It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Institute for Creation Research - No really, it's a thing.

page: 1
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+1 more 
posted on May, 13 2015 @ 05:37 AM
link   
Official ICR Website.

So I'm going to start this thread with a little bit of information. I was reading a story this morning titled:Duggar family member: ‘All science’ points to creationism being true, and this 'institute' came up.

I thought it was the one run by Ken Ham, you know the guy that thinks that the Big Bang Theory is false, because, we weren't there to see it happen, but no, it's another beast.

Wikipedia


The Institute for Creation Research (ICR) is a Christian Creationist apologetics institute in Dallas, Texas that specializes in education, research, and media promotion of creation science and the Genesis creation narrative as a historical event. The ICR adopts the Bible as an inerrant and literal documentary of scientific and historical fact as well as religious and moral truths, and espouses a Young Earth creationist worldview.[3] It rejects evolutionary biology, which it views as a corrupting moral and social influence and threat to religious belief.[4] The ICR was formed by Henry M. Morris in 1972 following an organizational split with the Creation Science Research Center (CSRC).[5]


Now these people use 'peer review' studies, to come to these sorts of conclusions:


These simulations showed that increased sea-surface temperature following the Genesis Flood was the likely cause of the ice age. Heavy snow occurred in the mountains of the western United States and in northeastern North America which explain past glaciation found in these locations. Hypercanes and enhanced nor’easters were fueled by the warm oceans and the deserts of Egypt, Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Creationism. Pittsburgh, PA: Creation Science Fellowship Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Israel, Iraq, and Iran would have likely been much wetter for years after the Genesis Flood.


Which in itself is mind boggling because the last Ice Age, would have occured, 4000 years before the Earth was made, according to them, but hey, look they have 'science' and stuff!

I bring you back to the original article I was discussing earlier:


In a video uploaded to YouTube, Seewald asked the institute’s Dr. Jason Lisle if he could prove that God existed.

Lisle explained to the 19 Kids and Counting star that atheists don’t really exist at all. “The evidence of God is ubiquitous. It is everywhere,” he told Seewald. “In fact, Roman 1 tells us that God has revealed himself to everyone, and what that means is, there is really no such thing as an atheist.”


So, how do we prove this? We use the following type of logical fallacies:





And when all else fails and even your own argue against your ideas, you go to this one:



So, finally, the last part of the article says this:


“I know there is also a lot of scientific evidence, we are here at the Institute for Creation Research, and there is a lot of — really, all science points to the validation of the Genesis account,” Seewald said.


No it doesn't. Most, if not all of the actual science, says that Genesis is a load a bullocks. That's not an opinion, it's the view of millions, upon millions of scientists, all around the world.

I guess my question is, aren't Christians tired of being treated like you're an idiot? Can you honestly believe that something like the Genesis account is LITERAL and 100% true account of Earth's creation? Aren't you tired of people claiming to know what God wants, meant or is doing?

Even the bloody Roman Catholic Church admits that science and religion can go hand in hand, and that things like aliens and the big bang theory do not exclude God from the equation, nor is their doctrine threatened by it.

~Tenth




posted on May, 13 2015 @ 05:54 AM
link   
So instead you bash the YEC and put all your faith in current scientific paradigm? Sounds progressive. Maybe quit pointing fingers and treating people like subhumans for daring to think against the mainstream. In 100 years, odds are our entire notion of the "Big Bang" will have adapted and changed, rendering what you know now ignorant.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 06:02 AM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify


In 100 years, odds are our entire notion of the "Big Bang" will have adapted and changed, rendering what you know now ignorant.


And yet we still won't be saying that Earth is only 6000 years old...


So instead you bash the YEC and put all your faith in current scientific paradigm?


Yes.

The world NEVER moved anywhere but forward when we looked and trusted science. Science is nothing but our best guess at this current time. Of course it's best to follow it, as opposed to things we know are NOT true, due to the current science paradigm.

Sure lots of nasty stuff has come out science, and the same is true for religion.


Maybe quit pointing fingers and treating people like subhumans for daring to think against the mainstream.


And there lies the problem. Somehow, the 'mainstream', is something to be scoffed at. Where does all this anti-intellectualism come from with these people?

I haven't treated anybody like subhumans, I made no mention of their character, I simply asked why you are allowing people, who are lying to you effectively, to keep doing so without you asking them to stop. I'm asking you why you allow them to treat you like subhuman morons, when anybody can study these things for a short period of time and realize how wrong they are.

As the millions of scientists I mentioned above have as well.

~Tenth



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 06:07 AM
link   
a reply to: tothetenthpower

I'm a Christian, and I'm not tired of being treated like an idiot. I don't even know where these YEC exist. Seems like a giant strawman used to rip apart Christian beliefs and is a total bastardization towards interpreting Genesis. Why do they get so much attention? I've yet to meet one person who believes this in real life. And if they did, so what?

It is quite amusing to observe science become a religion, and see its followers squirm when pointed out. No, this doesn't mean I reject science. It means I don't subscribe to all of its tenants, until proven fact



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 06:11 AM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify


It is quite amusing to observe science become a religion, and see its followers squirm when pointed out.


I actually agree with you. I don't consider science to be a religion, I'm simply choosing to believe what millions of peer reviewed studies and scientists have to say on the matter.


No, this doesn't mean I reject science. It means I don't subscribe to all of its tenants, until proven fact


Me too, and what has been proven, I believe in. I don't for example take everything the LHC says as fact, because that's super new and not peer reviewed.


I'm a Christian, and I'm not tired of being treated like an idiot.


You aren't? I would be. Poor Christians are probably one of the most pandered to group of people. And they just expect you to fall in line with whatever nonsense they put up.

~Tenth



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 06:13 AM
link   
a reply to: bobbypurify

Some 46% of Americans are creationists: www.gallup.com...

But please stop trying to turn this into a "vs. Christians" issue. It's not. There are plenty of Christians who accept the findings of science.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 06:23 AM
link   
First, I expect a lot more than 46% are creationists. Second, if you follow the truth, you will be, too. A lot of top scientists are creationists. You may be confusing hard science with soft science. There is almost no hard science to support an old universe. Big bang? Big bust. Big bang was based on Hubble's discoveries. He found the expansion of the universe, and said there were two possibilities: either it was created (and we can't have that), or it started from nothing by itself. Had we taken both as possible, we would be on the right track to finding the solution. Now, hard science shows that the Milky Way is at the center of the universe (quantum red shift).

The only way for science to reconcile the discoveries of hard science is to create imaginary solutions: dark matter, dark energy, multiverse, etc. It is highly likely that these solutions will never be proven, and can therefore be considered to be faith-based.

Therefore, your world view will dictate how you interpret the facts. You can believe a drawing of a cave man, or you can believe the hard science. IMHO, scientists are firing those who believe in creation, and reject any evidences for creation. The Bible said this would happen, and said it 2000 years ago.
edit on 5/13/2015 by Jim Scott because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 06:23 AM
link   
a reply to: GetHyped

I wish they did a some sort of chart to see where these 1024 respondents came from and how they answered. Maybe the Bible Belt believes in 10,000 year old earth. Time isn't designated towards creation in the bible, at least in a empirical sense. So I don't know why people give a number to it.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 06:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify
So instead you bash the YEC and put all your faith in current scientific paradigm? Sounds progressive. Maybe quit pointing fingers and treating people like subhumans for daring to think against the mainstream. In 100 years, odds are our entire notion of the "Big Bang" will have adapted and changed, rendering what you know now ignorant.


Wait, they lie and claim all scientist are supporting genesis, yet you see problem to someone calling them lairs and call this bashing?! Seriously?

What would you call people believing in fairy tales from bronze age??

No faith involved in science, just pure data, observations and repeatable experiments...

On the other hand, large amount of faith are required to eat this cake presented by OP, and somehow I have this feeling even you claim not to believe the same, you have issue with people calling it for what really it is?!

You don't have a problem that their teaching will create scientifically illiterate kids?! IMHO this is abuse of children, what do you think??


a reply to: Jim Scott

If 7% is a A LOT top scientist, then yes, A LOT, 7% of top scientist are creationist?!
Claim without supporting evidence is just claim, just what whole talk about so called 'holly books' is...

edit on 13-5-2015 by SuperFrog because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 06:39 AM
link   
a reply to: SuperFrog

Not an abuse of children at all. Where is this being taught? And why are you sending your children there? Send them to a public school where you can get all the state-sponsored science and history



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 06:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify
a reply to: SuperFrog

Not an abuse of children at all. Where is this being taught? And why are you sending your children there? Send them to a public school where you can get all the state-sponsored science and history


Did you even read OP post or you are just responding to title of OP???


In a video uploaded to YouTube, Seewald asked the institute’s Dr. Jason Lisle if he could prove that God existed.

Lisle explained to the 19 Kids and Counting star that atheists don’t really exist at all. “The evidence of God is ubiquitous. It is everywhere,” he told Seewald. “In fact, Roman 1 tells us that God has revealed himself to everyone, and what that means is, there is really no such thing as an atheist.”



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 06:47 AM
link   
a reply to: SuperFrog

I'm responding to you. Is it an abuse to have a different worldview and interpretation of life than the mainstream? You can think whatever you want about anyone but claiming they're abusing their children for not aligning with your worldview? I'll leave that particular judgment to you



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 06:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Jim Scott




He found the expansion of the universe, and said there were two possibilities: either it was created (and we can't have that), or it started from nothing by itself


Both theories say everything came from nothing.

The difference is one group says god did it. The other group says we don't know how the universe started, but because we have made these observations, this could be what happened.

I choose to be on the side that's more intellectually honest.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 06:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobbypurify
a reply to: SuperFrog

I'm responding to you. Is it an abuse to have a different worldview and interpretation of life than the mainstream? You can think whatever you want about anyone but claiming they're abusing their children for not aligning with your worldview? I'll leave that particular judgment to you



First of all, it is no 'world view' in question, but misinterpretation of FACTS, and as I said earlier, a lie because we know that only 7% of top scientist are RELIGIOUS (so not even all of them are creationist, they just believe in personal god). So yes, feeding children lies and present it like something it is not is dishonesty and abuse.

It is just interesting that lies don't worry you, and here we point to facts about lies in what they tell, did not even have to quote 'material' (read holy book) yet....
edit on 13-5-2015 by SuperFrog because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 07:01 AM
link   
a reply to: tothetenthpower

You just heard about these guys? They are a riot aren't they? I've been linked to more than a few ICR "studies" while debating evolution and creationism on these boards so I have already familiarized myself with their idiocy. Though discovering them is like discovering the Creation Museum and seeing all the blatant idiocy on display. Then you look around and discover that there are people taking that crap seriously and you silently weep for humanity.




posted on May, 13 2015 @ 07:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Jim Scott

Dude, your killing my perspective of Cali being one of the most rational and progressive places on earth, with that blind faith based post of yours.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 07:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: CoherentlyConfused

Both theories say everything came from nothing.


Can you prove that? Because last I checked, the Big Bang Theory doesn't say that at all.


The difference is one group says god did it. The other group says we don't know how the universe started, but because we have made these observations, this could be what happened.


More like one group says god did it then that same group invents a strawman to make the scientific theory sound more ridiculous so people don't believe it is true despite all the evidence saying it is. You know like you just did in this post?


I choose to be on the side that's more intellectually honest.


Apparently not... About Big Bang Theory



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 07:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I was generalizing. I understand that the BBT doesn't say everything came from nothing.

I was trying to point out that it's amusingly hypocritical that some groups of folks believe god just willed everything into existence, *poof* like magic, then in the same breath, thinks its ridiculous to believe everything came from nothing. (When in reality, that's not even what the BBT says, which makes it even more ridiculous.)



edit on 13-5-2015 by CoherentlyConfused because: (clarifying, hopefully)

edit on 13-5-2015 by CoherentlyConfused because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: CoherentlyConfused

Ok then. Nevermind.

edit on 13-5-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 08:51 AM
link   
Yes, it's absolutely insane. S&F'd.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join