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.

 

Creation vs Evolution Debate

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 12:25 PM
link   
I've only been on the this forum for 2 two days and see that God and Creation is kind of a hot topic.
I personally believe in Creation and I'm constantly see people making false assuming about it.
Creation is NOT all faith based there is science behind it, and evidence to support it. Many people aren't aware of this however because it's not taught in school and doesn't come up much in church. Never the less there is a science to support it.

I think if anybody wants to debate it seriously they should look at both side before choosing one. In another post somewhere I link to video which debates Creation vs Evolution. I'm going to link it here too so people can find easier. It's about 2 hours long and is very entertaining even if you on the evolution side of the fence.

And an awesome plus is the debate is with that jerk Michael Shermer from Skeptic magazine, he lost. I like seeing Mickey lose.

Anyway before debating the fact take some time look at them. Let the video run in the background for two hours while at work or where ever.

It's worth it, if only to watch Michael Shermer lose.


Google Video Link



[edit on 2-8-2007 by ebe51]




posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by ebe51
And an awesome plus is the debate is with that jerk Michael Shermer from Skeptic magazine, he lost. I like seeing Mickey lose.[edit on 2-8-2007 by ebe51]


I dont like this michael either, he is just a debunker, not skeptical at all. I am just listening to michael debate stanton friedman last night on c2c. Michael just does not want to believe anything.
No wonder america is spiritually inept country, with people like him there.



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 01:38 PM
link   
I can't watch the video now, I'm working. But no one has told me the scientific version of congregationalism or ID. The question on my mind though is who is the no-supernatural creator(s). Once the become supernatural, it is no longer science. I've heard ideas(not even a theory) that it was aliens and/or us from the future, but those always involve us influencing evolution, not creating life from scratch.

Will this video attempt to give me a scientific creator? or should i not bother watching it when i get home?



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThaDewd
I can't watch the video now, I'm working. But no one has told me the scientific version of congregationalism or ID. The question on my mind though is who is the no-supernatural creator(s). Once the become supernatural, it is no longer science. I've heard ideas(not even a theory) that it was aliens and/or us from the future, but those always involve us influencing evolution, not creating life from scratch.

Will this video attempt to give me a scientific creator? or should i not bother watching it when i get home?



This video is as debate between Evolution and the Bible's accounts for Creation. It will explain why Evolution is not a good theory and why Creation per the bible is a better way to go using observed evidence.

As an example you will here about trees found standing up right in Earth layers which by evolution should have took billions of years to form. Yet, trees want stand up for billions of year while waiting for the dirt to pile up. A tree should fall and rot.

That's one of many many topic he debates with Mick Shermer.



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 01:57 PM
link   
its times like these i like to quote slayer "i keep the bible in a pool of blood so that none of its lies can affect me"...charming.

but seriously now, god created a man and a woman and they had 3 sons...now, the sons had children of they'r own...how? unless eve aged well but even still...EW...and if that doesnt grab you how about noah, his wife and 3 sons the only survivors of the human race...where did we all come from? incest is not a good basis for the creation of our "great" species! so evolution it is, but, being the argumentative type, i totally believe we started out as monkey's and the universe was created in the big bang, what always stumps me is...where did the stuff that went bang come from in the first place? and i still have no explaination for the platapus



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Many of your questions are answered in the video.



posted on Aug, 2 2007 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by ebe51


As an example you will here about trees found standing up right in Earth layers which by evolution should have took billions of years to form. Yet, trees want stand up for billions of year while waiting for the dirt to pile up. A tree should fall and rot.



perhaps, if we didnt cut them down, a tree will survive for that long, the flora and fauna were very different that long ago, the fossilisation of plant matter could be explained by the good ol' meteorite strike theory. or it could just be the worlds most lethargic tree. i cant comment for sure as i wasnt there, just a theory. i will watch the video when i have a spare 5 mins.



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 07:59 AM
link   
it's kent hovind, an outright liar and fraud. need proof to back up that claim?
www.kent-hovind.com...

and... how exactly did shermer lose? it's clear that hovind lost, seeing as he has no science to back up anything he says...

anyway, hovind is an outright fool. there's a reason he's in jail right now...

[edit on 8/3/07 by madnessinmysoul]



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 09:17 AM
link   
Yeap his in jail for tax related charges. I knew this, yet it doesn't take away from the information provided.

I only linked the video as a starting point. There is allot of info out there that backs creation.

So putting his tax problems aside what within the video was a lie? I would really like know because I've much of this stuff on my own, and though I don't agree with everything most of he provided looks to be factual.

Post edit:

I know there are allot of personal attacks on people such as Kent, I don't care! I want get to the science behind it. I don't care if he maked 2 billion dollars a year, or if he doing the neighbor chick.

I just want debate the claims made. If there is something non-factual in the claims I want to debate it.




[edit on 3-8-2007 by ebe51]



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 09:26 AM
link   
51, i provided a link that has all of hovind's lies in one spot. just look through it. i can't list every single thing because i'm not going to bother re-watching it (just watching it once gave me a .ache from stupidity exposure). there is absolutely no evidence to support creationism. in fact, if there was evidence i'd be one of the first people to openly embrace it.



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by ebe51
Yeap his in jail for tax related charges. I knew this, yet it doesn't take away from the information provided.



Hang on. He was put in Jail for a maximum sentence of TWO HUNDRED AND EIGHTY EIGHT YEARS.

For scamming money from speeches and videos promoting creation science.

Two words: Snake Oil.

He took a lot of money by telling people exactly what they wanted to hear. And then he tried to do a runner with $70,000 yanked from Dino-Land or whatever it was called.

Snake Oil.

Wake up.




[Edit: sorry, he was facing 288 years, and he got 10. WTF is with the US court system? ]

[edit on 3-8-2007 by vox2442]



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
51, i provided a link that has all of hovind's lies in one spot. just look through it. i can't list every single thing because i'm not going to bother re-watching it (just watching it once gave me a .ache from stupidity exposure). there is absolutely no evidence to support creationism. in fact, if there was evidence i'd be one of the first people to openly embrace it.


I looked through many of them (not all of them) they were mostly personal attacks on him. Which one would be the best to debunk his claims?

I'll look through and give my honest opinion.



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Not only is Kent Hovind a total fraud, he hasn't even got a degree in biology. In fact I wonder if he can even understand high school science books...

[edit on 3-8-2007 by DarkSide]



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 09:37 AM
link   
Also kent was the only video I could find, and videos are more entertaining then endless web-site reading.

There are many web-sites they aren't sponsored by Kent. Do you want to go that route instead, sense you don't like Kent?

[edit on 3-8-2007 by ebe51]



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by ebe51
Also kent was the only video I could find, and videos are more entertaining then endless web-site reading.

There are many web-sites they aren't sponsored by Kent. Do you want to go that route instead, sent you don't like Kent?


How much do their videos cost?



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 09:43 AM
link   
It's free off google video and his web-site....

BUT WAIT, were getting off topic. I already said I don't care about personal stuff, he can be smoking crack with a hooker for all I care.

I want to debate the scientific evidence he provide.



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by ebe51
It's free off google video and his web-site....

BUT WAIT, were getting off topic. I already said I don't care about personal stuff, he can be smoking crack with a hooker for all I care.

I want to debate the scientific evidence he provide.


Yeah, I get that. But think about this rationally for a second.

How much money can be made by going to small towns around the country and giving people a good plain spoken speech that re-enforces everything that people want to hear?

Saying things like: "they believe that we came from rocks!" is a gross oversimplification of the debate, and bending terms and definitions to the point that one might call it lying. Another might call it Bovine Excrement. Or Snake Oil. But it sells. People link to the google vid and then pay to see him speak next time he`s in town.

Because it`s easy, and because you have a lot of people standing up and telling you that it`s the Right Thing To Do.

If a used car salesman told you that Japanese Cars are inferior because they are made by non-Christians and therefore against God, would you buy a car from him?

Or would you quietly back away, taking care not to make any sudden movements?



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 10:26 AM
link   
I aint standin for this

I dont have too much scientific fact about creation but i have some

And i have a whole bunch of logic for debating about the bible to prove that it is true

almost everyone here is against you ebe51 But i am here with you and so is God



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Saying things like: "they believe that we came from rocks!" is a gross oversimplification of the debate, and bending terms and definitions to the point that one might call it lying.


Again I think your taking from the attention of why I put the thread here. I didn't want to debate Kent, I want to debate the science behind creation.

As far oversimplification... it's a debate and it goes both ways. Evolutions do same. But you know what, you do bring a good point and a place to actually start talking the claim.

If not rocks, what do you believe?



posted on Aug, 3 2007 @ 10:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by pumert
I aint standin for this

I dont have too much scientific fact about creation but i have some

And i have a whole bunch of logic for debating about the bible to prove that it is true

almost everyone here is against you ebe51 But i am here with you and so is God


I`m not against ebe51, nor am I against you. I`m pulling for you, in fact. I mean that in all sincerity.

People are making a ton of money from this Creation Science stuff. they`re getting your dollars, they`re getting your votes. You`re being taken.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join