• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The dishonesty of creationists.

McBell

McBell

Admiral Obvious
shadowsmith said:
If evolution is true where's the missing link?
Click to expand...
:facepalm:

Here you go, The Missing Link:
missinglink2.jpg

​
 
tumbleweed41

tumbleweed41

Resident Liberal Hippie
shadowsmith said:
If evolution is true where's the missing link?
Click to expand...

shadowsmith said:
I meant the one that links humans to lower life forms.
Click to expand...

shadowsmith said:
A list of the transitional fossils from lower life forms to human.
Click to expand...

'Missing Link' is a popular term in the media, 'pop' science, and among Creationists. And asking for the so called 'Missing Link', or a "list of the transitional fossils from lower life forms to human" shows a lack of understanding of both the formation of fossils and the plethora of biological evidence for Common Ancestry.
 
tarasan

tarasan

Well-Known Member
tumbleweed41 said:
Most Creationists rely on the reveled revelations of the Bible, and a literal interpretation of the OT in particular. As a former Christian I was also taught the inerrancy of the Bible.
I was also taught as a Christian not to bear false witness, that is, to lie, use deceit, or mislead is wrong.
However, the instances where leading Creations do deceive are numerous, and show the dishonesty many Creationists will stoop to in order to persuade those ignorant of science that Evolution and the ToE are wrong.

Kent Hovind claimed of the Vollosovitch mammoth findings, "One part of a mammoth was carbon-dated at 29,000 years old. Another part is 44,000 years old. Here’s two parts of the same animal. That’s from USGS Professional Paper #862."

When in fact the truth is,​
"Hovind makes a big-time misrepresentation here. I looked at the data in USGS Professional Paper 862. It is a 1975 paper by Troy Pewe entitled “Quaternary Stratigraphic Nomenclature in Unglaciated Central Alaska”. It is a description of stratigraphic units in Alaska, but does contain more than 150 radiocarbon dates. Many of these dates are from the 1950’s and 60’s. There are three references to mammoths: hair from a mammoth skull (found by Geist in 1951 in frozen silt); “flesh from lower leg, Mammuthus primigenius” (found by Osborne in 1940, 26 m below the surface); and the “skin and flesh of Mammuthus primigenius[”] [baby mammoth] (found by Geist in 1948 “with a beaver dam”). The dates given are, respectively, 32,700; 15,380; and 21,300 years BP BUT the last is thought to be an invalid date because the hide was soaked in glycerin.
NOWHERE IN THE PAPER DOES IT SAY, OR EVEN IMPLY, THAT THESE SPECIMENS ARE PARTS OF THE SAME ANIMAL. They were found in different places, at different times, by different people. One is even termed “baby”, and the other is not. To construct this Fractured Fairy Tale, Hovind must have hoped that no one listening would check and see what his reference really said." Karen E. Bartelt


Jonathan Sarfati of Answers in Genesis tells us that, "Human lysozyme is closer to chicken lysozyme than to that of any other mammal."
Duane Gish who has a doctorate in biochemistry has said the same thing

While the truth is, it is not true nor is it even close to being true. Human lysozyme is identical to chimpanzee lysozyme thus elementary logic tells us it not possible for another lysozyme to be closer. In reality, chicken lysozyme differs from human lysozyme in 51 out of 130 positions.


These are leading men in the Creationist debate, yet they rely on lies and half truths to try to "prove" Creationism.

Is this dishonesty approved by other Christians?

Info
​


​
Click to expand...

seriously they are just making Christianities life worse, and is that really neccisary at this point what with paedophilia in the catholic church and all? you would think that they would lay low for the while so that we can get back on course before they say silly things like that :(

Tarasan feels sad....
 
AxisMundi

AxisMundi

E Pluribus Unum!!!
shadowsmith said:
If evolution is true where's the missing link?
Click to expand...

This, and claiming there are no transitional fossils, is a common ploy from people who must refuse Evolution as it challenges their religious beliefs.

Evolution isn't a series of sudden, gross mutations where a species changes suddenly due to those "mutations" that happen to be viable, so there will be no "missing link". There will be, and is, a series of very small changes and adaptations as shown in the fossil record.

Evolution is, quite simply, the slow process of adaptation as a species moves into a new environmental niche in the never ending quest for new food sources and protection from predators.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top