So apparently this happened...

[Agnostic75]

The tone of your criticism of those who do not share your belief is consistent with the propaganda common to ToE believers. Expressions such as "you pretend to know it all", "you are not telling the truth", "you are deluded. Crazy." 'You belong in some institution." "Or in gaol" are all meant to intimidate anyone who doesn't drink the ToE Kool-Aid, or dares question this theory. Such abusive personal attacks are contemptible and do you no credit.

Geology professor John Campbell writes: "The essential differences between Biblical catastrophism and evolutionary uniformitarianism are not over the factual data of geology but over the interpretations of those data. The interpretation preferred will depend largely upon the background and presuppositions of the individual student."

(The Genesis Flood, 1967 p.xvii) Concerning scientists who were ice age prone, is this quote from Scientific American, 5/1960 p.71: Scientists "were finding ice ages at every stage of the geologic history, in keeping with the philosophy of uniformity. Careful reexamination of the evidence in recent years, however, has rejected many of these ice ages."

Put more succinctly, geologist have frequently been wrong about their theories. In many parts of the earth, evidence for flood waters is abundant.

Please reply to my most recent post in my thread on presuppositionalism at http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...127895-presuppositionalism-5.html#post2802634.

Many posts in this forum have presented facts that contradict the evolution theory.

One of your own sources, geology professor John McCampbell, is a theistic evolutionist, reference an article at Biblical Apologetic Methodology by Dr. Myron Houghton (part 1) – The Quest.

Consider the following:

For example, both humans and chimps have a broken copy of a gene that in other mammals helps make vitamin C.......It's hard to imagine how there could be stronger evidence for common ancestry of chimps and humans.......Despite some remaining puzzles, there’s no reason to doubt that Darwin had this point right, that all creatures on earth are biological relatives.” The Edge of Evolution, pp 71-2.

How is Behe wrong?

Do you know enough about biology to adequately critique and discuss Dr. Ken Miller's article at The Flagellum Unspun on the evolution of the flagellum? If not, then your personal objections to evolution are actually religious, not scientific.

 

[rusra02]

There's a lot of misrepresentations there. Let's go through them:

1- Evolution does not predict that all changes are "slow and gradual" or even remain at a constant speed, but that in areas of high environmental attrition, speciation happens comparatively more rapidly. That is all that Dr. Raup is saying.

2- The Cambrian explosion did not happen overnight. It was a period of around 70-80 million years. The reason it is referred to as "sudden" or "rapid" is because 70-80 million years was a comparatively rapid time for the number of species to develop through evolution compared with before and afterward.

3- All of the new species that occurred during the Cambrian explosion did not appear "suddenly". Their evolution can very clearly be traced from the fossils left behind during the Cambrian explosion.

So, that fact turns out to not be a "fact" at all, but a deliberate attempt to distort an actual scientific event. Now, present another one.

Your argument is not with me, but the sources quoted. They don't support your conclusions.

 

[Agnostic75]

Your [ImmortalFlame] argument is not with me, but the sources quoted. They don't support your conclusions.

Your argument with evolution is not with me, but with the over 99% of experts who accept naturalistic or theistic evolution. They don't support your conclusions.

 

[Agnostic75]

The tone of your criticism of those who do not share your belief is consistent with the propaganda common to ToE believers. Expressions such as "you pretend to know it all", "you are not telling the truth", "you are deluded. Crazy." 'You belong in some institution." "Or in gaol" are all meant to intimidate anyone who doesn't drink the ToE Kool-Aid, or dares question this theory. Such abusive personal attacks are contemptible and do you no credit.

Geology professor John Campbell writes: "The essential differences between Biblical catastrophism and evolutionary uniformitarianism are not over the factual data of geology but over the interpretations of those data. The interpretation preferred will depend largely upon the background and presuppositions of the individual student."

(The Genesis Flood, 1967 p.xvii) Concerning scientists who were ice age prone, is this quote from Scientific American, 5/1960 p.71: Scientists "were finding ice ages at every stage of the geologic history, in keeping with the philosophy of uniformity. Careful reexamination of the evidence in recent years, however, has rejected many of these ice ages."

Put more succinctly, geologist have frequently been wrong about their theories. In many parts of the earth, evidence for flood waters is abundant.

It is interesting to note that your source John McCampbell is a theistic evolutionist, not a creationist.

Presuppositionalism is not a good argument, as I showed my most recent post in my thread on presuppositionalism at http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...127895-presuppositionalism-5.html#post2802634.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Your argument is not with me, but the sources quoted. They don't support your conclusions.

These aren't "conclusions". They are the facts about what the Cambrian explosion represents - something that your sources were deliberately lying about. Except for that scientist who was quoted out of context, and actually does agree with me. So you're wrong on multiple counts.

Do you have any more supposed "facts" to present?

 

[Krok]

The tone of your criticism of those who do not share your belief is consistent with the propaganda common to ToE believers. Expressions such as "you pretend to know it all", "you are not telling the truth", "you are deluded. Crazy." 'You belong in some institution." "Or in gaol" are all meant to intimidate anyone who doesn't drink the ToE Kool-Aid, or dares question this theory. Such abusive personal attacks are contemptible and do you no credit.

You are a deluded crazy person. You've never even seen a Karoo Sequence rock, yet you pretend that you know it all and more than all those specialists who have actually studied those rocks. You are crazy. You do humanity a disservice.

Geology professor John Campbell writes: "The essential differences between Biblical catastrophism and evolutionary uniformitarianism are not over the factual data of geology but over the interpretations of those data. The interpretation preferred will depend largely upon the background and presuppositions of the individual student."
(The Genesis Flood, 1967 p.xvii) Concerning scientists who were ice age prone, is this quote from Scientific American, 5/1960 p.71: Scientists "were finding ice ages at every stage of the geologic history, in keeping with the philosophy of uniformity. Careful reexamination of the evidence in recent years, however, has rejected many of these ice ages."

I have no idea who John Campbell is or was, but he's never studied a Karoo Sequence rock. Is he also one of the crazy people, like you?

Put more succinctly, geologist have frequently been wrong about their theories. In many parts of the earth, evidence for flood waters is abundant.

Not in the Kaoo Sequence. Unless you can provide empirical, verifiable evidence for flood waters. None has been found and lots of real geologists have studied those rocks very extensively. Are you dreaming about Santa Clause again? Wake up. Wishful thinking won't change reality.

 

[shawn001]

Originally Posted by rusra02
Put more succinctly, geologist have frequently been wrong about their theories. In many parts of the earth, evidence for flood waters is abundant.

"Put more succinctly, geologist have frequently been wrong about their theories"

yes they have and they have also been right. For example plate tectonics, which was proven. You post something from Scientific American and the 1960's?

Really? You seem to think we haven't learned anything since then?


"evidence for flood waters is abundant"

What evidence? Please show the evidence you believe supports a global flood? One item at a time.

 

[johnhanks]

Your argument is not with me, but the sources quoted. They don't support your conclusions.

You mean like the source you quoted that goes on to say

This record of change pretty clearly demonstrates that evolution has occurred ...

?

 

[rusra02]

Originally Posted by rusra02
Put more succinctly, geologist have frequently been wrong about their theories. In many parts of the earth, evidence for flood waters is abundant.

"Put more succinctly, geologist have frequently been wrong about their theories"

yes they have and they have also been right. For example plate tectonics, which was proven. You post something from Scientific American and the 1960's?

Really? You seem to think we haven't learned anything since then?


"evidence for flood waters is abundant"

What evidence? Please show the evidence you believe supports a global flood? One item at a time.

Is it your position there is no evidence for ancient floods?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Is it your position there is no evidence for ancient floods?

No, he asked you to provide evidence of a global flood.

You don't get away with straw man arguments and avoiding questions in this debate. Incidentally, can you present any non-dishonest facts that conflict with evolution?

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Ahhh, and now the dissembly and misdirection begins...

 

[rusra02]

No, he asked you to provide evidence of a global flood.

You don't get away with straw man arguments and avoiding questions in this debate. Incidentally, can you present any non-dishonest facts that conflict with evolution?

I know what he asked. If you care to start a thread about this, I will be happy to respond. This thread is Evolution vs. Creationism.
The fact that you don't accept what the scientists said about the cambrian "explosion" doesn't make them or me dishonest. The facts are that life appears suddenly without ancestors, and this fits the Bible account that God created them. The fossil record supports creation, not evolution. As John Moore commented: "Groups of both plants and animals appear suddenly in the fossil record...Whales, bats, horses, primates, elephants, hares, squirrels, etc., all are as distinct at their first appearance as they are now. There is not a trace of a common ancestor, much less a link with any reptile, the supposed progenitor."
While your attempts at discrediting are somewhat more subtle than Krok's, they are nonetheless just as dishonorable.

 

[Krok]

The facts are that life appears suddenly without ancestors,.... .

Not true at all. It doesn't matter how many times you repeat this, it won't turn into the truth.

 

[johnhanks]

... As John Moore commented: "Groups of both plants and animals appear suddenly in the fossil record...Whales, bats, horses, primates, elephants, hares, squirrels, etc., all are as distinct at their first appearance as they are now. There is not a trace of a common ancestor, much less a link with any reptile, the supposed progenitor."...

This assertion, dubious at the time it was made, has been left even more adrift by subsequent discoveries. Fossil precursors of whales, for example, are now very well known, as are mammal-like reptiles. You would do well to put less reliance on forty-year-old sources.

 

[Krok]

Is it your position there is no evidence for ancient floods?

The evidence indicate that we've had lots of floods. At different times. Same as lots of glacial periods. Same as lots of volcanoes. Same as lots of deltas. Same as lots of times sea level rose and fell. Same as lots of tsunamis. There is not one single piece of evidence for a global flood.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

I know what he asked.

And you failed to answer him, by dint of the fact that there is no evidence for your global flood hypothesis.

All evidence is, in fact, against it.

 

[Krok]

Pardon my ignorance, but who's John Moore? Who's John Campbell? Any references to where they published their research on the Karoo Sequence in peer-reviewed geological journals?

Are they people who think that he or she or it or they are a god gods or part of gods? Why would we want to think that they know more or less than anyone else?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I know what he asked. If you care to start a thread about this, I will be happy to respond. This thread is Evolution vs. Creationism.

Now you're just evading the question.

The fact that you don't accept what the scientists said about the cambrian "explosion" doesn't make them or me dishonest.

Except you only quoted one scientist, and he doesn't agree with you. Nor did I disagree with or contradict what he said - you just misrepresented it.

The facts are that life appears suddenly without ancestors, and this fits the Bible account that God created them.

That is not what the Cambrian explosions shows. There were life-forms before the Cambrian explosion - it's just that the Cambrian explosion was a period of time in which there was comparatively rapid speciation. You clearly haven't attempted to look into it at all, have you?

The fossil record supports creation, not evolution. As John Moore commented: "Groups of both plants and animals appear suddenly in the fossil record...Whales, bats, horses, primates, elephants, hares, squirrels, etc., all are as distinct at their first appearance as they are now. There is not a trace of a common ancestor, much less a link with any reptile, the supposed progenitor."

And why should I care what he says? Every geologist, paleontologist and biolgist on the planet disagrees with him.

While your attempts at discrediting are somewhat more subtle than Krok's, they are nonetheless just as dishonorable.

I asked you to present facts, and you present lies. I explain how your lies are lies, and now your'e repeating your lies - showing no acknowledgement of the fact that they have already been exposed - and you call me dishonourable? You are peddling total garbage, and you won't even admit it.

Since you refuse to accept the "practically every scientist on the planet disagrees with you" argument as valid, I've had no choice but to debate facts with you. If you cannot present anything other than this wilfull ignorance then it is clear that the facts are not on your side.

 

[Krok]

The tone of your criticism of those who do not share your belief is consistent with the propaganda common to ToE believers.

This ****** me off, again. Rusra02, you've never touched a Karoo rock in your life. Yet you want to tell everyone that all those people who have studied those rocks, that they all are wrong.

Rusra, get an education in geology. After that, do the work. Walk around in the field for hundreds of miles, following those rocks. Do the drilling. Study those cores. Go underground every day for weeks on end. Look at those rocks under a microscope. Year after year. Write your research up. Publish it in order for those hundreds of specialists can have a look at everything.

Yet, before even starting with the first part, you tell all those professionals that they are part of some conspiracy and that they all are wrong. You keep pretending that you know it all. My opinion is that you are actually nothing better than a piece of unfossilised snail coprolite on the ocean floor. Nothing more.

 

[Agnostic75]

Who's John Campbell?

His name is actually John McCampbell. He is a geology professor in Louisiana. It is embarrassing for rusra02 that McCampbell happens to be a theistic evolutionist, not a creationist.