10,000 years ago? Not I.

Oh, didn't you? Whether you did or not, you still lied.

Was the David Raupt you quote-mined the same paleontologist who said:

"Now with regard to the fossil record, we certainly see change. If any of us were to be put down in the Cretaceous landscape we would immediately recognize the difference. Some of the plants and animals would be familiar but most would have changed and some of the types would be totally different from those living today. . . This record of change pretty clearly demonstrates that evolution has occurred if we define evolution simply as change; but it does not tell us how this change too place, and that is really the question. If we allow that natural selection works, as we almost have to do, the fossil record doesn't tell us whether it was responsible for 90 percent of the change we see or 9 percent, or .9 percent."

​

 

[PolyHedral]

The Bible is not a science book. It is God's Word, but when it deals with any subject, including science, it is accurate and true.

Only if you twist it rather excessively.

 

[camanintx]

I invite each person to check the quote for themselves. When someone does tell the truth about the fossil record, anyone quoting them is called a "quote miner" and worse.

When you present a quote saying "The fossil evidence could be consistent with the idea of a Great Designer" as meaning "The fossil record instead supports the
concept of direct creation" while leaving out the part that says "The fossil record implies trial and error, an inability to anticipate the future, features inconsistent with an efficient Great Designer" then yes rusra02, you are quote mining.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

I invite each person to check the quote for themselves. When someone does tell the truth about the fossil record, anyone quoting them is called a "quote miner" and worse. At the same time, ToE propagandists challenge those who believe in creation to present evidence. Here's another 'quote mined' for you:
"Instead of finding the gradual unfolding of life, what geologists in Darwin's time and geologists of the present day actually find is a highly uneven or jerky record; that is, species appear in the sequence very suddenly, show little or no change during their existence in the record, then abruptly go out of the record."
David Raup-field museum of natural history bulletin 1/79 p.23
National Geographic likened the fossil record to "a film of evolution from which 999 of every 1,000 frames have been lost on the cutting-room floor." (11/04 p.25)
The 1 out of 1,000 frames found in the fossil record displays sudden appearance of living things, and stability with little or no change in these plants and animals. Yet, these facts are routinely ignored by the evolutionist faithful.

The Bible is not a science book. It is God's Word, but when it deals with any subject, including science, it is accurate and true.

I've extensively proved you quote-mined and lied about what Sagan actually said. There's no need to prove you're quote mining David Raup considering some one already beat me to it.