Evolution: The Grand Experiment

[davbrucas]

Sounds like you're looking for a scapegoat for the limitations of science. Looking for scapegoats has recently become the American way, so welcome to that non-elite club, doctor. The only limitation to science is mankind himself, and there's nothing you can do about that.

Meamwhile, I'll gladly remain secure in my belief in God. As part of that, I am afraid of nothing, especially the advancement of science.

Good for you. Actually, I dont spend any time during the day (other than when I am reading this forum) thinking about God, creation, religion, etc...I really couldnt care less about it. My life is about being a good husband and father and enjoying my time here. Most of the posts I make in here are just for entertainment so dont try to read too deeply into them as they have no bearing on my life.

[The King]

Good for you. Actually, I dont spend any time during the day (other than when I am reading this forum) thinking about God, creation, religion, etc...I really couldnt care less about it. My life is about being a good husband and father and enjoying my time here. Most of the posts I make in here are just for entertainment so dont try to read too deeply into them as they have no bearing on my life.

I know that, remember this an internet forum. You've been exposed to Christian doctrine in your life and have rejected it, which you have the complete freedom to do. Congrats on having made a successful life for yourself and others, that's a big reward in the here and now that is worthy of respect.

[BrianC]

Dude, your body maintains a very tight pH range of the blood. It never reaches extreme ranges unless you are extremely ill and near death. Your body is very efficient at buffering acidic environments because our metabolism produces acidic by products and we are well adapted to it. On the other hand, we dont have a good alkaline buffer system. There are 3 major ways that the body buffers acid. NaHCO3-Carbonic Anhydrase system (major acid-base buffer), respiratory system to blow off CO2, and the kidneys to regulate H+ excretion. What you are talking about with minerals is a very small part of the overall buffer system. If you are stating that you are testing your blood at times and it reads 6.5 then you are FOS. You would be dead long before your pH reaches that level. Dude, get your histrionic personality disorder and your schizophrenia in check before posting. All you do on here is bait people into an argument and then slam them using your flawed logic and made-up/exaggerated resources. You could be an asset in this forum if you would just state your knowledge of the Bible and religion and leave all of the other condescending extracurricular stuff out of here.

Wow, very uninformed and unresearched. You need to research pH. No, I would not be dead if my pH were at 6.5. People's pH can be lower than that too. 6.5 is not that low at all. When lab results for my mom came back, her pH was around 6 and the doc didn't freak out at all. Just said it was little bit acidic. So I'm not the one who needs to get my facts straight before I post. And I can prove flat out that my pH goes to 6.5, because I can take pictures of the pH paper right next to the color key to show how it comes out, though in photographs, it may be hard to tell colors 100% accurately. It is not uncommon for people to have acidic pH levels. In fact, most people do most of the time. It's just not enough to do much damage to their bodies. 6.5 isn't bad at all.

[BrianC]

Every claim that religions have made that have been tested, where they can be tested have been found to be false.

That is a completely false claim. Anyone can see that. There's a kid at a church in Lewisville who did not have an eardrum in one ear. Andrew Wommack was at that church that week so I attended. I don't 100% agree with the guy, but he's fairly correct on a lot of stuff. He is not some big fancy show and he doesn't make money off his visits to churches to speak and he always offers prayer for healing at the end of his talks. The kid could hear out of that ear after Andrew prayed for him. If you go to Andrew Wommack's website, I believe they have the story on there and they may have the x-rays before and after of the kid's eardrum. Though, that won't prove anything, because pictures can be faked. I've seen a lot of instances where doctors could not explain why or how someone was healed.

I believe things to be true because they can be proven. The sky is blue because of the gasses in it, the grass is green because of the chlorophyll, not because some magic man in the sky willed it to be so. How can someone with the power that you claim him to have be so incredibly inept at conveying simple messages?

Look, I can't help it if you don't understand God. You clearly hate religion for your own purposes and you don't want anything to do with it and you even like to scoff at it, most likely because of your experience with it which turned you off to it. I can understand that, because I hate religion too. But you're transfering what you know from religion to God, as if religions can define who God really is and as if they're actually doing His will, and that's just plain ignorance of the truth. In the Bible God and His prophets and apostles are always fighting AGAINST organized religion and instead trying to create communities of people who help one another and don't judge one another.

If you don't care about God, why do you feel the need to fight against Him so vehemently in these forums? What, does it make you feel good to scoff at believers? I mean, really, what is your purpose for doing what you do? Why don't you just stop commenting if you believe this is all a bunch of mumbo-jumbo? It shouldn't matter to you if you don't believe in it. Which means you just come in here to spout off at people who disagree with you to be a jerk.

[BrianC]

Beat me to it. But we understood the point he was making. The Christian argument will be that God has helped man understand his environment over the years. People back in biblical times were less adept at understanding science like we do today. I, on the other hand, believe it's Occam's Razor...and the simple answer is that God does not exist and was created by man as a way to explain the world around him. Now we have evolved technologically to where we dont need God as an explanation.

I disagree. I believe the simplest answer is that everything has a Creator. Why? Because if there is an intelligent, powerful Creator, there is a source to the energy that makes up this universe and there is intelligence behind the incredible complexity of it.

Evolutionism, on the other hand, says that it all happened by chance, billions of years ago, when a big bang happened out of nothing and things just happened to order themselves out, and against gas laws, stars and planets formed, and against all odds, information created itself and ordered itself and then came to life in the organism it was in, then that organism found a female just like it and mated and found something to eat and then through tons of complex system changes over the years, we eventually got living plants, animals and humans. That's INCREDIBLY complicated compared to a Creator creating it all.

So, Occam's Razor is actually more in favor of Creationism rather than Evolutionism.

[BrianC]

His point was solid, just a minor correction.

There is also something definitely disconcerting about not knowing why anything exists, let alone explaining how it all works together. God fills that void nicely. I have fewer qualms with the notion of God than the human manifestations of religion.

You still cannot explain how everything came from nothing. You believe the universe made itself out of nothingness, practically. In fact, I read a quote once from an evolution scientist who said that it could be said that the universe made itself out of nothing.

An eternal being, having no beginning and no end, is the only logical solution for this, and it is a demand of philosophy and science when you get down to it. It's required for everything to exist. That's logical.

And the reason "religion" even exists on this planet is because people screw up what God gives them. If things were the way God set it up in first-century Christianity, people would simply have communities of people who believe in the Creator and help one another and have a block party once a week on Saturday night to hang out with friends and talk about what God's done for them. That's exactly what Christians did in the first-century. It was a party with finger foods, live bands, singing, dancing, mingling and then a big feast. It was like Thanksgiving every weekend. And at the end was when people shared what God had done for them or taught them with everyone else. That's all it was. There were not churches. "Church" actually meant "assembly" and if you had said it was a building, they would not have known what you were talking about. All of this absurd religious tradition we see nowadays comes from Jewish practices (like the party) taken out of Christian practices and being replaced with Pagan practices. That's where a church building comes from. Constantine removed all Jewish feasts and practices out of Christianity in the 4th century, because he hated the Jews, then he mixed in Pagan practices like the temple services, the priests, the Pagan holidays, etc.. That's where Catholicism came from and that's why it got so corrupted. Though, Paganism was already very slowly seeping its way into Christianity before that, though, as we see with the tongues speakers in Corinth and other Pagan beliefs very slowly seeping their way in. But nothing like what Constantine did.

If you are truly interested in this type of stuff, you'll love the book Pagan Christianity by Frank Viola. Excellent book that tracks how it all happened.

[BrianC]

I'm not talking about how things came into existence, but why. There's a huge distinction there. Many Atheists that I know will at least cave on this one point and admit that they could be wrong but I'm not aware of anyone filling the 'why' void with anything but some God.

I absolutely agree that we are far from understanding what we live in, but that doesn't and shouldn't stop us from trying.

Creationism does not stop us from trying to understand science and the universe. Science is to research HOW things work, not the origins, because we cannot know the origins since that is not provable with science. It can only be theorized but never proven since no one was there to see it. It's philosophy which is religious, because it cannot be proved.

We can prove religion doesn't hinder science because most of the scientists who discovered and started our major branches of science were Creationists since Evolution hadn't taken hold yet. And even after Evolution had taken hold, we get lots of Creationists furthering science. Creationists are responsible for electricity and the MRI and all kinds of things. Since evolution is theory and cannot be proved, it does not benefit science to pump money into proving that theory. Just as pumping any money into proving creation is useless, as well. Pumping money into strictly scientific research to understand our world or make advances, though, that is what will further us, and it doesn't matter if you're evolutionist or creationist, you can do that research.

Christians held for centuries a belief in geocentricism, which we now know, through science, isn't the case.

Blame the Pagans mixing their beliefs with the Christians to form Catholicism. Research it yourself, don't take my word for it. If you watch Hovind's seminars, at one point he shows how the ancient cultures, including the Jews, knew the earth orbited the sun. We LOST technological advances according to ancient ruins. It took incredible technology to build the Great Pyramid and Stonehenge. And we still haven't figured out how they did it. In fact, we've found that they definitely had drills that would go down 10 times further than our modern drills today will go down in the ground. Amazing technology back then which was lost. And the Columbus flat earth history is a myth:

Excerpt from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_Ea...historiography)

In 1945 the Historical Association listed "Columbus and the Flat Earth Conception" second of twenty in its first-published pamphlet on common errors in history.[97]

This belief is even repeated in some widely read textbooks. Previous editions of Thomas Bailey's The American Pageant stated that "The superstitious sailors [of Columbus' crew] ... grew increasingly mutinous...because they were fearful of sailing over the edge of the world"; however, no such historical account is known.[98] Actually, sailors were probably among the first to know of the curvature of Earth from everyday observations, for example seeing how mountains vanish below the horizon on sailing far from shore.
(end of excerpt)

The Bible taught about the "circle" of the earth, and in Hebrew, that word we translated "circle" means "sphere" actually. They knew the Earth was a sphere long before the flat earth idea came along. There's a lot of history that is recorded very wrongly. In fact, we find ancient Roman artifacts from the 200BC (or 300AD) era (i forget which) in New Mexico, and we also found the Ten Commandments in New Mexico, both buried where we know they were legitimately placed there a VERY long time ago. That's not the only proof we have of the Romans crossing the ocean either. There's a lot of stuff out there we're not educated about in history which you might find interesting and helpful. I believe when Paganism was mixed into Christianity to make Catholicism and the Roman Empire fell, that is what caused a major hindrance to scientific advance, because of the idiots ruling back then. I wouldn't blame that on God or the Bible, though. That's corrupt Pagans and Catholics and their man-made religions which are not what the Bible teaches.

And many are now accepting that perhaps Genesis wasn't so literal. That doesn't refute the existence of God, just redefines what we know about the world we live in and how it came to be.

To me, Genesis 1:3 might as well say this:



That's not pidgeon holing, that's putting what we live in into terms that we can understand. How absurd was it that the sun should not revolve around the earth? How absurd is it that the earth might be older than what some medieval monk calculated it to be using biblical texts? How absurd is it that the mechanics behind your God's creation should be questioned because some people take it as evidence that God doesn't exist at all?

We know Hebrew writings very well. We understand the langauge very well too. We know for a fact that Genesis is literal, not figurative. Anyone who says otherwise is ignorant and uneducated in Hebrew writing. Besides, you would have to say that Genesis starts out figurative and then suddenly switches to literal without any indications as such, because most of Genesis is clearly literal. The ONLY thing people say is figurative is the creation story, but that makes no sense at all. There is no figurative language or marker used whatsoever. The days are literal 24 hour days in Hebrew and that is signified by the use of "the evening, the morning, the first day". Clearly, it's a 24 hour day. It's literal, not figurative. That we know for certain. If it were figurative, then people would lose trust in God, because He did not let us know that was figurative, and it would disprove things in the creation story, such as death entering the world through man's sin (evolution says the opposite). Your view of this stuff is very misinformed (no offense, though, of course).

People refuse Christ on the merits of Christianity itself, not because evolution gives them something else to believe in.

I will admit that a lot of people do reject Christianity because of the absurd things some denominations do and teach. But statistically, 75% of Christians who go to college abandon their faith before they graduate college, and most of them cite Evolution teaching as the cause for that. They were weak in their faith before and never taught other theories, and that's why they jump on evolution. They're selfish and they don't want to be held to some standard religion setup for them, so they jump on Evolution quickly to absolve their being subject to a God (a God which religion incorrectly portrays). I learned a ton about evolution and didn't know anything about creation until I was around 20, and I never once faltered in my faith due to evolution teaching. I figured the gap theory was correct at the time. I had strong faith because I had actually been born again when I was 16, so that was unshakable no matter what I was taught. I understood the absurdity of something created out of nothing, so I knew a God was required. It was just logical. No one had to teach me that.

The problem today is that parents don't live their faith. They're a bunch of hypocrites who go to their religious meeting on Sunday and are taught one thing, then they live their lives completely different the rest of the week, because they're either not truly born again, or they were taught some screwed up religious practices, or they just don't care. And the kids pick up on it and become rebellious because they see their parents hypocrisy. Psychologically, the way we see our own father is the foundation for how we see God the Father. If you study research on this, you'll find that people who have fathers whom they are not close to or whom are resented or hypocrites, etc., are less likely to have a relationship with God or view Him kindly. The child/father relationship is extremely important for children in the area of understanding and knowing God the Father. I know quite a bit about psychology and a decent amount about child psychology. It is amazing what you find out about how parents examples and discipline style and how those things are what are causing our children to be so rebellious nowadays.

Sure, evolution is a point of contention that juxtaposes religious dogma with scientific knowledge. Christians push back against it because they perceive it as a threat to the authority of the Bible. But non-believers don't need evolution to try and undermine what the bible says. Like the King says, we've been doing that just fine since Adam and Eve - without evolution.

Religion kills itself because man screws up everything God gives them. Evolution just causes more people to leave religion more quickly and lose faith in a God. And it is responsible for mass atrocities such as Hilter and the millions communism has killed.

In reality, though, Evolutionism is not science at all. It is a belief, because it cannot be proved, just as Creation cannot be proved. One must BELIEVE in evolutionism, because they cannot know it is true, and in fact, the evidence is against evolutionism, not for it. When you have millions and millions of fossils on the earth and not one transitional fossil, that disproves evolutionism from one kind of animal to another. Darwin said it himself. I even showed you the video where one of the leading experts at the museum in England that has the most fossils of any collection (9 million) says that there is not one transitional fossil, where as Darwin said that if his theory were true, there should be TONS of transitional fossils.

Evolutionism is psuedo-science. It's a religion.

[BrianC]

Sure, it seems implausible that we evolved by chance; anyone with enough probability theory would likely deem it providence, or a great statistical unlikelihood that we even started up, let alone got to where we are. But how can some Christians be so sure we were just winked into existence with the same arrogance that was held when geocentricism was being questioned?

I should have said 'Some Christians' but didn't meant to overly generalized that all Christians see science as a threat to the bible.

Look I agree that it is a stretch that one should patently write off God on the basis of science and evolutionary theory because it doesn't necessarily disprove a hidden, supernatural influence. There's more to it than that, but what is observable sure does suggest the random, chance-based nature of our origin.

That was a fairly decent and honest post that exposes a bit more of an accurate portrayal of things. A bit more, but not completely (which is no problem).

You said that it seems improbable that we evolved by chance. The chances that we evolved are astronomical and unproved. In fact, in the fossil record, we see absolutely no transitional fossils - just fully formed kinds of animals. That supports creation and the Bible, not evolution theory. And you say that what we observe suggests the random, chance-based nature. I disagree. We see order in everything. We see no "chance-based" "random" nature about anything in life. It is all exceptionally ordered. Where do you get this random, chance-based observation from? I'd like to research what it is you say is random and chance-based about nature (no offense intended, just curious is all).

To me, it seems exceptionally illogical and irrational to place all your eggs in a basket which has no bottom in it. Evidence isn't in evolutionism's favor.

Oh, and Christians who know science know that science brings people closer to God and truth rather than fighting against it. Man-made evolutionism religion/theory is what fights against the Bible, not science.

[BrianC]

Religion is naiveté that gives some people comfort and it shouldnt be taken away from them. It’s like golfing, people like to golf. They shouldnt have their golf clubs taken away, and they should keep their churches, but we have to get it to a place where religion is treated at a level that it should be treated. That it is something fun that people get together and do on the weekend. A hobby. Further improvements technologically and scientifically will lead to the erosion of religion which will allow science to explain our beginnings and we will eventually get to that point where religion has taken its appropriate place as a side dish rather than a main course. Stephen Hawkings recently stated that we dont need God to explain away our existence. Sooner or later we will have direct proof of how we were created and when it shows that a benevolent God didnt just snap his fingers and we were created(and negates what is said in the Bible) many people will have to reevaluate their existence. But I am sure that people like BrianC and King will still cry that the Earth is flat even after it's proven not to be.

Are we supposed to act like it’s okay for people to say that the earth is 6000 years old? That humans and dinosaurs co-existed? That evolution is false? This is why religion is bad. It hinders our progress scientifically and technologically. If you guys are so secure in your beliefs in your God what are you afraid that science will find?

Those are both incredibly uninformed, ignorant and judgmental statements about people.

Again, science brings people closer to God rather than further away from Him. I explained how Creationists are responsible for starting most of our branches of science, which means belief in God and Creation does not hinder science. Also, Creationists are responsible for TONS of our inventions. Our Founding Fathers were all Creationists (even the Deists) and one of them holds the most patents in history. And one of them is responsible for electricity. We have tons of major scientific advances because of those Christians who founded this country. It's just sheer ignorance of the topic to say otherwise as you just did.

There is nothing unscientific about Creationism. It uses exactly the same evidences evolutionism does, but it interprets them differently. And in fact, the evidence is in favor of young earth creationism. Why? Because carbon dating actually shows the inability for the earth to be more than around 100,000 years old since we find carbon 14 in basically everything in the fossil record. And unless uranium 236 is ALSO found around everything in the fossil record, then the explanation is that nothing is older than about 100,000 years for certain. No dating methods we have work. If you research that, you'd find that out. Hovind has a lot of info on it and cites a lot of research and testing on it so you can see how they dates are all OVER the place no matter what type of dating method you us, and we can date things we know are a certain age and they never come out right no matter what dating method we use. You can also learn how things are actually dated in his seminar videos, as well.

I mean aboslutely no offense by this, but you are exceedingly uninformed about this stuff. If you want to accuse creationists of being non-scientific, you need to actually go and learn all about them by watching seminars like Hovind's. You will find that there is a TON of evidence that makes far more sense when placed into the creation model rather than the evolution model. There's nothing that goes against science in creationism. If there were, I would not believe in it. It has to make logical, scientific, rational sense for me to believe in it.

And I explained how geocentrism was actually more Pagan and Catholic than Christian. I think Hovind shows how the Bible says the Earth is orbiting the sun in scripture and he definitely shows the Old Testament verse that says the earth is a circle (but the original Hebrew is translated sphere - the King James translated it circle, and incorrectly so). So the Bible teaches a spherical earth, not a flat earth. You really need to research this stuff before you go talking about it as if you know all about it, because all you're doing is showing that you lack much knowledge or understanding about creation. You can't effectively debate something you do not thoroughly understand.

[BrianC]

Good for you. Actually, I dont spend any time during the day (other than when I am reading this forum) thinking about God, creation, religion, etc...I really couldnt care less about it. My life is about being a good husband and father and enjoying my time here. Most of the posts I make in here are just for entertainment so dont try to read too deeply into them as they have no bearing on my life.

All I'm here for is to give people information and to get them thinking about something they may not have previous thought about or known about before. My hope is that Christians will gain some new knowledge and get more informed about their beliefs and science. And my hope is that some atheists might actually decide to learn something about creationism and their own evolutionist beliefs so that they can be better informed and debate creationists more effectively.

The part about showing the absurd points of evolutionism is just a bonus, because it is kind of fun to mess with people. lol But it's all in good fun. No matter how hateful people are to me here, I have no hard feelings toward anyone. In person, I'd shoot the breeze with everyone and just have a good time. If I used a different name in person, none of you would have any clue it was me, because I'm very friendly and non-confrontational in person, because I really don't want to offend anyone. I'd rather just have friendly, civil conversations as friends. On here, I would like that, but Atheists for some reason like to jump all over Creationists and if I join in, they really get upset. lol Some have a good time with it - others get offended and downright hateful. I don't take it personally, though. It's just for fun.

[davbrucas]

Wow, very uninformed and unresearched. You need to research pH. No, I would not be dead if my pH were at 6.5. People's pH can be lower than that too. 6.5 is not that low at all. When lab results for my mom came back, her pH was around 6 and the doc didn't freak out at all. Just said it was little bit acidic. So I'm not the one who needs to get my facts straight before I post. And I can prove flat out that my pH goes to 6.5, because I can take pictures of the pH paper right next to the color key to show how it comes out, though in photographs, it may be hard to tell colors 100% accurately. It is not uncommon for people to have acidic pH levels. In fact, most people do most of the time. It's just not enough to do much damage to their bodies. 6.5 isn't bad at all.

Wow. You do realize that I am a physician, right? You have lost your fucking mind. Maybe you should do the research before spouting off stupid shit. No human on this planet can survive with a blood pH of 6.5. End of story. As a matter of fact, if your pH gets to ~7.1 you will be in a stupor or coma. It's this kind of shit that you say that lends you zero credibility to anything else you say.

[racrguy]

That is a completely false claim. Anyone can see that. There's a kid at a church in Lewisville who did not have an eardrum in one ear. Andrew Wommack was at that church that week so I attended. I don't 100% agree with the guy, but he's fairly correct on a lot of stuff. He is not some big fancy show and he doesn't make money off his visits to churches to speak and he always offers prayer for healing at the end of his talks. The kid could hear out of that ear after Andrew prayed for him. If you go to Andrew Wommack's website, I believe they have the story on there and they may have the x-rays before and after of the kid's eardrum. Though, that won't prove anything, because pictures can be faked. I've seen a lot of instances where doctors could not explain why or how someone was healed.

Just because a doctor can't explain why things happened, doesn't mean your magic man did it. Think of it like this, say a car breaks down and you take it to a mechanic to fix it, at first glance he may not know what caused the failure but after studying the problem areas he may be able to tell you what happened.

Look, I can't help it if you don't understand God. You clearly hate religion for your own purposes and you don't want anything to do with it and you even like to scoff at it, most likely because of your experience with it which turned you off to it. I can understand that, because I hate religion too. But you're transfering what you know from religion to God, as if religions can define who God really is and as if they're actually doing His will, and that's just plain ignorance of the truth. In the Bible God and His prophets and apostles are always fighting AGAINST organized religion and instead trying to create communities of people who help one another and don't judge one another.

If you don't care about God, why do you feel the need to fight against Him so vehemently in these forums? What, does it make you feel good to scoff at believers? I mean, really, what is your purpose for doing what you do? Why don't you just stop commenting if you believe this is all a bunch of mumbo-jumbo? It shouldn't matter to you if you don't believe in it. Which means you just come in here to spout off at people who disagree with you to be a jerk.

I don't need to understand something that can't be proven. Yes, I have issues with religion, and religious people because they (collectively, not necessarily as an individual) try to undermine things that are proven to be true.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwards_v._Aguillard and: http://ncse.com/news/2009/04/setback...n-texas-004710 And people like you who spread lies and halftruths.

You quote Kent Hovind like he actually knows anything. He has a Ph.D. from a creationist "college" that's non-accredited. So really, he has no education outside of a HS diploma.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Bible_University

If god really were all-powerful and omniscient, then he would have the ability to manifest himself in a manner that can't be mistaken for anything OTHER than god. And no, things like swarms and floods don't count.

Yes, I used links from wikipedia, Not always the most reliable source, but in this case all the information is correct.

I'm going to leave you with a video and a link, First up, the video


And now the link http://www.youtube.com/view_play_lis...&v=BS5vid4GkEY

[racrguy]

Those are both incredibly uninformed, ignorant and judgmental statements about people.

Again, science brings people closer to God rather than further away from Him. I explained how Creationists are responsible for starting most of our branches of science, which means belief in God and Creation does not hinder science. Also, Creationists are responsible for TONS of our inventions. Our Founding Fathers were all Creationists (even the Deists) and one of them holds the most patents in history. And one of them is responsible for electricity. We have tons of major scientific advances because of those Christians who founded this country. It's just sheer ignorance of the topic to say otherwise as you just did.

There is nothing unscientific about Creationism. It uses exactly the same evidences evolutionism does, but it interprets them differently. And in fact, the evidence is in favor of young earth creationism. Why? Because carbon dating actually shows the inability for the earth to be more than around 100,000 years old since we find carbon 14 in basically everything in the fossil record. And unless uranium 236 is ALSO found around everything in the fossil record, then the explanation is that nothing is older than about 100,000 years for certain. No dating methods we have work. If you research that, you'd find that out. Hovind has a lot of info on it and cites a lot of research and testing on it so you can see how they dates are all OVER the place no matter what type of dating method you us, and we can date things we know are a certain age and they never come out right no matter what dating method we use. You can also learn how things are actually dated in his seminar videos, as well.

I mean aboslutely no offense by this, but you are exceedingly uninformed about this stuff. If you want to accuse creationists of being non-scientific, you need to actually go and learn all about them by watching seminars like Hovind's. You will find that there is a TON of evidence that makes far more sense when placed into the creation model rather than the evolution model. There's nothing that goes against science in creationism. If there were, I would not believe in it. It has to make logical, scientific, rational sense for me to believe in it.

And I explained how geocentrism was actually more Pagan and Catholic than Christian. I think Hovind shows how the Bible says the Earth is orbiting the sun in scripture and he definitely shows the Old Testament verse that says the earth is a circle (but the original Hebrew is translated sphere - the King James translated it circle, and incorrectly so). So the Bible teaches a spherical earth, not a flat earth. You really need to research this stuff before you go talking about it as if you know all about it, because all you're doing is showing that you lack much knowledge or understanding about creation. You can't effectively debate something you do not thoroughly understand.

I just ran across this gem of a post.

The reason it stemmed from religion is because people started doubting the lies that have been put forth for over two millennia and decided to test what was claimed. Lo and behold they found that the dogma was false.

[davbrucas]

I don't need to understand something that can't be proven. Yes, I have issues with religion, and religious people because they (collectively, not necessarily as an individual) try to undermine things that are proven to be true.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwards_v._Aguillard and: http://ncse.com/news/2009/04/setback-science-education-texas-004710 And people like you who spread lies and halftruths.

You quote Kent Hovind like he actually knows anything. He has a Ph.D. from a creationist "college" that's non-accredited. So really, he has no education outside of a HS diploma.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kent_Hovind and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Bible_University

If god really were all-powerful and omniscient, then he would have the ability to manifest himself in a manner that can't be mistaken for anything OTHER than god. And no, things like swarms and floods don't count.

Yes, I used links from wikipedia, Not always the most reliable source, but in this case all the information is correct.

I'm going to leave you with a video and a link, First up, the video


And now the link http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=AC3481305829426D&playnext=1&v=BS5 vid4GkEY

Save your breath. These kind of people are consumed by their delusions. They will never give them up regardless of the evidence at hand. Yes, BrianC is a bad example of how a Christian should be. He is self-righteous, arrogant and condescending. He spreads ignorance and misinformation and quotes other peoples theories as if their opinions are the end all be all of information. If we ignore this parasite hopefully he will go away.

[racrguy]

Save your breath. These kind of people are consumed by their delusions. They will never give them up regardless of the evidence at hand. Yes, BrianC is a bad example of how a Christian should be. He is self-righteous, arrogant and condescending. He spreads ignorance and misinformation and quotes other peoples theories as if their opinions are the end all be all of information. If we ignore this parasite hopefully he will go away.

I'm really trying not to put him on my ignore list because I get a chuckle out of his posts, but DAMN it's hard not to lol