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.

 

Creationists, what is your case for proving creationism?

page: 8
9
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 08:35 AM
link   
Im just too darn pretty to be a great ape


As for the whole dawkins thing,i think he realised when the question was asked he was being setup.There are multiple answers for the question.One being as someone replied autism,atleast i think i read that.Edited: Was the video doctored?



[edit on 30-8-2009 by Solomons]




posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mike_A
This is a topic for those creationists on here who believe that creationism is just as scientifically valid as evolution.

As per the title, without referring to the theory of evolution or any religious text, please can you set out your scientific hypothesis, along with the relevant supporting evidence, as to how life on Earth came to be?


You might not believe the Bible, but I do. And I believe it gives me the right basis to understand this universe and correctly interpret the facts around me. I’m going to give you some examples of how building my thinking on the Bible explains the world and is not contradicted by science.
I can of course do this with numerous scientific examples, showing, for example, how the issue of sin and judgment is relevant to geology and fossil evidence; how the Fall of man, with the subsequent Curse on creation, makes sense of the evidence of harmful mutations, violence, and death; or how the original “kinds” of animals gave rise to the wide variety of animals we see today.


For instance, the Bible states that God made distinct kinds of animals and plants. Let me show you what happens when I build my thinking on this presupposition. I will illustrate how processes such as natural selection, genetic drift, etc. can be explained and interpreted. You will see how the science of genetics makes sense based upon the Bible. Evolutionists believe in natural selection—that is real science, as you observe it happening. Well, creationists also believe in natural selection. Evolutionists accept the science of genetics—well, so do creationists.
However, here is the difference: evolutionists believe that, over millions of years, one kind of animal has changed into a totally different kind. However, creationists, based on the Bible’s account of origins, believe that God created separate kinds of animals and plants to reproduce their own kind; therefore, one kind will not turn into a totally different kind. Now this can be tested in the present. The scientific observations support the creationist interpretation that the changes we see are not creating new information. The changes are all within the originally created pool of information of that kind—sorting, shuffling or degrading it. The creationist account of history, based on the Bible, provides the correct basis to interpret the evidence of the present; and real science confirms the interpretation.

Reference:
www.answersingenesis.org...



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 09:18 AM
link   
Could the Christians please just post what they believe without chastising others for not believing as they do?

Thank you.



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 11:31 AM
link   
Why are so many people unable to understand simple English? I don’t mean this to sound too harsh but I made it very clear in the first post that this was a thread for creationists who think the idea is compatible with science to put forward a scientific argument and that it is not meant to be another evolution vs creationism debate. Yet people are still making posts trying to disprove evolution, saying that creationism is just faith or that science is just faith. This thread is NOT for those arguments.

I think it’s telling that the vast majority are unable to stick to making an argument for their own belief and would rather attack rivals that might show them to be wrong. If your belief is correct it should be able to stand alone on its own basis.



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mike_A
reply to post by peaceonearth
 


That's not the point. The argument made in the video was that complexity cannot come from something less complex. It doesn’t matter if the starting point is designed or created by chance, so long as there are basic rules then very complex systems can arise.


And my point is, not without some kind of intelligence behind it.

My main thesis is that something cannot sprout from nothing, that chance alone cannot create the complexity we know as reality.

Just the pure fact that there is more beneath the surface of reality than we are even able to perceive/comprehend, should lend the idea that there is some form of intelligence or force within the Universe that guides life/existence along.

How many tries would it take for some random chance happening to create a set of guidelines/patterns that evolution/creation could follow to sprout and maintain life throughout the entire Universe?

Trial and error would imply that some form of intelligence lies behind reality/creation. I mean, why would the attempt even be made, if there was no form of consciousness or intelligence?

Either way you put it, there must be some kind of intelligence behind the Universe, it is that simple. I mean, we barely know ourselves, yet we are confident to state that there is no higher power, or intelligent design within the Universe (we aren't even a level 1 civilization yet we have the tenacity to say that there is no God - even though he has revealed his presence to us amany of times). Can we even define intelligence? How are we to know that consciousness does not exist everywhere, and is a universal standard?

Intelligence does not equate to wisdom or spiritual awareness.

How do you explain spiritual awareness, the capacity to see beyond the everyday facade of life, to peer into one's own soul and seek the answers one desires?

What if science has it wrong, and the true answer to life and her mysteries does not lie in the external world - in facts, figures, and physical proof/reality (which is suggested to be a meer illusion anyways), but in the internal world of the mind, heart, and soul?

What if the answers lie within US and not outside?

Explain why there are differing levels of consciousness and awareness, why even the most intelligent man may not be aware of intuition or the spiritual reality?

If the physical world is a hologram, if reality is an illusion - than that would leave only one main constant that really matters in this reality/experience - and that is the soul and the soul's journey. Lessons and experience.

There are those on this earth who would like to devoid you of your spiritual nature, be wary of those in power - they are not leading you in the right direction nor revealing any signifcant truth of reality to you. They keep us in the dark.



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by pdpayne0418

Originally posted by havok
The only evidence that I can give is the notion that everything is in perfect balance. With outer space, if you look around, there is calm, and chaos.

Harmony. The notion of perfection is evidence enough for me to believe creationism. Look around. Well, look around at nature. It is perfect, down to the smallest neurons, and sub-particles. Everything is controlled by some force, or some energy. Thats the Creator.

Better?


If you think that Nature is perfect, then you're either living in a different Universe than most of us, or you're extremely sheltered.

Peace,
Daniel


Can you please point out some of these imperfections?

I have not seen any as of yet.



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 03:57 PM
link   
heheh well you know, evolution isn't a complete theory either you know.. but yeah I suppose a lot of us have moved beyond religion, and I did that a very long time ago


Remember, just because creationism may or may not be a crock of # does not effect whether ultimate immaterial beings do not exist, given that physics masters are now saying material matter could make up as little as 7% of it.

Be intelligent, be agnostic, and a realist, as a scientist - the entropic limitations set out by thermal dynamics do not allow us to analyze that problem properly at least


and well, yeah i have a deep respect for spiritualism and creationism, but to the people going around claiming dinosaurs are a figment of imagination are as bad as the scientists who declare themselves atheist, it's based on ignorance, not real science in the case of assuming godlike ability to judge a godlike dilemma existing without the parameters of requirements thermodynamically/energetically(does god exist?), or fact in the case of the many excavated dinosaur remains known to man(dinosaurs dont exist?).

Thanks for the question ;p


A

ps; dawkins lovers, eat your hearts out. atheism is `wrong` as much and like creationism is right.,



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mike_A
Why are so many people unable to understand simple English? I don’t mean this to sound too harsh but I made it very clear in the first post that this was a thread for creationists who think the idea is compatible with science to put forward a scientific argument and that it is not meant to be another evolution vs creationism debate. Yet people are still making posts trying to disprove evolution, saying that creationism is just faith or that science is just faith. This thread is NOT for those arguments.

I think it’s telling that the vast majority are unable to stick to making an argument for their own belief and would rather attack rivals that might show them to be wrong. If your belief is correct it should be able to stand alone on its own basis.



If you're so damn smart then you know perfectly well that there isn't a material proof of God OR ELSE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE ALREADY

duh



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by habfan1968

Originally posted by pdpayne0418

Originally posted by havok
The only evidence that I can give is the notion that everything is in perfect balance. With outer space, if you look around, there is calm, and chaos.

Harmony. The notion of perfection is evidence enough for me to believe creationism. Look around. Well, look around at nature. It is perfect, down to the smallest neurons, and sub-particles. Everything is controlled by some force, or some energy. Thats the Creator.

Better?


If you think that Nature is perfect, then you're either living in a different Universe than most of us, or you're extremely sheltered.

Peace,
Daniel


Can you please point out some of these imperfections?

I have not seen any as of yet.


Of course these would only be imperfections if a "loving" Creator is behind His "good" creation. From a naturalist perspective, it's perfectly normal. These links should get you started, and don't even think about blaming these things on "sin."

Parasites 1

Parasites 2

Parasites 3

Ebola

Rabies

Taxoplasmosis

Intestinal Parasites

Genetic Disorders



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mike_A
Why are so many people unable to understand simple English? I don’t mean this to sound too harsh but I made it very clear in the first post that this was a thread for creationists who think the idea is compatible with science to put forward a scientific argument and that it is not meant to be another evolution vs creationism debate. Yet people are still making posts trying to disprove evolution, saying that creationism is just faith or that science is just faith. This thread is NOT for those arguments.

I think it’s telling that the vast majority are unable to stick to making an argument for their own belief and would rather attack rivals that might show them to be wrong. If your belief is correct it should be able to stand alone on its own basis.



We cannot meet your request because we start with a different perception than you do. What man calls science cannot even start to compare to God or explain his creation or eternal life. See we humans have such a limited ability to comprehend that we cannot put it into concievable words. We both have the same information we simply see that information differently. You see fossils as proof of mans evolution and we see it as proof of creation. It is the same "scientific data" you precieve it one way and we precieve it another. That is as simple as I can put it to you for you to understand. We cannot possibly compare mans understanding to God's. Does that mean we are wrong? Does that mean you are wrong? I suppose we will see in the near future.
The only way you could ever in a million years comprehend what we know is to change your preception. Become a believer, admit you are wrong, confess your sins and declare God as your creator and Jesus as your savior, throw away all preconcieved notions of human logic and pray your guts out, fast then read the Bible as if you never knew anything about it before then you will have an opening and everything will make since EVERYTHING. It is so awsume you will fall to your knees and have knowlegde beyond anything man could ever imagine. We cannot gift it to you we cannot explain it to you, you have to experience it. Do you understand?



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Mike_A
 

Oh PS your little evil man creeps me out every time I look at it. I dislike it very much.



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Melissa101
 


Wow. Just wow. That second paragraph is probably the most arrogant piece of drivel I've read in a long while. So much for humble Jesus, meek and mild I suppose.

Peace,
Daniel



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mike_A
Why are so many people unable to understand simple English? I don’t mean this to sound too harsh but I made it very clear in the first post that this was a thread for creationists who think the idea is compatible with science to put forward a scientific argument and that it is not meant to be another evolution vs creationism debate. Yet people are still making posts trying to disprove evolution, saying that creationism is just faith or that science is just faith. This thread is NOT for those arguments.

I think it’s telling that the vast majority are unable to stick to making an argument for their own belief and would rather attack rivals that might show them to be wrong. If your belief is correct it should be able to stand alone on its own basis.

What you are asking for is impossible even from the most intelligent of us, the debate goes both ways and cannot be proved or disproved either way.

Indulge me for a minute though?

Sit down in room by yourself and imagine something you have not seen heard or smelled before.(pretty tough to do)

Close your eyes and imagine something, now, look at the intricacies of what you have imagined.

Now build what you have imagined.

There are no supplies, no materials for you to build what you have imagined but in your mind it's beautiful and you will not rest until it is built.









posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by pdpayne0418

Originally posted by habfan1968

Originally posted by pdpayne0418

Originally posted by havok
The only evidence that I can give is the notion that everything is in perfect balance. With outer space, if you look around, there is calm, and chaos.

Harmony. The notion of perfection is evidence enough for me to believe creationism. Look around. Well, look around at nature. It is perfect, down to the smallest neurons, and sub-particles. Everything is controlled by some force, or some energy. Thats the Creator.

Better?


If you think that Nature is perfect, then you're either living in a different Universe than most of us, or you're extremely sheltered.

Peace,
Daniel


Can you please point out some of these imperfections?

I have not seen any as of yet.


Of course these would only be imperfections if a "loving" Creator is behind His "good" creation. From a naturalist perspective, it's perfectly normal. These links should get you started, and don't even think about blaming these things on "sin."

Parasites 1

Parasites 2

Parasites 3

Ebola

Rabies

Taxoplasmosis

Intestinal Parasites

Genetic Disorders



These supposed imperfections are based on someone's perception of perfection, would you agree with that.?



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by solomons path
 



I stopped watching when he talked about virus adapting to their environment. That's exactly what evolution is. Mutation or not, it's still evolving to survive the changes taking place. And if a mutation is harmful to a species and it dies out . . . that's still evolution. Evolution isn't linear, like the creationist like to make it out.
i thought the video explained it well enough.i guess i 'll have to
say it my way. God encoded adaptation in our DNA. there's no proof of evolution to this day. plenty of proof for adaptation though.
great video btw.



So . . . your god encoded principals of Evolutionary Biology (genetics) in our DNA? Yet, there is no proof of evolution. So, in essence, you are denying your god's work?

And there is mountains of proof of evolution . . . EVERYTHING we have learned from the study of genetics backs the theory of evolution. Genetics wasn't known to Darwin, yet a hundred years later, genetics supports all of his findings. Wouldn't you think genetics would falsify Darwin's observations, if he was totally wrong?

Since creationist can't think for themselves and critically analyze data that doesn't come from YouTube . . . here's a video for you. It's about the Dover School Board trial. It shows pretty clear that there is no evidence for ID/creationism . . . also, has testimony refuting the "no proof of evolution" claim, so popular with creationists. I hope you actually watch it with a critical eye . . . but, I'm sure you'll just come back to tell me about the "good news".

PBS - Dover School Board on Trial

So, eight pages in and not one shread of physical evidence to back any creationist claims . . . just "what's wrong with evolution". Unfortunately, you can't prove anything by disproving a totally separate entity. As the OP stated, if it is true . . . it should be able to stand on it's own merits without attacking differing views or resorting to ad hom attacks.



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 06:21 PM
link   
I would like to point out (Again) this film "Expelled No intelligence required" it explains it all for those who want to know. www.expelledthemovie.com...

A certain group of people have gained control and want to further their ideas and protect their beliefs, even though these beliefs are not based on true science.

[edit on 30-8-2009 by peaceonearth]



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by habfan1968

These supposed imperfections are based on someone's perception of perfection, would you agree with that.?


Thank you for falsifying another tenant of creationism. Creationists often state that evolution is false because "mutations" are never beneficial and that we are in a steady decline since the creator's perfect creation. However, this is nothing more than a value judgement and neither falsifies evolution, nor shows proof of creation.

I know you thought this quote was a knock on evolution, but Evolutionary Biology doesn't deal in value judgements. However, creationism/ID is based solely on value judgements and faith.

Thank you for denying ignorance and showing us why creationist claims fall flat!



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by habfan1968
 


That's basically what I said in my first couple of sentences. These examples are only problems for people coming into this argument with an idea of good, loving God who created a good creation.

Peace,
Daniel



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by peaceonearth
 


I've watched that movie 4 times now . . . which is total propaganda bought and payed for by the Discovery Institute in Redmond.

Numerous people interviewed for the movie have since complained about the "creative" editing done to their portions - making it seem as if they support the notion of ID or taking their answers out of context to paint the picture of bias and supression.

Here's one . . .
Propaganda hits the silver screen



posted on Aug, 30 2009 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by solomons path

Originally posted by habfan1968

These supposed imperfections are based on someone's perception of perfection, would you agree with that.?


Thank you for falsifying another tenant of creationism. Creationists often state that evolution is false because "mutations" are never beneficial and that we are in a steady decline since the creator's perfect creation. However, this is nothing more than a value judgement and neither falsifies evolution, nor shows proof of creation.

I know you thought this quote was a knock on evolution, but Evolutionary Biology doesn't deal in value judgements. However, creationism/ID is based solely on value judgements and faith.

Thank you for denying ignorance and showing us why creationist claims fall flat!


Thank you for not answering the questioned posed in my post!

You should not suppose to know me as I would not suppose to know you or any intent you have by a post. However it would be fair to answer the question. By whose measure are you identifying perfection?



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join