"One Fact to Refute Creationism"

[blü 2]

It's the truth at least.

Forgive me for not having followed this thread from the beginning, but what definition of 'truth' are you in fact using?

 

[Subduction Zone]

So by your reasoning we should hold anyone that quotes "Mein Kampf" responsible for genocide then?

What about quoting the biography of a serial killer? Does that make someone responsible for the murders?

I think not.

Your being irrational. The Guardian is responsible for what it publishes, not the people who quote what was published.

ROFL! Christine is not the one being irrational here.

 

[Subduction Zone]

But did you know that Charles Darwin daughter wrote, that her father in his personal life, was studying to be minister of the bible and her grandfather was a minister of the bible. You probably didn't know that.

And how later in Charles Darwin life, he started to bring God more into the picture about his Theory of Evolution.
That how nothing happens by chance.

y
Please everyone knows that. But your latter claim is simply false. By the end of his life Darwin was pretty much an atheist. He saw the light. Would you care to try to justify your claim with a valid source?

 

[Subduction Zone]

And it sure does, when the Theory of Evolution is threatened, it rears up it's ugly head. In opposition to the truth.

It's sure is nice to see you agree on something.

Evolution has no "ugly head". It is simply the most accurate explanation of how life came to be. Lies of the sort that you believe in are the ugly ones. I asked if you could get over your fears. Obviously you can't.

Why does reality scare you so much?

 

[whirlingmerc]

(it's only 2:30 long)​

I'm not so interested in Dawkins reply to the request to come up with one sentence to convince the creationist to doubt their theory, but rather his observation of the intractable stance creationists take against the evidence supporting evolution. Dawkins says creationists "simply don't listen They simply stick their fingers in their ears and say 'la la la' " Dawkins calls this a disgrace to the human species.

So my question to the RF creationists here is, is this your stance as well? There is absolutely no fact, or set of facts, or bushels of facts that will ever convince you to doubt creationism. Personally, I believe it is. To admit the possibility that creationism might be wrong is to open a chink in the armor of one's faith. And fearing such a possibility the creationist's best defense is to stick ones fingers in one's ears.

So, am I right or am I right?

​

You're wrong He stuck his fingers in his ear and dismissed intelligent design out of hand. Common designer no surprised would have common design elements... it even would be necessary for common food chains to work to have some semblance of commonality.

 

[Skwim]

To best answer the Thread, "One Fact to Refute Creationism"

First a person has to start when Creationism first had it's start, When was that ?

From what I can determine creationism, as it pertains to the creation–evolution controversy, pretty much started after the publication of On The Origin Of Species by Darwin in 1859, and apparently really came into its own sometime after 1875.

However, if you're talking about the broader issue of the creation of life and how evolution deals with it, one has to understand what evolution addresses and what it doesn't. Far too often creationists will get hung up on the creation of life, and challenge evolutionists to "prove" how life could have come from some inanimate source rather than by the hand of god. A nice challenge, but not at all applicable to evolution because evolution simply doesn't care how life started. It could have started by abiogenesis, by "the hand of god," or came to earth from the planet Xenon LXII. Whatever it's source, it's immaterial. Evolution ONLY concerns itself with the change in heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations.

.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You're wrong He stuck his fingers in his ear and dismissed intelligent design out of hand. Common designer no surprised would have common design elements... it even would be necessary for common food chains to work to have some semblance of commonality.

How so? There is no evidence for intelligent design and all of the arguments that they have that I am aware of have been refuted.

 

[Skwim]

You're wrong He stuck his fingers in his ear and dismissed intelligent design out of hand.

I'd lay good money on the fact that everyone who champions evolution in the media is far more familiar with creationism/ID than you are. Of course this may not take much familiarity, but I'd still bet they are very conversant with creationism/ID and its "arguments."

Common designer no surprised would have common design elements... it even would be necessary for common food chains to work to have some semblance of commonality.

Please rephrase. This is not making any sense.

.

 

[Faithofchristian]

If you are told to believe something and you begin to believe it then it becomes your belief.

So how did you hear about this belief in the first place? Of course you have no need to believe it, the analytical mind would decide the merits of whatever is told you. Results of that analysis would depend on what you believe that you have previously been taught to believe.

Yet proof exists of dinosaurs existing, and the epochs they existed through, to deny their existence is folly as you have analysed for yourself by being told of their existence and seeing evidence to back up the story.

Dinosaurs were an evolutionary progression of life on the one and only earth who's history can be observed and traced in rocks and fossils back for over 4.5 billion years.

Yes one earth, but with 3 earth ages or to say, 3 histories of the earth. 3 generations of the earth. Back over Billions of years.

 

[ChristineM]

Yes one earth, but with 3 earth ages or to say, 3 histories of the earth. 3 generations of the earth. Back over Billions of years.

One continuous progress, here is a run down on the geological timescales involved

 

[Faithofchristian]

y
Please everyone knows that. But your latter claim is simply false. By the end of his life Darwin was pretty much an atheist. He saw the light. Would you care to try to justify your claim with a valid source?

By the time of Charles Darwin life, he pretty much becoming a minister of the bible.

Maybe you care to try to justify your claim.

All a person has to do is read the last 3 or 4 books of Charles Darwin and read for themselves.
You can also Google about the many letters written by Charles Darwin to his daughter.
Charles Darwin never gave up studying to be a minister. But continued his study.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes one earth, but with 3 earth ages or to say, 3 histories of the earth. 3 generations of the earth. Back over Billions of years.

This is mere hand waving ignorance that you cannot support. Why would you expect anyone to take you seriously?

 

[Subduction Zone]

By the time of Charles Darwin life, he pretty much becoming a minister of the bible.

Maybe you care to try to justify your claim.

All a person has to do is read the last 3 or 4 books of Charles Darwin and read for themselves.
You can also Google about the many letters written by Charles Darwin to his daughter.
Charles Darwin never gave up studying to be a minister. But continued his study.

You were the one that made the claim first. That puts the burden of proof upon you. I can support my claims, and I will. All you have to do is to either support your claims or admit that you were making things up again. Then it would be your turn and you could challenge my counter-claim.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Evolution has no "ugly head". It is simply the most accurate explanation of how life came to be. Lies of the sort that you believe in are the ugly ones. I asked if you could get over your fears. Obviously you can't.

Why does reality scare you so much?

So you say, that's your point of view, which is not everyone's.
When evolution meets Creationism, it rises it's ugly head, in protest against.

When a person of evolution asks me for proof of evidence, they can not handle me going to the bible, for my proof of evidence, Where else do you think a person who believes in creation will go. For their proof of evidence but the bible.

So you go into the world looking for your proof of evidence and I go to the bible.

I will not deviate from the bible nor will I accept evolution as a source to explain the existence of life.

 

[Faithofchristian]

This is mere hand waving ignorance that you cannot support. Why would you expect anyone to take you seriously?

That's where your wrong at, I can support my claim by the bible, unto which you can not accept the truth as given by the bible.

You go to evolution for your answers and I go to the bible for my answers.

People like yourself do not like it when people like me brings the bible into the subject of evolution, therefore evolution rises it's ugly head.

When evolution is brought up, as a Christian I have every right to bring the bible up for my defence.

You bring up evolution for your defence and I bring the bible for my defence.

Therefore it will be a never ending process.

 

[Faithofchristian]

You were the one that made the claim first. That puts the burden of proof upon you. I can support my claims, and I will. All you have to do is to either support your claims or admit that you were making things up again. Then it would be your turn and you could challenge my counter-claim.

To support my claim go to Google and put there in Charles Darwin personal life

And you will pull up everything you will need to know about Charles Darwin personal life and his letters to his daughter.

You can also go to any Library and ask for the life of Charles Darwin and the books of his.

Unless your afraid of having to do a little research on your part.
As a evolutionist you shouldn't mind a little research.

 

[ChristineM]

By the time of Charles Darwin life, he pretty much becoming a minister of the bible.

Maybe you care to try to justify your claim.

All a person has to do is read the last 3 or 4 books of Charles Darwin and read for themselves.
You can also Google about the many letters written by Charles Darwin to his daughter.
Charles Darwin never gave up studying to be a minister. But continued his study.

Yes googled it

Rare letter in which Charles Darwin confesses to being an atheist is set to sell for $90,000 | Daily Mail Online

It was lady hope who insisted darwin was a man of god.

 

[Enoch07]

You are a case in point.

Keep on dreaming.

It means much more than just that.

Only to someone who makes stuff up.

So. You lied, and you made false statements.

Nope it's true. Dawkins and Harris have both made statements to provide evidence for this. I am sorry your hero's are p.o.s's but the truth hurts sometimes.

You are comically missing the point, again.

The only thing comical is your inept understanding of basic definitions.

 

[ChristineM]

Keep on dreaming.



Only to someone who makes stuff up.



Nope it's true. Dawkins and Harris have both made statements to provide evidence for this. I am sorry your hero's are p.o.s's but the truth hurts sometimes.



The only thing comical is your inept understanding of basic definitions.

No need to dream, the facts are here in your posts

 

[Enoch07]

No need to dream, the facts are here in your posts

Yes they are.