[_ Old Earth _] See the Movie EXPELLED - atheist darwinism vs God

[John]

You're absolutely right. It is all indoctrination. All science is evil and should be stopped immediately.

grow up.

 

[jmm9683]

You're absolutely right. It is all indoctrination. All science is evil and should be stopped immediately.

grow up.

You just said that teaching the heavily supported scientific discipline of evolutionary biology is indoctrination. You grow up... or wake up.

 

[BobRyan]

[quote:03300]
[You also need to know about evolution if you wish to try and debate it.

i know enough about evlution to debate it, remember is was indoctrinated in school :wink:

Oh yeah, I know all about indoctrination in schools. In maths class, for example, they indoctrinated us with that nonsense about how, in a right angled triangle, the square on the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares on the other two sides.
[/quote:03300]

Perfect example of "making stuff up" to prove the argument for atheist darwinism.

CHRISTIAN thought leaders in SCIENCE (pure science not the junk-science of atheist darwinism) GAVE Us things like CALCULUS and Trig to BEGIN WITH. So no surprise to find devotees to atheist darwinism now wanting to pretend that it was the atheists that gave it to us -- next we'll hear that atheist darwinists "invented the internet" because "you gotta BELIEVE in atheist darwinism to invent the internet" !!!

And after swallowing the hoax of Piltdown man and then of the junk-science horse series published by Simpson's in 1951 (then instantiated in model form in the Smithsonian and all U.S text books on the subject) and archaeoraptor and abiogenesis-storytelling, and... well it's NO WONDER they think "you need atheist darwinism to get through TRIG"!!!

What else do we need atheist darwinism for -- basic HISTORY and the battle of Hastings?

In history class, we were indoctrinated to believe that the Battle of Hastings took place in 1066.

What ELSE do we need the junk-science of atheist darwinism for ??? "Basic Chemistry"???

In chemistry class, they indoctrinated us to believe that a molecule of water consists of two hydrogen atoms and an oxygen atom. But this is clearly false, because the Bible

WOW --- what a NEWS flash from our believers in atheist darwinism!! "if the Bible is true -- if atheists are wrong then Chemistry doesn't work!! "

Shocking that the junk-science of atheist darwinism is so mind-numbing that the believers in atheist darwinism have to pretend that ACTUAL science needs junk-science the way atheist darwinist junk-science needs "story telling".

. All science is evil and should be stopped immediately.

That is the kind of "co-opting" real science that believers in the junk-science religion we know of as "Atheist darwinism" try to get by with hoping "nobody will notice".

Hasn't worked so far.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[jmm9683]

If I hear this guy Bob say evolution is "junk science" one more time, I think my head is going to explode. ID, creationism, whatever you're calling it now is the very definition of junk science. Even if evolution was disproved, creationism doesn't win by default. That would be like saying that if there were two suspects to a crime and one was proved to have not done it, the second suspect is automatically guilty. There has to be actual evidence supporting it.

 

[BobRyan]

I think it's hilarious that creationists are completely unable to challenge evolution on its scientific merits,

I think it is hillarious that believers in the junk science of atheist darwinism STILL "imagine it to have scientific merist" EVEN though the frauds of the dating of Neanderthals is fully documented, the fraud of Piltdown is fully documented, the junk-science of Simpsons 1951 horse series STILL on display at the Smisthsonian in the 1990's is fully documented, the junk-science fraue of archaeoraptor is fully documented, Haeckles fraudulent "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny".... (the endless sequence of hoaxes and frauds in junk-science religion of atheist darwinism is daunting by any measure).

NO WONDER atheist drawinst high priest Colin Patterson (Senior Paleontologist - British Museum Natural Hist) said regarding the junk-scienc practice in atheist darwinism of TELLING STORIES "about how one thing came from another - STORIES EASY ENOUGH TO TELL but they are NOT science"!!

Why atheist "feel stuck with that junk-science" no matter what the size of the list of hoaxes that are brought to light -- is NOT surprising.

WHY some christians choose to toss the Word of God out the window and join the atheists on their little island of hoaxes and junk-science frauds -- now THAT's a mystery science and religion have yet to solve.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

If I hear this guy Bob say evolution is "junk science" one more time, I think my head is going to explode. .

hmmm..

Look it up on in the dictionary "Father of Junk Science" has a picture of Darwin next to it.

Game over :

in Christ,

Bob

 

[John]

If I hear this guy Bob say evolution is "junk science" one more time, I think my head is going to explode. .

hmmm..

Look it up on in the dictionary "Father of Junk Science" has a picture of Darwin next to it.

Game over :

in Christ,

Bob

Its a game. lol we shall never beat the high score set up by Darwin

 

[jmm9683]

If I hear this guy Bob say evolution is "junk science" one more time, I think my head is going to explode. .

hmmm..

Look it up on in the dictionary "Father of Junk Science" has a picture of Darwin next to it.

Game over :

in Christ,

Bob

Says you, I'll take the word of people with actual scientific merit and authority over you any day. Plus they actually have evidence to back up their claims instead of goddidit.

 

[BobRyan]

I thought I heard the sound of a pumpkin exploding. :-?

 

[John]

Bobryan, the ignore function really helps in the filtering of people. :wink:

 

[John]

I thought I heard the sound of a pumpkin exploding. :-?

i blew one up with a thermite bomb (homemade) it makes a cool sound.

 

[jmm9683]

Bobryan, the ignore function really helps in the filtering of people. :wink:

Yeah I've thought about ignoring people that don't actually provide scientific evidence for their claims, not mentioning names...

 

[BobRyan]

There's nobody in the world trying to stop you from saying God created the universe.

Hmmm. JUST LIKE THERE Is "nobody in the world stoping atheists from claiming that the universe flew out of nowhere faster than the speed of light to a distance of about 130 Billion Lightyears in less than 3 minutes" --- "on it's own"???

You mean -- like THAT kind of story telling???

You mean Christians will get EQUAL time with that kind of monster story telling???

But until you can find a way to make that a testable, falsifyable scientific hypothesis, it has no place in a scientific discussion.

I see and -- "The universe moving faster than the speed of light" is a "testable, falsifiable hypothesis"??

What about "the forces of gravity, electromagnetism, weak and strong forces combined into ONE super force where existing laws of physics do not apply"???

IS THAT a "testable, falsifiable hypothesis"?

What about "an explosion from NOTHING" where there is NO gradient of heat distribution over time - but rather the entire event BEGINS in a table saturated form in terms of background radiation? is THAT also "testable" is it "Falsifiable".

In other words -- do you use critical thinking at all to make these wild claims against Christians and the Bible vs junk-science story telling?


Question for you --- What part of that do you not understand?

Oh, and the guy who answered your question immediately before me was right - when you lie for Jesus, you're still lying.

Lying for Jesus --claiming that Jesus is Creator???? John 1:1-4 makes the case -- should we burn it so that atheist darwinists will be happy?? Or should we simply contradict it and then "pretend" that contradicton is what the Bible "meant to say all along"

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Free]

Everyone,

No more personal attacks, flaming or ridicule. Stick to the points being made or don't bother posting.

Thanks.

 

[John]

Everyone,

No more personal attacks, flaming or ridicule. Stick to the points being made or don't bother posting.

Thanks.

Roger that.

 

[BobRyan]

Ill start a thread on this one and link it, but I always have been confused as to why evolution has been singled out.

Why not quantum physics? Why not relativity? Why not anatomy?

Because - we have "actual science" and then we have "junk-science". ACTUAL science *much of it actually STARTED by Christian thought leaders" is REAL -- does not need hoaxes, can be examined in the lab etc.

But atheist darwinist JUNK SCIENCE is simply a system of clever stories coopting the language of real science as a disguise.

Piltdown man was NOT a hoax sponsored on behalf of calculus or physics or chemistry or quantum mechanics.

Archaeoraptor was NOT a hoax sponsored to prop up calculus or physics or chemistry or computer science or engineering.

Neanderthal dating of fossils less than 3000 years old and some less than 400 years old -- out to a storytelling distance of 25000 years old WAS NOT done to prop up calculus, or physics, or trig, or chemistry or computer science ...

Haeckles fraudulent examples of "ontogeny recapitulating phylogeny" were NOT put there to lend credibility to calculus or physics, or chemistry.

ALL of These hoaxes and dozens like them were done for the junk-science religion we know today as atheiist darwinism.

Given that glaringly obvious fact it is EASY to understand why an atheist darwinst would then have to "pretend" to mystified as to why Bible believing Christians consider darwinism's junk-science stories to be worthless vs attacking all those "REAL" sciences.

The part that is puzzling for objective readers with independant thought engaged -- is why a CHRISTIAN would ALSO have to pretend to be mystified by that!

That is the question that should be answered on these threads.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan The objective OBSERVER on the other hand says "I don't know where it all came from or if it was designed -- I WILL FOLLOW THE DATA WHERE IT LEADS".

When you find sticks in the shape of an arrow on the beach -- it could just be the random process of the ocean washing up debris or it COULD be that someone has placed that there.

The atheist starts with his statement of blind faith "there is NO SOMEONE to place it so no matter how complex the data and design there can be no SOMEONE".

The objective scientist looks at the sticks and says "I don't know the origin for this - I will study the related facts to see where the data leads me". It is only the Christian that can accept the data either way. For example the Christian has no problem looking at a chemical reaction with precipitant and saying - that is an interesting fact of nature, science, chemistry. At the same time he has the academic freedom to say "yes but look at the placement of our planet and the kinds of chemical reactions that just so happen to take place here in favor of life. The number of variables for this biosphere to work are very large -- too large for chance".

Devotees to atheist darwinism are "stuck" with "no matter how complex the design -- no DESIGNER".

By objective observer do you mean ID? Come now.

What sort of finances did they receive? Shall we look into it?

Are we free to conclude that any scientist funded by an atheist is in fact a fraud because it is really just atheism?

Is that the "funding" policy you are trying establish across the board?

Please be objective instead.

A true scientist does follow the data. As long as the data stays in nature.

According to the Bible GOD created nature -- you seem to argue that science is free to ask "what and why" about origins AS LONG as the answer is NOT "looks like somebody did this on purpose".

As along as the answer is "this SHOWS NO SIGN of intelligence at all being involved" then it is science "by definition".

So when someone makes car -- you may scientifically EVALUATE the car as LONG as your science never reaches the point of saying "This car could not have popped out of the ground by itself".

AS SOON as your scientific method concludes -- "no way to pop cars out of the ground" or
"NO way to assemble a single living cell" or "No way to turn this hyrax into a horse if we have to do it in real life -- in real lab".

What about "As soon as you discover mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosome Adam you admit the SINGLE father and SINGLE Mother paradigm of the Bible was correct -- scientifically speaking"?

ID was bad and lazy “scienceâ€Â.

What FRAUDs -- what HOAXES has ID produced to the level of Simpons' junk-science horse series placed on display in the Smithsonian???

What frauds -what HOAXES has ID produced to the level of NEANDERTHALS boldly published as 25000 year old species for 30 years -- until about 2 years ago when that hoax was uncovered?

What FRAUDS - what HOAXES has ID produced to the level of Piltdown man, Nebraska Man? Archaeoraptor? Haeckles fraudulent manipulated presentation to "show" that his story telling about "Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" had any kind of "science" behind it?

WHEN will ID EVER reach the mountain high standard of junk-science frauds and hoaxes that have ALREADY been admitted to by atheist darwinists themselves in the name of atheist darwinism?

But think about it this way. Science explains everything through nature and natural laws. If you belief is that God created the universe and natural laws, then he is the creator by default.

ID is saying that God could not design the world to function on its own. He has to get his hands involved every so often to make it function.

If God designed a car, do you think it would be one he would have to stop every 20 miles and adjust the brakes,

You are asking the wrong questions.

1. "ID is saying God created the universe" as if "that is a bad thing" is not the kind of "position" you expect from someone who is not atheist or agnostic.

2. But worse it is not even an accurate statement about ID. It is one thing for Sida-A to differ with Side-b -- but your comment indicates that you don' t even know what side-b is.

3. IF "God designed a car"??? You are way out on a limb there. IF Cars CAN BE SHOWN to be manufactured by man -- and that they have no possibility of NATURE simply MAKING ONE -- THEN we see that MAN is required to MAKE the car NO MATTER how much gas or oil is needed and no matter how often it is needed.

Simply "recognizing" that you need a PERSON to make a car -- because you can LOOK at a car and SEE that it is DESGINEd and is NOT the result of "undirected random events" brings you to the ID table. The ID group AND Christians are free to let that data take them where it leads - but someone who starts out saying "by faith I believe that there are no people, no designers, no car manufacturers" -- THAT person's FAITH only allows them ONE option when they find a car on the road.

"NO matter how crazy it seams (like the unverse zooming into existence on it's own faster than the speed of light) -- that car got here on it's own -- or an alien asteroid put it here from some other place where it came about on it's own" -- which is EXACTLY what Dawkins said about life on the movie EXPELLED!!

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Quasarsphere]

What FRAUDs -- what HOAXES has ID produced to the level of Simpons' junk-science horse series placed on display in the Smithsonian???

What frauds -what HOAXES has ID produced to the level of NEANDERTHALS boldly published as 25000 year old species for 30 years -- until about 2 years ago when that hoax was uncovered?

What FRAUDS - what HOAXES has ID produced to the level of Piltdown man, Nebraska Man? Archaeoraptor? Haeckles fraudulent manipulated presentation to "show" that his story telling about "Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" had any kind of "science" behind it?

Well, there's this movie you may have heard of called "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" in which it is falsely claimed that Hitler's actions were somehow inspired by Darwin's work (in reality Hitler was not a fan of Darwin at all, which is probably why Darwin's books were banned in Nazi Germany), that evolutionary theory is racist or can be used to justify racism (in reality, evolution, when properly understood, makes racism ridiculous) and that there's some kind of conspiracy within the scientific community to silence those who question Darwin. In reality, they're left behind by the scientific community because they simply do not play by the rules of the scientific method. They're not expelled, they're flunked. There's no problem with questioning Darwin - evolutionary theory has..ha ha...evolved quite considerably since Darwin's time.

Oh, and don't get me started on the dodgy interviewing and editing techniques.

Then there's the outright lies spouted by the likes of Ken Ham, Kent Hovind et al, oh, and the Lady Hope story, wherein Charles Darwin was falsely claimed to have recanted his theory on his deathbed.

Need I go on?

Now, here's a question - given that the Piltdown Man was indeed a hoax and was revealed as such (by actual scientists) more than 50 years ago, why do creationists have to keep going on about it? The scientific community laid it to rest decades ago. It hasn't been used to support evolutionary theory since before my mother was born, let alone in my lifetime. It was just one muppet playing a prank. You won't find it in any modern textbooks. Let it go, like the scientists did in 1953.

Nebraska Man was a genuine error, not a hoax.

I need more info on the Neanderthals whereof thou speakest.

 

[BobRyan]

Bob said
What FRAUDs -- what HOAXES has ID produced to the level of Simpons' junk-science horse series placed on display in the Smithsonian???

What frauds -what HOAXES has ID produced to the level of NEANDERTHALS boldly published as 25000 year old species for 30 years -- until about 2 years ago when that hoax was uncovered?

What FRAUDS - what HOAXES has ID produced to the level of Piltdown man, Nebraska Man? Archaeoraptor? Haeckles fraudulent manipulated presentation to "show" that his story telling about "Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" had any kind of "science" behind it?

WHEN will ID EVER reach the mountain high standard of junk-science frauds and hoaxes that have ALREADY been admitted to by atheist darwinists themselves in the name of atheist darwinism?

These are frauds that in many cases were forced into science texts books for a number of decades before the real junk-science nature of the wild "supposed science claims" were revealed in the light of day.

What science data has ID presented -- pushed into text books and museums that turned out to be "pure junk science" as in these GRAND examples above?

Well, there's this movie you may have heard of called "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" in which it is falsely claimed that Hitler's actions were somehow inspired by Darwin's work

That claim of yourse has never held water on any of the close reviews done on the subject.

AND that claim of yours is not science at all!! The entire "master race" and culling of their own German people including the deformed, elderly etc was rife with political arguments regard their race, the evolution of man etc.

It is a bit late to be trying your hand at revisionist history.

But I do accept it as "all you have by comparson" with the monster hoaxes listed above --

So I grant you that this is the tiny space your argument must be content to live in --

Need I go on?

You tell me.

The list of hoaxes above are recognized by BOTH atheist darwinists AND Christians!

So far you have not been able to put up much against it by comparison.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Bob said
What FRAUDs -- what HOAXES has ID produced to the level of Simpons' junk-science horse series placed on display in the Smithsonian???

What frauds -what HOAXES has ID produced to the level of NEANDERTHALS boldly published as 25000 year old species for 30 years -- until about 2 years ago when that hoax was uncovered?

What FRAUDS - what HOAXES has ID produced to the level of Piltdown man, Nebraska Man? Archaeoraptor? Haeckles fraudulent manipulated presentation to "show" that his story telling about "Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" had any kind of "science" behind it?

WHEN will ID EVER reach the mountain high standard of junk-science frauds and hoaxes that have ALREADY been admitted to by atheist darwinists themselves in the name of atheist darwinism?

These are frauds that in many cases were forced into science texts books for a number of decades before the real junk-science nature of the wild "supposed science claims" were revealed in the light of day.

What science data has ID presented -- pushed into text books and museums that turned out to be "pure junk science" as in these GRAND examples above?

Now, here's a question - given that the Piltdown Man was indeed a hoax and was revealed as such (by actual scientists) more than 50 years ago, why do creationists have to keep going on about it? The scientific community laid it to rest decades ago. It hasn't been used to support evolutionary theory since before my mother was born, let alone in my lifetime. It was just one muppet playing a prank. You won't find it in any modern textbooks. Let it go, like the scientists did in 1953.

Nebraska Man was a genuine error, not a hoax.

I need more info on the Neanderthals whereof thou speakest.

[/quote]

1. Piltdown was a fraud used to promote junk-science. For 40 years the fraud was used to prop-up the junk-science of Darwinism until it was debunked in the 1950's. Now "we are supposed to ignore the junk science means used to prop up darwinism's rise to acceptance".

2. Nebraska Man (the SINGLE TOOTH of a pecary used as the EVIDENCE behind story telling of an entire cave dwelling family supposedly found in Nebraska and used as evidence in the Scopes trial against Creationists). How is it that ONE TOOTH of a pig "is all junk-science needs to fabricate the entire life story of hominids in Nebraska disproving the bible?"

3. Take a look at the Horse Series "That NEVER HAPPENED IN NATURE" by atheist Darwinist standards AND YET was used for decades to convince children that atheist darwinism was legit. TRULY this is junk-science "at it's best"!!

4. Then of course - you have the 30 year problem of the Neaderthal story also forced on children in public schools to give junk-science credibility. Yet "Another hoax" still on display at the Smithsonian whose sole purpose is to make atheist darwinism "appear like real science".

It is a shame that atheist darwinists have been able to peddle their junk-science snake oil so well EVEN though their fraudulent methods have been exposed time after time. But to tell you the truth - I don't blame atheists for being stuck with such junk-science methods after all -- what other choice do they have? It's either that endless round of debunked story telling - or admit there is a designer --- their faith tells them to stick with the junk-science at all costs. Dawkins admits it -- and I respect him for it.

But what about Christians who join them? what kind of thinking is going on there??? That is the question these boards might be able to answer!

in Christ,

Bob