All you knew about Creationism! Debunked!

Originally posted by jedimiller

Created by evolutionists, atheists..to prove God wrong?

The problem is hearing all the scientist try and describe their enemy like Bush does with the war on terror.

Who are we fighting...Bush speaking.."terrorisssssssss.." tongue retracts back snapping in the wind.

Scientists say; them oh them, "crazy creationists," they think the world is only six thousand years old, what monkeys they must be, the little people swinging from the trees.

The evolutionists can not define the creationist any more than the creationist can define the evolutionists, both ideas have millions of permutations that are believed to be a part of the definition of each idea.

If you have several religions which have varying definitions of how creation was accomplished, then which should we accept as the official creationist definition?

The one they invent?

Like Bush invents the terrorist booogy man or one which can be applied to nature to produce a measurable definable effect in the shape of reality?

If a man is with God, God is with the man, the hand of the Lord is upon the face and the forehead for all to behold whereby the eyes may be open, where by the eyes may be closed.

The spirit that drives this anger is like nothing I have experienced.

It all serves as evidence for the side which says human nature should not be trusted, that corruption for self flows in the blood of men as much as honor for self.

Our blood is daily weighed in a balance, and daily found wanting, in the rising and falling of the days there comes a time when our share is required for satisfaction of the offenses of our flesh and the flesh of our fathers..

We all know the Spirit of the Lord will not always abide men.

Only the corruption can save us now.

The God man will come to save us, He comes to save and to destroy.

He comes born of a woman, begotten of God, of honor, the Messiah.

He comes born of a cow, begotten of hell, or corruptions, apoleia.

1Jo 2:18 ¶ Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

The question is not do I believe God is infallible the question is do you?

Hybrid Species

/399dk9

[edit on 2-4-2008 by newday]

Originally posted by dave420
Next to electric aliens, this is one of the most ridiculous "theories" I've ever come across. There's absolutely no evidence that suggests it's real, just the poster's obvious ignorance to what a fossil is, and how fossils are created.

A fossil bone is a rock. chemically in everyway. Gemwolf said that already. So I'm right about that. Show me a bone that's 10,000 years old that shows actual bone. You wont find one.

this could be the most ridiculous theory you ever heard..Welcome to ATS.

Originally posted by newday
The problem is hearing all the scientist try and describe their enemy like Bush does with the war on terror.

Who are we fighting...Bush speaking.."terrorisssssssss.." tongue retracts back snapping in the wind.

Scientists say; them oh them, "crazy creationists," they think the world is only six thousand years old, what monkeys they must be, the little people swinging from the trees.

You make alot of sense. Scientists are always trying to come up with ways to debunk God. Same way bush uses terrorists to get his ways. I believe archeologits, palentologists etc. used their methods to create these false fossil bones to prove the theory of evolution. They will do anything to prove genesis wrong as well, I wouldn't be surprised if a scientist came out to say that god is not real and that he can prove it by showing us some fake bone person from 60 million years ago. it's all very possible now. what do you think?

Originally posted by jedimiller
A fossil bone is a rock. chemically in everyway. Gemwolf said that already. So I'm right about that. Show me a bone that's 10,000 years old that shows actual bone. You wont find one.

That's not entirely true. This is where Compression Fossils come into the picture...

A compression fossil is a fossil preserved in sedimentary rock that has undergone physical compression. While it is uncommon to find animals preserved as good compression fossils, it is very common to find plants preserved this way. The reason for this is that physical compression of the rock often leads to distortion of the fossil.

Examples:
Google Book
Article
See also National Geographic's Dino Autopsy

jedimiller i've never heard such a theory. i don't want to call you any names or insult you but in my mind i feel like you are trying to be controversial. is this an attempt at humor?

reply to post by Brain Damaged


I'm going to second Brain Damaged on this idea...this thread reeks of an April Fool's 'joke'....not a very funny one, at that.

WW

reply to post by Gemwolf


Keep in mind to that recent finds have shown that at the center of some fossil bones there is still remnants of soft tissue. There was a thread on here about it. Keep in mind the tissue was crystallized, it wasn't soft, however they were able to remove the crystallization and get to the proteins that remained. Even before these were found they were able to pull incomplete DNA from fossils. So, while they are rock, parts of them still contain organic compounds.
There are also dinosaur mummies, where the softer tissues were preserved like mummification, and then fossilized themselves (if I understand the process, I've just started reading about them.)
reply to post by weedwhacker


i'd like to agree with the April first bit, but this fellow is getting some noteriety for posting threads similar in content and style to this.

[edit on 2-4-2008 by RuneSpider]

Jedi, who sculptured these tree fossils 5 kilometers inside the mountain?

Originally posted by jedimiller

I believe archeologits, palentologists etc. used their methods to create these false fossil bones to prove the theory of evolution.

wrong post

[edit on 2-4-2008 by newday]

Jedimiller...I want to say nice try but this really isn't.

However your thread title is quite ambitious so I'll give you credit for attempting such a difficult feat, yet stopping very short of the goal.

I grew up in West Virginia. There are many coal mines around me as we technically lived in the mountains. As a child my friends and I would climb down the mountains through the woods and into the valley where there would be piles of coal fragments and various other types of rock the miners had dug up and piled in various places. I suppose they weren't useful but I am not sure as I don't know much about mining.

These were HUGE stacks set across from some railroad tracks. Huge...like "hills and mountains to climb" huge.

We would go there specifically because we knew we'd find fossils. We always did.

Fossilized plants were the most common but every now and then we'd find tiny animal bones. No one was excavating anything there. No scientist was there to discovery anything let alone look for something. It was just mounds of rocks and curious kids.

Dude...we found many fossils that we just took home. Now who went down there and planted all of those things that was left in the middle of nowhere for no apparent reason?

Fossils are real mate. It's not a conspiracy to debunk God.

Sheesh...now you have me wondering if my parents kept all those rocks we kept bringing home.

P.S. Kudos to Gemwolf for taking the time to find those very interesting links and info.

- Lee

Originally posted by Gemwolf

A compression fossil is a fossil preserved in sedimentary rock that has undergone physical compression. While it is uncommon to find animals preserved as good compression fossils, it is very common to find plants preserved this way. The reason for this is that physical compression of the rock often leads to distortion of the fossil.

Ah...I believe this is what we used to find then.
As I said it was usually plants and leaves.

reply to post by lee anoma


Great post, lee...

My take? It's an April Fool's joke, and not very funny at all.

Happy Spring!!!

WW

Wow, this isn't a reach at all, someone smell troll?

Oh well, I like those pics from the mine, thats really cool.

I could buy into the theory, except I remembered a story from a while ago that stuck in my head because I thought "Jurassic Park" the first time I read the headline.

Here's a link to the article, it discusses the discovery of soft tissue in a dinosaur bone that is said to be 68 million years old.

www.sciencedaily.com...

How does this fit in with the theory?

reply to post by HaTaX


Good find, HaTaX

I still think this is a really bad April Fool's joke.....

WW

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by HaTaX

 

Good find, HaTaX

I still think this is a really bad April Fool's joke.....

WW

I believe the april fool's joke should have been done 1 of april ?

This thread makes me realise that there's a flawed way in how ATS' enemy list works - I couldn't understand why this thread was starting of off nothing, untill I realised the OP is on my enemies list..

And with good reason, as I can deduct from all the answers..

Originally posted by tep200377

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by HaTaX

 

I still think this is a really bad April Fool's joke.....
WW

I believe the april fool's joke should have been done 1 of april ?

I advice you to look up the other threads the OP has started. Many of them are right out ridiculous IMHO, and from that I believe this thread is quite serious on his behalf.

[edit on 3/4/08 by Thain Esh Kelch]

reply to post by WatchNLearn

The Creationist based their argument that the earth in young (approx. 6000 years old) thus no fossils or dinosaurs etc. are real. This ridiculous calculation was first put forward Dr. John Lightfoot (1602-1675) then later by James Ussher (1581-1656), Archbishop of Armagh.

NO WHERE in the bible does it say the world is 6000 years old. This is a completely arbitrary age made up by these crack pots with an agenda.

Really couldn't have said it better. Even though I am a creationist, I believe the Earth is somewhere around 4 billion years old via carbon dating. Without carbon dating we have civilizations in the Indus valley dating around 9000 BC with evidence of destruction by a thermonuclear event. So I guess that kills the 6000 year idea right there. Unless someone carved them there bones and added radiation to them causing a reading 50 time higher than background radiation.

What about coalified foot prints, bones and other things? Were they also carved out of coal to look like bones and foot prints? Now is there a bunch of Chinese paleontologists carving rocks in the Gobi desert to look like bones? Give me a brake.

reply to post by tep200377


tep, just my theory.

I see the OP posted at 0556 EDT (my time zone) 2 Apr, and I also know (from other threads) that the OP lives in the Pacific Time Zone...so just guessing he had the idea on 1 Apr, and got around to posting shortly after midnight, his time....just supposin', that's all.

WW

Like As-ho-les, everyone has an "Opinion" and their agendas to resist change,resist anything that flies in the face of what they believe, want to believe and need to believe in order to function in this world. These are the same people who repress others; the same people who support Popes and Religious dogmas; the same people who can be cops and jailers and solders who kill innocent women and children calling themselves patriots..the same people who will pass a poor starving soul along the side of the road and do nothing...these are the self serving and the reason why humans life span has to be so short why the good die young because only lies, cheats, thieves, betrayers and baby killers can survive long in such a world. It is he "Heart Of Darkness" that must exist to give contrast to what is good. It is one of the things I look to and convinces me that there is reincarnations, as I feel sure many were bugs and fish in their past lives. Mankind and its civilizations have risen and been destroyed many times and so will this civilization. It is our Karma.