Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Creation Museum Sparks Evolution Debate
RedNova ^ | 22 May 2005 | Staff

Posted on 05/23/2005 3:29:06 AM PDT by PatrickHenry

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 681-684 next last
To: Junior

He'll claim that links to such papers were presented in a previous post, which he'll reference. When you point out that there were no links in that post, he'll tell you to read it again. Later, he'll deny ever making such a claim.


121 posted on 05/23/2005 9:32:05 AM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro

"People with any brains and any interest in living in an educated society will not stand for this foolishness."

Intriguing statement. So you will buy the blue states votes by muzzling the First Amendment expressions of Bible-believing Creationists (whom you believe are uneducated, brainless fools)?

Welcome to the Brave New World of VadeRetro?


122 posted on 05/23/2005 9:33:00 AM PDT by ColoCdn (Neco eos omnes, Deus suos agnoset)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: ColoCdn
It does have everything to do with avoiding the responsibility of explaining Mr. Fraud Protsch.

What on earth are you babbling about? The explanation for him is that he's a charlatan. Yes, shocking as this revelation may seem to you, charlatans exist.

This sweeping under the rug of "well, isn't it nice that science showed that science was wrong" is awfully convenient.

Science didn't show that science was wrong. Please refer back to my post #110 about this statement. What science showed was that a scientist was wrong. To be more precise, it showed that a scientist probably fabricated claims.

If you're going to call Christians to task for the Ken Ham's of the world, you've got to answer for the Prof. Protsch's.

You have your answer, and only in your fevered imagination was anyone evading it.

123 posted on 05/23/2005 9:34:53 AM PDT by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: nmh
Obviously the Hebrew in Genesis is over your pointed little empty head. But that doesn't stop you from advertising your dumbness.

Nice "Christ-like" ad hominem attack, there, Brother! </SARCASM> I'm sure our Lord is proud of you for that one!

I firmly believe that God Almighty DID create all there is -- and that Genesis I describes his mighty works perfectly well. All I did was describe your misinterpretation of the Hebrew "yom" -- which leads you to to assume a nasty and aggressive posture of defense of your sinfully puny opinion of the majesty of our Creator and His works.

BTW, you never responded to my #50. FYI, all but two of those "spots" are not stars, but galaxies at least as large as the one of which our Solar system is but an significant speck.

And don't give me the "We and Earth must be the center of God's Ceation, because he sent His Son here to save us" bit.

I praise the Lord that He did come to save you (and me) -- but he did so because we were sinners...not because this miniscule corner of His creation is "special".

124 posted on 05/23/2005 9:35:21 AM PDT by TXnMA (ATTN, ACLU & NAACP: There's no constitutionally protected right to NOT be offended -- Shove It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: From many - one.

But not by you. How do you explain the scientific climate that allowed such a fraud to be accepted dogma in evo texts, and became a significant 'branch' overnight, when science is supposed to be so dogged about it's 'peer review'?

I'd love to hear your explanation.


125 posted on 05/23/2005 9:35:29 AM PDT by ColoCdn (Neco eos omnes, Deus suos agnoset)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: ColoCdn
Couldn't find a better rebuttal, eh?

You just can't stand that, unlike creationists, scientists who accept evolution don't tolerate lies from their colleagues.
126 posted on 05/23/2005 9:35:34 AM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv

Read post #125, and jump in on your detailed explanation, if you wish. The more the merrier.


127 posted on 05/23/2005 9:36:43 AM PDT by ColoCdn (Neco eos omnes, Deus suos agnoset)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: blowfish

nmh is a known liar, hence his demonstratably false claims. See my previous post for a past example of his shameless dishonesty.


128 posted on 05/23/2005 9:37:16 AM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: ColoCdn
So you will buy the blue states votes by muzzling the First Amendment expressions of Bible-believing Creationists (whom you believe are uneducated, brainless fools)?

Did somebody violate the poor baby's First Amendment wights? How? By saying the poor baby didden tell da twoof?

Who is muzzling you? You make claims. The claims are exposed as false. You come back dumb as a stump on another thread with the same BS. And so proceed.

That is the nature of the contest: whether a lie truly can circle the world while the truth is pulling its boots on. I might be tempted to muzzle you, but I can only show the lurkers that there are no good pennies in the little piggy bank of creation/ID mantras.

129 posted on 05/23/2005 9:38:51 AM PDT by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: TXnMA
Please describe how your "six 'yom' -- 6000 years ago" viewpoint explains this:

I beleive in a God that created this universe from nothing. Those that want to believe that the universe created itself, and that they are descendents of slime can celebrate their beliefs as well.

130 posted on 05/23/2005 9:39:33 AM PDT by 4CJ (||) OUR sins put Him on that cross. HIS love for us kept Him there.(||)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio

Hey Dimensio, how's it going?

I haven't been on one of the threads in a while. Good to see you're still pulling for your home team.

That's an odd, unfounded claim you've made, isn't it? Have you ever asked my opinion on whether I put up with Christian frauds? Have you ever read anything in any of my numerous threads that would indicate that?

Then why, in the name of intellectual honesty, would you promulgate a lie in the form of an accusation?


131 posted on 05/23/2005 9:39:58 AM PDT by ColoCdn (Neco eos omnes, Deus suos agnoset)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro

Tsk, tsk, tsk.

We need to go to the 'quiet time' corner, so we can let all of our feelings out without disrupting the class.

It's fascinating that you admit the truth of my suspicion when you said "...I might be tempted to muzzle you,..."

That's how totalitarianism is conceived.


132 posted on 05/23/2005 9:42:19 AM PDT by ColoCdn (Neco eos omnes, Deus suos agnoset)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: ColoCdn
Have you ever asked my opinion on whether I put up with Christian frauds? Have you ever read anything in any of my numerous threads that would indicate that?

We should remember all the times you've exposed creationist frauds. Since nobody thus far seems to, it should be a trivial exercise to link some of the many cases of this.

133 posted on 05/23/2005 9:43:41 AM PDT by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: ColoCdn
It's fascinating that you admit the truth of my suspicion when you said "...I might be tempted to muzzle you,..."

I suspect you'd make a crappy King of the Universe as well. Fact remains, your complaint is something that never happened.

134 posted on 05/23/2005 9:44:54 AM PDT by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: wallcrawlr
I disagree. Its entirely from a lack of civility.

I am all for civility, and I try to keep my cutting remarks to a minimum, but neither side is particularly innocent of offense. However, I do not believe if these threads were made more polite through agressive moderation that they would attract more than a minority of posters.

135 posted on 05/23/2005 9:45:15 AM PDT by Liberal Classic (No better friend, no worse enemy. Semper Fi.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: ColoCdn

You've heard it, you just don't like it.

He got away with it for a while, then got caught. System works. It's also self correcting. His stuff won't be in new books nor will it be referenced in new articles.

Scientists recognize the fact of bias, human error and human frailty. We correct mstakes as fast as we find them. We also don't care. If it was one time carelessness, grants diminish or disappear; if it was fraud, jobs do. Speed of acknowledging error and working on corrections helps a bit if it was carelessness. Done. Next.


136 posted on 05/23/2005 9:45:16 AM PDT by From many - one.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: ColoCdn
That's an odd, unfounded claim you've made, isn't it? Have you ever asked my opinion on whether I put up with Christian frauds?

You're right, I apologize for being so presumptious. It's just that I've seen so few creationists call other creationists to task on demonstratable lies that I've gotten into the habit of assuming -- because it tends to be a safe bet -- that a given creationist doesn't care when his or her colleagues lie.

So tell me, what do you think of known liars-for-creationism here on FR such as Matchett-PI and nmh?
137 posted on 05/23/2005 9:45:28 AM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro

And your answer to my question was...................................................................................?

(still waiting)


138 posted on 05/23/2005 9:46:01 AM PDT by ColoCdn (Neco eos omnes, Deus suos agnoset)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: ColoCdn
How do you explain the scientific climate that allowed such a fraud to be accepted dogma in evo texts, and became a significant 'branch' overnight, when science is supposed to be so dogged about it's 'peer review'?

Like pretty much any other field, someone who is determined to misuse his 'authority' will be able to do so for a time. Your utterly bankrupt argument can be exposed quite easily by analogy: Bill Clinton's misdeeds as president were not an indictment of the presidency or of our constitutional system, but rather an indictment of the man.

This scientist obviously made a name for himself by conducting proper science, and then misused the authority he'd thereby been granted for whatever unknown reason (perhaps for personal renown, or perhaps for nationalistic reason, or whatever).

139 posted on 05/23/2005 9:47:13 AM PDT by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio

I wait with bated breath. Whatever that means.


140 posted on 05/23/2005 9:52:03 AM PDT by Liberal Classic (No better friend, no worse enemy. Semper Fi.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 681-684 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson