PDA

View Full Version : Who are these creationists?



LWW
03-23-2011, 09:35 AM
Gregor Mendel, a Roman Catholic priest and abbott, first discovered the laws of genetics with his now famous studies of the garden pea. His work lay in obscurity for many years before being rediscovered. Mendel did not accept Darwin's theory, because his own discoveries in genetics showed that creatures tend to revert to kind.

LWW
03-23-2011, 09:35 AM
Louis Pasteur, a Franciscan Tertiary, developed the germ theory of disease and CLAIMED that microbes transmit many diseases. This claim has been thoroughly proven. The doctor who first applied Pasteur's theories to the operating room was the Quaker Joseph Lister.

LWW
03-23-2011, 09:36 AM
Louis Agassiz by his comparison of fossil fish and studies of living fish was one of the great founders of icthyology. He was strongly creationist in his views.

LWW
03-23-2011, 09:37 AM
When Bernhard Riemann died, a biographer noted that he had served Christ outside the pulpit as his father had served Christ in the pulpit. Riemann's father had intended his son for the ministry, but Riemann chose mathematics instead. He created a major branch of non-euclidean geometry and did other mathematics of much value.

LWW
03-23-2011, 09:39 AM
Einstein built his theory of relativity on the work of three men, two of whom were Christians. The first of these Christians was Bernhard Riemann who had developed the mathematics of Riemannian Space, which Einstein found could explain the curvature of space. The other was James Clerk Maxwell whose equations and work with pre-quantum physics led directly to modern physics. Einstein's work was to some measure forced by the famous Michelson-Morely measurements of the speed of light which showed that the speed of light is an absolute. Einstein sought and found the explanation. Edward William Morley was the Christian half of that experimental duo.

LWW
03-23-2011, 09:40 AM
The most famous champion of vaccination was a Christian doctor, *Edward Jenner, who did his work against fierce opposition and in the teeth of threats against himself. In effect he wiped out smallpox from among the diseases that terrify mankind. He died from a cold caught carrying firewood to an impoverished woman.

LWW
03-23-2011, 09:41 AM
Georges Lemaitre, a Belgian priest, PREDICTED from his reworking of Einstein's theories, that space would be found to be expanding. Einstein himself at first resisted the implications but later applauded them. The expansion of space was soon confirmed. An IMPLICATION of Lemaitre's theories was background radiation. He was notified of the discovery of this radiation as he lay dying. A note found in Lemaitre's manuscripts said "It all had to have begun with light." His was the first scientific-mathematical creation theory, soon supplanted by better models. It is interesting to note that Bishop Robert Grosseteste, studying light, advocated (on philosophical-theological grounds) a primitive Big Bang expansionist theory in the thirteenth century.

LWW
03-23-2011, 09:42 AM
Sir Isaac Newton wrote a million words of theology. Arian in outlook, his science was nonetheless motivated by his Christian thought.

Soflasnapper
03-23-2011, 02:43 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Gregor Mendel, a Roman Catholic priest and abbott, first discovered the laws of genetics with his now famous studies of the garden pea. His work lay in obscurity for many years before being rediscovered. Mendel did not accept Darwin's theory, because his own discoveries in genetics showed that creatures tend to revert to kind. </div></div>

Who are these creationists? Scientists who lived prior to when natural selection became widely accepted in the '30s to '50s of the 20th century as the key mechanism of evolution.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Charles Robert Darwin FRS (12 February 1809 – 19 April 1882) was an English naturalist.[I] He established that all species of life have descended over time from common ancestry, and proposed the scientific theory that this branching pattern of evolution resulted from a process that he called natural selection.

He published his theory with compelling evidence for evolution in his 1859 book On the Origin of Species.[1][2] The scientific community and much of the general public came to accept evolution as a fact in his lifetime.[3] However, it was not until the emergence of the modern evolutionary synthesis from the 1930s to the 1950s that a broad consensus developed that natural selection was the basic mechanism of evolution.[4] In modified form, Darwin's scientific discovery is the unifying theory of the life sciences, explaining the diversity of life.[5][6] </div></div>


So your point amounts to special pleading.

Show the list of eminent scientists whose educations and scientific work took place after the '50s who agree with creationism. It would be a very short list.

LWW
03-23-2011, 02:49 PM
Incomplete, but a nice start:

Dr. Paul Ackerman, Psychologist
Dr. E. Theo Agard, Medical Physics
Dr. James Allan, Geneticist
Dr. Steve Austin, Geologist
Dr. S.E. Aw, Biochemist
Dr. Thomas Barnes, Physicist
Dr. Geoff Barnard, Immunologist
Dr. Don Batten, Plant physiologist, tropical fruit expert
Dr. John Baumgardner, Electrical Engineering, Space Physicist, Geophysicist, expert in supercomputer modeling of plate tectonics
Dr. Jerry Bergman, Psychologist
Dr. Kimberly Berrine, Microbiology & Immunology
Prof. Vladimir Betina, Microbiology, Biochemistry & Biology
Dr. Raymond G. Bohlin, Biologist
Dr. Andrew Bosanquet, Biology, Microbiology
Edward A. Boudreaux, Theoretical Chemistry
Dr. David R. Boylan, Chemical Engineer
Prof. Linn E. Carothers, Associate Professor of Statistics
Dr. David Catchpoole, Plant Physiologist (read his testimony)
Prof. Sung-Do Cha, Physics
Dr. Eugene F. Chaffin, Professor of Physics
Dr. Choong-Kuk Chang, Genetic Engineering
Prof. Jeun-Sik Chang, Aeronautical Engineering
Dr. Donald Chittick, Physical Chemist (interview)
Prof. Chung-Il Cho, Biology Education
Dr. John M. Cimbala, Mechanical Engineering
Dr. Harold Coffin, Palaeontologist
Dr. Bob Compton, DVM
Dr. Ken Cumming, Biologist
Dr. Jack W. Cuozzo, Dentist
Dr. William M. Curtis III, Th.D., Th.M., M.S., Aeronautics & Nuclear Physics
Dr. Malcolm Cutchins, Aerospace Engineering
Dr. Lionel Dahmer, Analytical Chemist
Dr. Raymond V. Damadian, M.D., Pioneer of magnetic resonance imaging
Dr. Chris Darnbrough, Biochemist
Dr. Nancy M. Darrall, Botany
Dr. Bryan Dawson, Mathematics
Dr. Douglas Dean, Biological Chemistry
Prof. Stephen W. Deckard, Assistant Professor of Education
Dr. David A. DeWitt, Biology, Biochemistry, Neuroscience
Dr. Don DeYoung, Astronomy, atmospheric physics, M.Div
Dr. David Down, Field Archaeologist
Dr. Geoff Downes, Creationist Plant Physiologist
Dr. Ted Driggers, Operations research
Robert H. Eckel, Medical Research
Dr. André Eggen, Geneticist
Dr. Dudley Eirich, Molecular Biologist
Prof. Dennis L. Englin, Professor of Geophysics
Prof. Danny Faulkner, Astronomy
Prof. Carl B. Fliermans, Professor of Biology
Prof. Dwain L. Ford, Organic Chemistry
Prof. Robert H. Franks, Associate Professor of Biology
Dr. Alan Galbraith, Watershed Science
Dr. Paul Giem, Medical Research
Dr. Maciej Giertych, Geneticist
Dr. Duane Gish, Biochemist
Dr. Werner Gitt, Information Scientist
Dr. Warwick Glover, General Surgeon
Dr. D.B. Gower, Biochemistry
Dr. Dianne Grocott, Psychiatrist
Dr. Stephen Grocott, Industrial Chemist
Dr. Donald Hamann, Food Scientist
Dr. Barry Harker, Philosopher
Dr. Charles W. Harrison, Applied Physicist, Electromagnetics
Dr. John Hartnett, Physicist and Cosmologist
Dr. Mark Harwood, Satellite Communications
Dr. George Hawke, Environmental Scientist
Dr. Margaret Helder, Science Editor, Botanist
Dr. Harold R. Henry, Engineer
Dr. Jonathan Henry, Astronomy
Dr. Joseph Henson, Entomologist
Dr. Robert A. Herrmann, Professor of Mathematics, US Naval Academy
Dr. Andrew Hodge, Head of the Cardiothoracic Surgical Service
Dr. Kelly Hollowell, Molecular and Cellular Pharmacologist
Dr. Ed Holroyd, III, Atmospheric Science
Dr. Bob Hosken, Biochemistry
Dr. George F. Howe, Botany
Dr. Neil Huber, Physical Anthropologist
Dr. Russell Humphreys, Physicist
Dr. James A. Huggins, Professor and Chair, Department of Biology
Evan Jamieson, Hydrometallurgy
George T. Javor, Biochemistry
Dr. Pierre Jerlström, Creationist Molecular Biologist
Dr. Arthur Jones, Biology
Dr. Jonathan W. Jones, Plastic Surgeon
Dr. Raymond Jones, Agricultural Scientist
Prof. Leonid Korochkin, Molecular Biology
Dr. Valery Karpounin, Mathematical Sciences, Logics, Formal Logics
Dr. Dean Kenyon, Biologist
Prof. Gi-Tai Kim, Biology
Prof. Harriet Kim, Biochemistry
Prof. Jong-Bai Kim, Biochemistry
Prof. Jung-Han Kim, Biochemistry
Prof. Jung-Wook Kim, Environmental Science
Prof. Kyoung-Rai Kim, Analytical Chemistry
Prof. Kyoung-Tai Kim, Genetic Engineering
Prof. Young-Gil Kim, Materials Science
Prof. Young In Kim, Engineering
Dr. John W. Klotz, Biologist
Dr. Vladimir F. Kondalenko, Cytology/Cell Pathology
Dr. Leonid Korochkin, M.D., Genetics, Molecular Biology, Neurobiology
Dr. John K.G. Kramer, Biochemistry
Prof. Jin-Hyouk Kwon, Physics
Prof. Myung-Sang Kwon, Immunology
Dr. John Leslie, Biochemist
Prof. Lane P. Lester, Biologist, Genetics
Dr. Jason Lisle, Astrophysicist
Dr. Alan Love, Chemist
Dr. Ian Macreadie, molecular biologist and microbiologist:
Dr. John Marcus, Molecular Biologist
Dr. George Marshall, Eye Disease Researcher
Dr. Ralph Matthews, Radiation Chemist
Dr. John McEwan, Chemist
Prof. Andy McIntosh, Combustion theory, aerodynamics
Dr. David Menton, Anatomist
Dr. Angela Meyer, Creationist Plant Physiologist
Dr. John Meyer, Physiologist
Dr. Albert Mills, Animal Embryologist/Reproductive Physiologist
Colin W. Mitchell, Geography
Dr. John N. Moore, Science Educator
Dr. John W. Moreland, Mechanical engineer and Dentist
Dr. Arlton C. Murray, Paleontologist
Dr. John D. Morris, Geologist
Dr. Len Morris, Physiologist
Dr. Graeme Mortimer, Geologist
Stanley A. Mumma, Architectural Engineering
Prof. Hee-Choon No, Nuclear Engineering
Dr. Eric Norman, Biomedical researcher
Dr. David Oderberg, Philosopher
Prof. John Oller, Linguistics
Prof. Chris D. Osborne, Assistant Professor of Biology
Dr. John Osgood, Medical Practitioner
Dr. Charles Pallaghy, Botanist
Dr. Gary E. Parker, Biologist, Cognate in Geology (Paleontology)
Dr. David Pennington, Plastic Surgeon
Prof. Richard Porter
Dr. Georgia Purdom, Molecular Genetics
Dr. John Rankin, Cosmologist
Dr. A.S. Reece, M.D.
Prof. J. Rendle-Short, Pediatrics
Dr. Jung-Goo Roe, Biology
Dr. David Rosevear, Chemist
Dr. Ariel A. Roth, Biology
Dr. Jonathan D. Sarfati, Physical chemist / spectroscopist
Dr. Joachim Scheven Palaeontologist:
Dr. Ian Scott, Educator
Dr. Saami Shaibani, Forensic physicist
Dr. Young-Gi Shim, Chemistry
Prof. Hyun-Kil Shin, Food Science
Dr. Mikhail Shulgin, Physics
Dr. Emil Silvestru, Geologist/karstologist
Dr. Roger Simpson, Engineer
Dr. Harold Slusher, Geophysicist
Dr. E. Norbert Smith, Zoologist
Dr. Andrew Snelling, Geologist
Prof. Man-Suk Song, Computer Science
Dr. Timothy G. Standish, Biology
Prof. James Stark, Assistant Professor of Science Education
Prof. Brian Stone, Engineer
Dr. Esther Su, Biochemistry
Dr. Charles Taylor, Linguistics
Dr. Stephen Taylor, Electrical Engineering
Dr. Ker C. Thomson, Geophysics
Dr. Michael Todhunter, Forest Genetics
Dr. Lyudmila Tonkonog, Chemistry/Biochemistry
Dr. Royal Truman, Organic Chemist:
Dr. Larry Vardiman, Atmospheric Science
Prof. Walter Veith, Zoologist
Dr. Joachim Vetter, Biologist
Dr. Tas Walker, Mechanical Engineer and Geologist
Dr. Jeremy Walter, Mechanical Engineer
Dr. Keith Wanser, Physicist
Dr. Noel Weeks, Ancient Historian (also has B.Sc. in Zoology)
Dr. A.J. Monty White, Chemistry/Gas Kinetics
Dr. John Whitmore, Geologist/Paleontologist
Dr. Carl Wieland, Medical doctor
Dr. Lara Wieland, Medical doctor
Dr. Clifford Wilson, Psycholinguist and archaeologist
Dr. Kurt Wise, Palaeontologist
Dr. Bryant Wood, Creationist Archaeologist
Prof. Seoung-Hoon Yang, Physics
Dr. Thomas (Tong Y.) Yi, Ph.D., Creationist Aerospace & Mechanical Engineering
Dr. Ick-Dong Yoo, Genetics
Dr. Sung-Hee Yoon, Biology
Dr. Patrick Young, Chemist and Materials Scientist
Prof. Keun Bae Yu, Geography
Dr. Henry Zuill, Biology

LWW
03-23-2011, 02:55 PM
You might also want to check out Francis Collins.

llotter
03-23-2011, 03:10 PM
Thanks for putting that list in alphabetical order so that I can see where to insert my name. But, I don't have all that much confidence in the scientific community as an authority on much outside of their specific field. Most scientists are coerced into the Darwinist line if they hope to gain research funding.

cushioncrawler
03-23-2011, 04:16 PM
Pipple that beleev in God are either stupid or mad.
Dubb haz shown us that there are stupid scientists and mad scientists out there.
mac.

cushioncrawler
03-23-2011, 04:19 PM
And i feel sure that i az an amateur kood go throo every single one of the items referred to by Dubb and show that it iz bullshit.

Just off the top of my head the first that pops out iz the M-M speed of light stuff. M-M showed that the speed woznt constant.
A minor matter.
mac.

Mendel woz wrong.
Pastuer woz wrong.
And Darwin woz wrong.
They were all wrong.
Thats how science goze.
mac.

cushioncrawler
03-23-2011, 04:34 PM
In the oldendays allmost everyone woz a Godist.
But there are more Godists nowadays i would think.

Einstein's math and anyone else's math haznt proven anything. Math can never proov anything. Math iz a language, that iz all. Its az stupid az me saying i can proov something by speaking Polish.
And Einstein's theorys etc werent theorys at all -- and they didnt explain anything at all.
A real theory hazta aktually say and show how and why something works like it works.
Giving a force or something a name eg Gravity duznt explain it at all. U might az well call it Mary.
And saying that Space-Time iz bent iz bullshit. Firstly it iz bullshit. And secondly it duznt aktually explain.
Dont get me started.
mac.

hondo
03-23-2011, 05:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Pipple that beleev in God are either stupid or mad.
Dubb haz shown us that there are stupid scientists and mad scientists out there.
mac. </div></div>

Now you've hurt my feelings.
Here it is, CC. One has a belief structure.
It is one's duty to investigate the truth.
Then you try it.
Does it work for you?
Are you continuing to be open to truth?
What's the big deal?

I have investigated.
I have been open to the possibilities.
It works for me.
Why are non-believers so determined to shatter one's belief?
THAT makes no sense.

JohnnyD
03-23-2011, 06:00 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=cushioncrawler]Pipple that beleev in God are either stupid or mad.
Dubb haz shown us that there are stupid scientists and mad scientists out there.
mac. </div></div>

Now you've hurt my feelings.
Here it is, CC. One has a belief structure.
It is one's duty to investigate the truth.
Then you try it.
Does it work for you?
Are you continuing to be open to truth?
What's the big deal?

I have investigated.
I have been open to the possibilities.
It works for me.
Why are non-believers so determined
It makes no sense that YOU lied.WHY DID YOU LIE.

JohnnyD
03-23-2011, 06:01 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Pipple that beleev in God are either stupid or mad.
Dubb haz shown us that there are stupid scientists and mad scientists out there.
mac. </div></div>

Now you've hurt my feelings.
Here it is, CC. One has a belief structure.
It is one's duty to investigate the truth.
Then you try it.
Does it work for you?
Are you continuing to be open to truth?
What's the big deal?

I have investigated.
I have been open to the possibilities.
It works for me.
Why are non-believers so determined to shatter one's belief?
THAT makes no sense. </div></div>
AND YOU of all people talking about TRUTH.LOL.

THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE.

wolfdancer
03-23-2011, 06:44 PM
I saw no reason for the pissant comments following your post.
He claims to be a true Christian, yet here he is mocking you, for you, defending your faith. If anybody ever had any suspicions, re: his "Jesus" claims....this should confirm them. He uses religion as a stage prop.

JohnnyD
03-23-2011, 06:46 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I saw no reason for the pissant comments following your post.
He claims to be a true Christian, yet here he is mocking you, for you, defending your faith. If anybody ever had any suspicions, re: his "Jesus" claims....this should confirm them. He uses religion as a stage prop. </div></div>
WHY did he lie?

WHY are you a racist and bigot?

hondo
03-23-2011, 06:54 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I saw no reason for the pissant comments following your post.
He claims to be a true Christian, yet here he is mocking you, for you, defending your faith. If anybody ever had any suspicions, re: his "Jesus" claims....this should confirm them. He uses religion as a stage prop. </div></div>

He is a phony.
When I stated that Christ was God in a post, he called me a liar.
He is a tool of Satan, spreading hate on this forum.
He gets angry when we talk of our love for Christ, Wolfie.
He is the deceiver.

All we can do is pray that God will remove the hate in his heart.
Meanwhile, I ignore him and let him trash every one of king dub's threads.
LOL! I may start posting on all of dub's threads just so the weasel can trash them.
Wouldn't that be a pizzer! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

JohnnyD
03-23-2011, 07:09 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I saw no reason for the pissant comments following your post.
He claims to be a true Christian, yet here he is mocking you, for you, defending your faith. If anybody ever had any suspicions, re: his "Jesus" claims....this should confirm them. He uses religion as a stage prop. </div></div>

He is a phony.
When I stated that Christ was God in a post, he called me a liar.
He is a tool of Satan, spreading hate on this forum.
He gets angry when we talk of our love for Christ, Wolfie.
He is the deceiver.

All we can do is pray that God will remove the hate in his heart.
Meanwhile, I ignore him and let him trash every one of king dub's threads.
LOL! I may start posting on all of dub's threads just so the weasel can trash them.
Wouldn't that be a pizzer! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif </div></div>
YOU have been busted.

WHY DID YOU LIE?To impress others of course.From your posts i see a very insecure person.A person who is wrapped up in themselves.YOU are a PRETENDOR AND LIAR.YOU are seeking recognition by being a FRAUD.YOU are emotionally crippled.
YOU fail to comprehend what the truth is.The truth will set you free.
YOU HAVE A DESTRUCTIVE NEED FOR RECOGNITION AND APPROVAL.


TEACHER &gt; FAILED.

cushioncrawler
03-23-2011, 07:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">.....Why are non-believers so determined to shatter one's belief? THAT makes no sense....</div></div>U speak the truth. It duznt make sense.
If i am korrekt, if Godists are stupid or mad, then it makes no sense to shatter their beleef. To do that i would havta somehow change their stupidity, or madness. Probly an impossibility.

If it were due to ignorance, then i would hav a chance. But it aint.
mac.

Qtec
03-23-2011, 07:39 PM
debunked (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ty1Bo6GmPqM)

Q

pooltchr
03-23-2011, 07:43 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Pipple that beleev in God are either stupid or mad.
Dubb haz shown us that there are stupid scientists and mad scientists out there.
mac. </div></div>

Now you've hurt my feelings.
Here it is, CC. One has a belief structure.
It is one's duty to investigate the truth.
Then you try it.
Does it work for you?
Are you continuing to be open to truth?
What's the big deal?

I have investigated.
I have been open to the possibilities.
It works for me.
Why are non-believers so determined to shatter one's belief?
THAT makes no sense. </div></div>

Hondo, this may have been one of your most lucid, well thought out, intelligent posts ever!

Steve

cushioncrawler
03-23-2011, 10:31 PM
The thing iz, in the oldendays men and women of means devoted 1/3 of their life to bible study, 1/3 to humanitarian works, 1/3 to science, and 1/3 to arithmetik.
mac.

wolfdancer
03-23-2011, 10:34 PM
Mac, that unintentionally read like Bush-onomics 101.....

hondo
03-23-2011, 10:34 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Pipple that beleev in God are either stupid or mad.
Dubb haz shown us that there are stupid scientists and mad scientists out there.
mac. </div></div>

Now you've hurt my feelings.
Here it is, CC. One has a belief structure.
It is one's duty to investigate the truth.
Then you try it.
Does it work for you?
Are you continuing to be open to truth?
What's the big deal?

I have investigated.
I have been open to the possibilities.
It works for me.
Why are non-believers so determined to shatter one's belief?
THAT makes no sense. </div></div>

Hondo, this may have been one of your most lucid, well thought out, intelligent posts ever!

Steve </div></div>

Thanks. Did you see johnny d.'s response to it?
Yet not a word of criticism from any of the klan to him?
Bloody hypocrites!

JohnnyD
03-23-2011, 10:38 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Mac, that unintentionally read like Bush-onomics 101..... </div></div>Uncalled for.There is no need to criticize others.

hondo
03-23-2011, 10:38 PM
And your king dub continues to praise him as a fine Christian.
It cheapens anything you guys say and make you appear to be phonies and hypocrites.
I know you'll fire back and say it's not your place to say anything to him , jennings, yet you have no problem criticising the posts of those you don't like.
Bloody hypocrite!

JohnnyD
03-23-2011, 10:39 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Pipple that beleev in God are either stupid or mad.
Dubb haz shown us that there are stupid scientists and mad scientists out there.
mac. </div></div>

Now you've hurt my feelings.
Here it is, CC. One has a belief structure.
It is one's duty to investigate the truth.
Then you try it.
Does it work for you?
Are you continuing to be open to truth?
What's the big deal?

I have investigated.
I have been open to the possibilities.
It works for me.
Why are non-believers so determined to shatter one's belief?
THAT makes no sense. </div></div>

Hondo, this may have been one of your most lucid, well thought out, intelligent posts ever!

Steve </div></div>

Thanks. Did you see johnny d.'s response to it?
Yet not a word of criticism from any of the klan to him?
Bloody hypocrites! </div></div>
I'll bet everybody seen how YOU lied.

PRETENDOR

JohnnyD
03-23-2011, 10:42 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And your king dub continues to praise him as a fine Christian.
It cheapens anything you guys say and make you appear to be phonies and hypocrites.
I know you'll fire back and say it's not your place to say anything to him , jennings, yet you have no problem criticising the posts of those you don't like.
Bloody hypocrite! </div></div>It cheapens YOU as a school teacher to talk the way you do.

hondo
03-23-2011, 10:49 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">.....Why are non-believers so determined to shatter one's belief? THAT makes no sense....</div></div>U speak the truth. It duznt make sense.
If i am korrekt, if Godists are stupid or mad, then it makes no sense to shatter their beleef. To do that i would havta somehow change their stupidity, or madness. Probly an impossibility.

If it were due to ignorance, then i would hav a chance. But it aint.
mac. </div></div>

You say stupidity: I say enlightenment.
Perhaps we're both right.
What we believe is our destiny.
While you rot in a cold grave with no consciousness
and johnny d. burns in Hell for the evil and hate he has spread on this forum, I might be sitting in the heavenly spheres
dining on rainbow trout and sipping Glenfiddich.

Ah, but wait! That can't be right!
You are an intelligent man and know without a shadow of a doubt
that the cold grave and the cease of consciousness awaits us all.
My bad!

hondo
03-23-2011, 10:53 PM
Hey, dub, you're a believer. Wonder if there are forums in Heaven?
If not, you might as well be in Hell with johnny d. Right?

And if there are forums in Heaven, dub, will you be a little nicer or continue to spread your sheet?

WWJD?

JohnnyD
03-23-2011, 10:58 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: cushioncrawler</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">.....Why are non-believers so determined to shatter one's belief? THAT makes no sense....</div></div>U speak the truth. It duznt make sense.
If i am korrekt, if Godists are stupid or mad, then it makes no sense to shatter their beleef. To do that i would havta somehow change their stupidity, or madness. Probly an impossibility.

If it were due to ignorance, then i would hav a chance. But it aint.
mac. </div></div>

You say stupidity: I say enlightenment.
Perhaps we're both right.
What we believe is our destiny.
While you rot in a cold grave with no consciousness
and johnny d. burns in Hell for the evil and hate he has spread on this forum, I might be sitting in the heavenly spheres
dining on rainbow trout and sipping Glenfiddich.

Ah, but wait! That can't be right!
You are an intelligent man and know without a shadow of a doubt
that the cold grave and the cease of consciousness awaits us all.
My bad! </div></div>
Stop the lies and you too can achieve heaven.Jesus loves you.BUT,stop the lies.

Why did you lie?

YOU have a destructive need for recognition and approval.

CALM DOWN.

BLOODY HYPOCRITE!

JohnnyD
03-23-2011, 10:59 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hey, dub, you're a believer. Wonder if there are forums in Heaven?
If not, you might as well be in Hell with johnny d. Right?

And if there are forums in Heaven, dub, will you be a little nicer or continue to spread your sheet?

WWJD? </div></div>LWW does not lie.

WHY DO YOU LIE?

BLOODY HYPOCRITE!

Soflasnapper
03-24-2011, 09:20 AM
Ok, you go from a list that has names of scientific giants so famous everyone may have heard of them, to a list that has names so obscure that nobody has ever heard of any of them?

I don't think that answered my question correctly.

But I appreciate the effort you made to go to some creationist site and copy and paste this list.

Soflasnapper
03-24-2011, 09:28 AM
Nice catch.

So this is a lieing list, in the service of God? Typical.

LWW
03-24-2011, 09:38 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ok, you go from a list that has names of scientific giants so famous everyone may have heard of them, to a list that has names so obscure that nobody has ever heard of any of them?

I don't think that answered my question correctly.

But I appreciate the effort you made to go to some creationist site and copy and paste this list.

</div></div>

Perhaps you asked your question incorrectly then.

But, what is your opinion of Francis Collins belief? Or, Einstein's for that matter?

Soflasnapper
03-27-2011, 02:46 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Ok, you go from a list that has names of scientific giants so famous everyone may have heard of them, to a list that has names so obscure that nobody has ever heard of any of them?

I don't think that answered my question correctly.

But I appreciate the effort you made to go to some creationist site and copy and paste this list.

</div></div>



Perhaps you asked your question incorrectly then.

But, what is your opinion of Francis Collins belief? Or, Einstein's for that matter? </div></div>

Collins is a former self-admitted atheist who has become a believer in God. Good for her! I share her newer belief.

However, as is the case with former one things who convert to latter other things (think ex-smokers), such people tend to go to a fanatic extreme of their new belief.

Fact is, evolution has long been harmonized with a belief in God, dating from Tielhard de Chardin at the latest. There is no contradiction in saying God is in charge, AND that he uses natural selection and evolution as his mechanism, as even the Roman Catholic Church has been saying for decades.

Einstein, while an amazing genius, is a little far-afield from his area of specialty when he opines on biological topics. If you saw the movie 2012, the representation there that he backed up Hapgood's thesis of crustal movements of thousands of miles happens to be exactly true (Einstein wrote the approving forward for that book, just as they said in the movie). I take all his views as interesting, and worthy of consideration, but realize that they are less authoritative and less due deference as one veers from his area of specialty.

pooltchr
03-27-2011, 03:05 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Fact is, evolution has long been harmonized with a belief in God, dating from Tielhard de Chardin at the latest. There is no contradiction in saying God is in charge, AND that he uses natural selection and evolution as his mechanism, as even the Roman Catholic Church has been saying for decades.

</div></div>

I totally agree. This is the point that so many in the anti-creationist group fail to understand. The two theories are not mutually exclusive.

(and, just a minor pet peeve of mine, but when refering to God, the pronouns He and His should be capitalized)

But, again, thank you for making a point that I have been trying to make for years.

Steve

LWW
03-27-2011, 03:38 PM
First, she is a he.

Second, Collins doesn't disbelieve in evolution.

Soflasnapper
03-27-2011, 03:56 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">First, she is a he.

Second, Collins doesn't disbelieve in evolution. </div></div>

Good first point, and thanks for that correction.

Confusing second point, and if that is so, what are you doing citing him in this creationist camp?

Is his position like mine and Steve's, then?

LWW
03-27-2011, 09:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">First, she is a he.

Second, Collins doesn't disbelieve in evolution. </div></div>

Good first point, and thanks for that correction.

Confusing second point, and if that is so, what are you doing citing him in this creationist camp?

Is his position like mine and Steve's, then? </div></div>

Why are you assuming that a belief in a creation conflicts with a belief in evolution?

cushioncrawler
03-28-2011, 12:43 AM
Aktually evolution woz a Godist term. Darwin kept well kleer of it at first, certainly untill about Edition 5.
mac.

Soflasnapper
03-28-2011, 01:03 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">First, she is a he.

Second, Collins doesn't disbelieve in evolution. </div></div>

Good first point, and thanks for that correction.

Confusing second point, and if that is so, what are you doing citing him in this creationist camp?

Is his position like mine and Steve's, then? </div></div>

Why are you assuming that a belief in a creation conflicts with a belief in evolution? </div></div>

I plainly do not assume that. I just explained why that notion is false. I am rather assuming that the more modern people you have mentioned share the views of those people you started the post by listing.

If they don't, I don't get your point, assuming you had one.

cushioncrawler
03-28-2011, 02:53 AM
If thems oldendays fellas kame back today, would they be creationists.
If they were in the usofa, praps.
If not in the usofa, nuh.
mac.

LWW
03-28-2011, 03:35 AM
The cabal could learn something about deflection from you.

This started with your assumption that essentially zero modern scientists believe in creation.

Next we will here how you were actually referring to rice growing techniques in Cambodia or something?

Let me ask you a simple question ... do you or do you not believe that the universe had a moment of creation?

Soflasnapper
03-28-2011, 08:34 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The cabal could learn something about deflection from you.

This started with your assumption that essentially zero modern scientists believe in creation.

Next we will here how you were actually referring to rice growing techniques in Cambodia or something?

Let me ask you a simple question ... do you or do you not believe that the universe had a moment of creation? </div></div>

I've been posting under the assumption that I knew what you meant by 'creationists.' This:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Creationism is the religious belief[1] that humanity, life, the Earth, and the universe are the creation of a supernatural being. As science developed from the 18th century onwards, various views developed which aimed to reconcile science with the Genesis creation narrative.[2] At this time those holding that species had been separately created were generally called "advocates of creation" but they were occasionally called "creationists" in private correspondence between Charles Darwin and his friends. As the creation–evolution controversy developed, the term "anti-evolutionists" became more common, then in 1929 in the United States the term "creationism" first became specifically associated with Christian fundamentalist opposition to human evolution and belief in a young Earth, though its usage was contested by other groups, such as old earth creationists and evolutionary creationists, who believed in various concepts of creation.[3] Today, the American Scientific Affiliation and the UK-based Christians in Science recognize that there are different opinions among creationists on the method of creation, while acknowledging unity on the Christian belief that God "created the universe."[4][5][6]</div></div>

As is frequently the case, you evidently are not referring to the common meaning, and specifically are now talking about 'creation' of the world, rather than 'creationism' (denying that species arrive from common ancestors via mutation and natural selection).

I have already mentioned in another thread of yours that I lean toward Fred Hoyle's steady state theory of the universe over the Big Bang theory, and I'm unable to work out a way for that version to have any 'moment of creation,' except as a way to re-ignite matter out of the cold state of entropy death. Isaac Asimov had a short story to this effect.

Whatever may have happened to jump start it all, I think the physical universe as we know it now is the end result of a kind of physical evolution, through the evolution of the stars, from first inchoate dust clouds accreting to sufficient mass to begin nuclear fusion, their cycling through the various nuclear fuel reactions to create the heavier elements, their dispersal through novae and super-novae, and then the re-accretion of such heavier elements into the kinds of planets we see.

I do not believe the earth was fully formed exactly as we see it now, but was formless and void, molten and hot until some billions of years passed from its origins and it gradually became how it is now.

As to biology, I do not believe species came about fully formed and with all the variation we see now, but began in common primitive ancestors, and then evolved and split paths into the phyla we find today.

cushioncrawler
03-29-2011, 03:08 AM
I googled hoyle. I think i like fred, but he woz a bit loopy.
Me, myself, i too dont beleev in The Big Bang.
I dont even beleev in A Big Bang.
Steady State sits better with aether theory i think.
Fred's probability calculations for evolution are louzy.
mac.

Qtec
03-29-2011, 04:18 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">During an appearance on HBO's "Real Time with Bill Maher" on Friday night, Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.) stated clearly that he does not believe in the process of evolution.

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>"I believe I came from God, not from a monkey so the answer is no," he said, laughing, when asked if he subscribes to the theory. Later in the segment he added, "I don't believe that a creature crawled out of the sea and became a human being one day."</span>

According to a Gallup poll released last month, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>40 percent of Americans believe God is responsible for creating human life <u>in its current form</u> roughly 10,000 years ago.</span>

The survey found that 52 percent of Republicans believe in creationism. 34 percent of Democrats and independents maintain the same view, the poll showed. An excerpt of analysis from Gallup: </div></div>
link (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/30/jack-kingston-evolution_n_815909.html)

Creationists, as described above, believe in the Bible's view of creation. If you believe in evolution , guided by God's hand, then you are not a Creationist.

Its guys like Kingston who are the problem. If he is right, every branch of science has it wrong.

Q

LWW
03-29-2011, 04:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have already mentioned in another thread of yours that I lean toward Fred Hoyle's steady state theory of the universe over the Big Bang theory, and I'm unable to work out a way for that version to have any 'moment of creation,' except as a way to re-ignite matter out of the cold state of entropy death. Isaac Asimov had a short story to this effect.

Whatever may have happened to jump start it all, I think the physical universe as we know it now is the end result of a kind of physical evolution, through the evolution of the stars, from first inchoate dust clouds accreting to sufficient mass to begin nuclear fusion, their cycling through the various nuclear fuel reactions to create the heavier elements, their dispersal through novae and super-novae, and then the re-accretion of such heavier elements into the kinds of planets we see.
</div></div>

You are arguing with yourself again.

Hoyle argued for an eternal universe and against chemical evolution.

Hoyle also was never able to come up with a sensible explanation for Hubble's discoveries.

Have you?

Qtec
03-29-2011, 05:26 AM
check this out (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnMORjrs_eU&feature=fvwrel)

Q

LWW
03-29-2011, 05:33 AM
And it cracks me up that as proof that other dimensions of existence don't exist ... he presents evidence that other dimensions of existence do in fact exist.

Doublethink is in fact a fascinating mental disorder.