"The Top 10 Claims Made by Creationists to Counter Scientific Theories"

[Jumi]

I see the words "inferred evolutionary relationships". If there is solid evidence, what need is there for "inference"?

Do we have solid evidence of Jesus having existed? No, but we can infer that he did.

How large is this “library”? It is about three billion “letters,” or nucleotides (bases), long. If it were transcribed onto paper, the book would fill 200 volumes the size of a 1,000-page telephone book, according to the Human Genome Project.

It's a different from phonebooks, there's only 4 "letters" of chemical interaction. So they're much much more simple than phonebooks in text and to add, each of those four letters is always next to their pair. There's also no exclamation marks or such, you'll have an awfully long word about just copying.

How many 'libraries' do you know of that built themselves and provided all the information in all the books on the shelves with no intelligent direction?

I can't think of any either.....

You're inferring things based on an analogy.

A library is a nice analogy to a point where those libraries need to have a copy of each of them repeated in a ridiculously redundant fashion. Do you know any city that packs every room, including the toilet with full libraries that are nearly identical? You can't even read a part of a book and they're all cookbooks. Even the librarians don't know what they're cooking and might end up cooking stuff that's harmful to us. You'd think there would be a better way to keep the books, like a central library.

We're full of nearly identical "libraries", but we actually have more libraries inside of us in bacteria than we have on our own and our "books" even get confused(not too often, but often enough that we still carry them... and our children and their children) with them and end up in our progeny. So our libraries can even pick up new books that change the owner, or as is the case our children.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...s-carry-more-bacterial-cells-than-human-ones/
https://www.the-scientist.com/?arti...-Humans-Have-Been-Swapping-DNA-for-Millennia/

 

[teektalks]

Good.
Deadpool 2 Movie Review

 

[exchemist]

Like I said, human beings of flesh and blood, were not there at the time of the dinosaurs, But the Spirit man was there at the time of the dinosaurs.
Of course you have no clue or idea what I'm talking about.
Do you know the difference between the human man of flesh and blood.
And the Spirit man ?

I know you are aching to tell us.

 

[Faithofchristian]

I know you are aching to tell us.

As for the human beings of flesh and blood, did not walk the earth at the same time with the dinosaurs.

But the Spiritual man was here at the same time with the dinosaurs.

In the book of Genesis 1:26--"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness"
So who do you suppose God was talking to when God said ( let us ? )
The ( let us ) God was talking to,
Were the Angels Gabriel and Michael and all the other Angels which are in heaven.

As to who else would God be talking to,
if not the Angels in heaven.
( Let us make man in our image after our likeness ? )

 

[tayla]

I found it interesting that the majority of these claims (I don't agree that all deserve top-ten status) don't have a thing to do with evolution---claims typical among creationists.

The reason is because the Bible is fiction; that is the reason.

 

[Audie]

As for the human beings of flesh and blood, did not walk the earth at the same time with the dinosaurs.

But the Spiritual man was here at the same time with the dinosaurs.

In the book of Genesis 1:26--"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness"
So who do you suppose God was talking to when God said ( let us ? )
The ( let us ) God was talking to,
Were the Angels Gabriel and Michael and all the other Angels which are in heaven.

As to who else would God be talking to,
if not the Angels in heaven.
( Let us make man in our image after our likeness ? )

You will want to talk to DJ about the Vice of Inference.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

Of course your not going to like this, My evidence is my bible, that's my evidence, whether you want to accept it or not.

Surely you understand that the Bible is considered to be a list of claims. I doubt that you would accept something as true simply because someone writes it down on a piece of paper.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

I am always amazed at how scientists can make claims that sound so positive, when they have so little real evidence.

You have already stated that you will reject any observation if it supports evolution. Your claims are very disingenuous.

 

[leibowde84]

Kurt Wise is a modern day geologist and agrees


Honestly...I admire people with such a great faith, they live in a status of ancestral purity (The innocence William Blake spoke of)

His surname sounds like a cruel game of destiny...though...

Ken Wise is not a geologist. He is the Director of Creation Research at Truett McConnell University. Maybe in a past life he was, but not anymore. A "geologist" is someone who is employed as a geologist. Just like everyone who went to Law School is not necessarily a lawyer.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

I would not even say "siblings" since the first bird was also clearly a dinosaur. There is no change in kinds in evolution, there are merely speciation events.

It may be a bit early to introduce cladistics. I have found it is easier for people to first understand the concept of common ancestry using the colloquial paraphyletic groups before making their heads spin with monophyletic terms.

 

[leibowde84]

Oh yes, this is the "tired light" hypothesis, to account for the cosmological red shift.

It's been abundantly discredited of course, but it was not totally wacky at the time it was originally proposed (1929): Tired light - Wikipedia

Also it remains the case that we only have empirical evidence that the laws of physics, or at least some of the fundamental the constants they contain, are in fact constants in space and time and not variable in some way. I read only recently a controversy over some cosmological work suggesting the fine structure constant might have varied.

Really it is just Ockham's Razor that says we take them as constant until we have evidence to the contrary.

That is the only scientific approach. If an abundant amount of evidence confirms that these laws are constant, we should assume they are until other evidence shows otherwise. Falling into logically fallacious traps is dangerous and stupid.

 

[leibowde84]

Of course your not going to like this, My evidence is my bible, that's my evidence, whether you want to accept it or not.

The Bible is merely a book of claims written by human beings thousands of years ago, though. So, how is it evidence of anything?

 

[leibowde84]

As for the human beings of flesh and blood, did not walk the earth at the same time with the dinosaurs.

But the Spiritual man was here at the same time with the dinosaurs.

In the book of Genesis 1:26--"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness"
So who do you suppose God was talking to when God said ( let us ? )
The ( let us ) God was talking to,
Were the Angels Gabriel and Michael and all the other Angels which are in heaven.

As to who else would God be talking to,
if not the Angels in heaven.
( Let us make man in our image after our likeness ? )

So, outside of the Bible you have nothing to base this claim on, right? No evidence other than claims made in the Bible?

 

[Subduction Zone]

It may be a bit early to introduce cladistics. I have found it is easier for people to first understand the concept of common ancestry using the colloquial paraphyletic groups before making their heads spin with monophyletic terms.

You might have a point. My underlying strategy is to illustrate that the idea of "change of kinds" is simply a creationist strawman.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

You might have a point. My underlying strategy is to illustrate that the idea of "change of kinds" is simply a creationist strawman.

We are definitely on the same page. All I would suggest is to use terms that the public is more familiar with, like using mammal instead of Eutheria. I have also found that tolweb.org is a really great resource.

 

[Subduction Zone]

We are definitely on the same page. All I would suggest is to use terms that the public is more familiar with, like using mammal instead of Eutheria. I have also found that tolweb.org is a really great resource.

http://tolweb.org/tree/

Nice site. Is that a current project? I know that there is an ongoing attempt to make a massive internet cladogram of all life. It will be a project without end and have a truly massive data base.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

http://tolweb.org/tree/

Nice site. Is that a current project? I know that there is an ongoing attempt to make a massive internet cladogram of all life. It will be a project without end and have a truly massive data base.

Tolweb is the best site I have found for the general public. As to other databases, I'm not sure what scientists are currently using or building, but if history is any guide there will be multiple projects going in parallel.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Surely you understand that the Bible is considered to be a list of claims. I doubt that you would accept something as true simply because someone writes it down on a piece of paper.

As to what claims are you talking about.
It's evidence that you rely on what other people will say, That you have nothing of yourself, only what others will say.

Seeing you have no clue or idea as to who those men were or how they came to be chosen to write the scriptures.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

As to what claims are you talking about.

These, for example:

"So my point is, There were no humans beings of flesh and blood at the time of the dinosaurs.
But man was there at the time of the dinosaurs."

It's evidence that you rely on what other people will say, That you have nothing of yourself, only what others will say.

What people say is a claim. "Because I say so" is not evidence.

Seeing you have no clue or idea as to who those men were or how they came to be chosen to write the scriptures.

I could say the same of you. What I am asking for is evidence that verifies what they wrote.

 

[Faithofchristian]

The Bible is merely a book of claims written by human beings thousands of years ago, though. So, how is it evidence of anything?

Seeing that you haven't any idea or clue, As to who those men were or how they came to be or where they came from.

Go ahead explain it to us.