Is There Evidence for Creationism? Show it to us.

a reply to: Boadicea

"Secular fundamentalists"? LOL!

"Your honour, I would like to raise the 'I know you are, but what am I?' defence".

Are you actually going to come back at me with an argument, or are you going to take your ball and go home?

Yes, creationists STILL try and have evolution banned or creationism taught alongside it.

Yes, religious bigots STILL fight progressive social change.


You gonna stay on topic and post evidence for creationism? Or continue to derail the thread?

a reply to: GetHyped

If you want to take the word of a blogger over scientific journals like Icarus so be it.

The idea of the thread was to share evidences, not proofs.


Neither of us can do cartwheels yet Hyped, so don't start throwing stones in your own glass house.

The evidence for creation is that the universe even exists to begin with; that a big bang even happened.

You can flip the logic because according to physics, # can't just spring out of thin air (in opposition to creationism).

Well, if that's true, then why is there anything at all, such as matter, planets, stars, even the vacuum of space? Oh, the Big Bang you say. This happened, then that, over billions of years. Okay, I agree. But before that, how did the first matter ever form? It's not logically explainable, which is why the Big Bang theory even exists; which is why this thread exists.

So then, # can spontaneously form out of thin air through some complex process called the Big Bang, but God can't do it. If # can't be spontaneously created ever, then all matter which exists has always existed, for infinity.

Either something can come out of nothing, or it can't. If it can't, why does anything exist, ever? The space in which matter sits in the form of beings and objects, how did the space form. It always was there, infinity eons ago? Was it there before the "Big Bang"?

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

A paper published in a MATHEMATICS journal, not a biology journal.

Pz Myers is an EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGIST. Care to address his arguments...?

originally posted by: Raggedyman
About as much as there is for evolution

I'll save you the trouble of doing the research yourself. See the link below. Does Creationism have over 156,000+ research papers published anywhere on this planet? No. Of course, like others on this board, I am quite sure you will choose to ignore the hard evidence for evolution. But that's okay - I believe in survival of the fittest and natural selection - the Creationist genome, should one evolve through mutational error, will not be passed to future generations via the gene pool - that you can be certain of. Nature has a way of correcting itself.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

A paper published in a MATHEMATICS journal, not a biology journal.

Pz Myers is an EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGIST. Care to address his arguments...?

Ehhh, wrong...
You're discussing the first link I shared.

The second link is all science, Hyped.

www.sciencedirect.com...

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

I'm discussing the second link. Did you even read my link?? Care to address an EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGIST's takedown of the crappy paper?

Creationists: "Here's a crappy paper that supports creationism!"

Everyone else: "its a crappy study for these reasons [...]. Here's some solid scientific evidence for evolution instead"

Creationists: "the... the.. science is wrong! It's a lie!!"

Riiiiiiiiiight

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: Boadicea

"Secular fundamentalists"? LOL!

"Your honour, I would like to raise the 'I know you are, but what am I?' defence".

I'll see your "LOL!" and raise you a "hahahahahahaha!!!" Yes, secular fundamentalists who try just as hard to impose their faith-free philosophy on people of faith. What? Turnabout's not fair play? Only the godless can use such terms???

Are you actually going to come back at me with an argument, or are you going to take your ball and go home?

Well, I'm still here (much to your chagrin, I'm sure!) and what am I to argue? I asked questions, you answered. You can believe as you wish. I have no desire to force my views on you.... I'm just wondering why you/the OP/others want to force their views on me/others.

Yes, creationists STILL try and have evolution banned...

Okay. I said I'd take your word for it.

...or creationism taught alongside it.

And that's a problem for you? Why? After millions of people for thousands of years have believed in creationism, teaching kids that people believe in creationism is going to destroy society and mankind as we know it? I don't think so.

Yes, religious bigots STILL fight progressive social change.

And? So? How does that pertain to the OP wherein a "progressive" is challenging the religious?

You gonna stay on topic and post evidence for creationism? Or continue to derail the thread?

Um, actually, I directly addressed the OP in my first response with my "evidence" (or lack therof), and then asked my own question of the OP... how is that an issue for you? Are you the OP's gatekeeper? And for the record, I am not the one derailing the thread with off-topics like gay marriage and what not. Nor was I rude and insulting to you. I have kept my comments focused on evolution and creationism. But if you think I'm violating T&Cs, you'd better run quick like a bunny and tell the Mods so they can do their stuff.

a reply to: spygeek
Nothing does not exist, if it did, it would be a something. That is, there is no nothing or nowhere from which to create, so what does exist must have always existed in some form or another, and that means eternity.

Causation, cause and effect - it cannot come from eternity - it must be initiated - cause must be the effect of something without a cause. The only thing that can do that is will.

Will does not come from causation, causation comes from will. Causation is determined will.

To will you must be aware of what to will.

That is the logical truth, to see it you need only the faith to recognize it.

You think forces assembled, by happenstance, thereby developing a force which then went on to be able to control its on forces, will its own forces? No, you were willed all along.

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

I'm discussing the second link. Did you even read my link?? Care to address an EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGIST's takedown of the crappy paper?

Creationists: "Here's a crappy paper that supports creationism!"

Everyone else: "its a crappy study for these reasons [...]. Here's some solid scientific evidence for evolution instead"

Creationists: "the... the.. science is wrong! It's a lie!!"

Riiiiiiiiiight

You're getting ahead of yourself.

All you've shared is a blogger's opinion on a study they had no involvement in whatsoever.
I have no interest in their title as an evolutionary biologist because that's not how they present themselves...

They present themselves as a "Godless liberal" and any bias goes out the window with that asseveration.

Find me an article from Icarus that updates us by debunking the theory, or wallow in the ignorance of one uninvolved man's opinion.

a reply to: spygeek

Oh believe me. I was following a similar train of thought when I wrote my thread too. It's just not going to work. The Creationists you are trying to address argue along different rules of debate than most people do. It's impossible to get them to admit their hypocrisies or fallacies.

a reply to: Boadicea

Yes, getting nonsense such as creationism taught alongside evolution in a science class is a bad thing. It is not science and has no place there.

No, asking fundamentalists to substantiate their claims is not a form of bigotory. Seriously, does this really need to be said??

Yes, you are continuing the derail the thread.

Do you have evidence for creationism? If yes, great! Post it. If no, find another thread to contribute to where you can do so in an on-topic manner.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

That blogger is an EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGIST.

I can only assume you cannot address his rebuttal.

a reply to: spygeek

Yes

Detailed accounts reaching back closer to the period of creation exist in
ancient literature.



Despite any distaste one may have for it's religious context this is evidence.

a reply to: Bleeeeep

Factual/scientific content: 0

originally posted by: Boadicea

originally posted by: GetHyped

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: spygeek
Here's my question: Why do you care what I believe? How is it any skin off your back if I believe in creationism? I don't care why you believe in evolution but not creationism. Neither one of us can unequivocally prove either creationism or evolution. So what's the point? (Other than to poke and provoke those who do believe of course).

I am seriously asking. Why do you care? Should I just dismiss such questions as an effort to poke and provoke those who dare to believe differently than you? Or is there a practical purpose for your question?

Because religious fundamentalists can't keep their noses out of other people's business. Trying to bam the teaching of evolution, trying to ban gay marriage and so on.

THAT'S why.

Soooooo... secular fundamentalists have to return the favor and stick their noses in other people's business? That fixes everything???

I haven't heard of anyone trying to ban the teaching of evolution since last century (Scopes Monkey Trial), but I will take your word for it... I have however heard of many trying to ban the teaching of creationism this century. Who is actually bullying who here???

As for gay marriage, what does that have to do with evolution and creationism?

If religious fundamentalists are wrong for sticking their noses in other people's business, how is it okay for other people to stick their noses in religious fundementalists' business?

Creationism is to be taught in religious classes alongside other stories from the bible. It has nothing to do with Science, and therefore it is idiotic to teach alongside scientific theories.

Inspired by an identically titled thread of the opposite position.

And when I do this on ATS, my thread gets taken down.

a reply to: GetHyped

I care not for his uninvolved opinion...

What's so hard to accept?

Does it irk you that I won't accept some bloggers opinion?
When he had no involvement in the study that Icarus shared with the scientific community?

That's a personal problem for you, pal.

a reply to: GetHyped

Science can only measure physicality. We must assume the rest. Science, it cannot even tell what these words mean. It can only measure their width and height. That is a fact.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

It's OK to f you can't address the rebuttal. There's nothing wrong with holding your hands up and ducking out. But at least have a try! Don't just go "LA LA LA CAN'T HEAR YOU".

Are you going to address an EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGIST's rebuttal or not? Yes/no (delete as applicable).