Gotta go, I'll check the trhread later. I'll leave you to your um.. morning coffee.
Posted on 06/17/2007 6:54:37 PM PDT by Rodney King
Why I believe in Creation Posted: December 17, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern
I was stunned the other day when I asked evolution-believing listeners to my nationally syndicated radio show to call in and tell me why they believed.
"Just give me one reason why you accept the theory," I said. "Just give me the strongest argument. You don't have to give me mountains of evidence. Just tell me why I should accept it."
Not one evolutionist called in.
Meanwhile, the phone banks lit up with dozens of evolution skeptics.
Go figure. For more than 40 years, evolution has been taught as fact in government schools to generations of children, yet there is still widespread skepticism, if not cynicism, about the theory across the country.
But, because of political correctness and the fear of ostracism, most people are afraid to admit what they believe about our origins. That's why I wrote my last column – "I believe in Creation."
The reaction to it has been unprecedented. While I expected mostly negative fallout, most letters have been quite positive.
So, I decided to take this issue a step further. Since the evolutionists don't want to tell me why they believe in their theory, I figured I would explain why I believe in mine.
The primary reason I believe, of course, is because the Bible tells me so. That's good enough for me, because I haven't found the Bible to be wrong about anything else.
But what about the worldly evidence?
The evolutionists insist the dinosaurs lived millions and millions of years ago and became extinct long before man walked the planet.
I don't believe that for a minute. I don't believe there is a shred of scientific evidence to suggest it. I am 100 percent certain man and dinosaurs walked the earth at the same time. In fact, I'm not at all sure dinosaurs are even extinct!
Think of all the world's legends about dragons. Look at those images. What were those folks seeing? They were clearly seeing dinosaurs. You can see them etched in cave drawings. You can see them in ancient literature. You can see them described in the Bible. You can see them in virtually every culture in every corner of the world.
Did the human race have a collective common nightmare? Or did these people actually see dragons? I believe they saw dragons – what we now call dinosaurs.
Furthermore, many of the dinosaur fossils discovered in various parts of the world were found right along human footprints and remains. How did that happen?
And what about the not-so-unusual sightings of contemporary sea monsters? Some of them have actually been captured.
There are also countless contemporary sightings of what appear to be pterodactyls in Asia and Africa.
You know what I think? I think we've been sold a bill of goods about the dinosaurs. I don't believe they died off millions and millions of years ago. In fact, I'm not at all convinced they've died off completely.
Evolutionists have put the cart before the horse. They start out with a theory, then ignore all the facts that contradict the theory. Any observation that might call into question their assumptions is discounted, ridiculed and covered up. That's not science.
How could all the thousands of historical records of dragons and behemoths throughout mankind's time on earth be ignored? Let's admit it. At least some of these observations and records indicate dinosaurs were walking the earth fairly recently – if not still walking it today.
If I'm right about that – which I am – then the whole evolutionary house of cards comes tumbling down.
This is the evidence about which the evolutionists dare not speak.
Thanks for the information...it all adds up...
Excellent post...I agree with all you say..
Agreed...if he had this picture then, he will have no trouble finding it now...I really want this to be true...really, because I do believe that the Loch Ness Monster may be real, so I also believe that a pterodactyle in modern times may be real...
But wanting to believe, does not make it so...if and when the picture is posted, then we need the proof that it is not also a hoax, as the Civil War soldiers with their pterodactyle was shown to be...
And even if a living pterodactyle was found, it would do no harm at all to ToE...
So bring on that photo please...let all of us have a good look at it, and discuss it...
I also found ES's picture for him. At a paranormal page no less .
Thanks for those links, but where is the picture of the WW11 Australian soldiers at?...I see other pics, but canot find the one with the WW11 Australian soldiers, as claimed by ES...
The electomagnetic spectrum goes from low frequency sound wave to ultraviolet light energy. Visible light is a small segment of this electromagnetic spectrum.
Genesis
3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
Now scientist are saying the same thing, the electromagnetic spectrum is the start of all matter.
I have looked up Gregg Braden and Tom Bearden. The information is very scientific and very interesting.
Look at DNA, 90% is junk. It is now being studied that this may be a memory storage. Past generations would have stored data in your dna simular to a micrchip of today’s computers. Now look at the bible could this be information on the generational curses and generational blessings.
You wrote: “Your post is an excellent example of how the discussion of creationism/evolution has devolved. Instead of approaching this reasonably, scientifically, you mock God.”
BF: I don’t mock God — there is no evidence that a God exists. I mock people who believe in God.
You wrote: “And that is the crux of the entire issue — your rejection of creationism/ID (and embracing of evolution) is the result of your antipathy toward God, and not because of any factual/scientific reasons.”
BF: Wrong again. I have no antipathy toward God. There is no evidence there is a God, except in your imagination.
You wrote: “Thank you for illustrating my argument. I pray that you soon see the foolishness of hating your Creator, a Creator who has made a way for you to become reconciled with Him.”
BF: I don’t hate my “Creator.” See above.
I agree
It does not, nor should it predict that there is a time limit on the lifetime of any species.
I agree that it currently does not, in principle, predict such a limit, however, I think it is premature to predict on your part, what a theory will or will not predict in the future as it acquires new information, or data. That's just my opinion mind you.
If you believe that evolution in any way states that a species 'must' evolve into a different species then you are mistaken. Not even Darwin believed that.
I don't harbor this belief.
The reason we believe populations to be extinct is because there is no evidence they exist today and their fossil record terminates 'relatively' abruptly.
Which is why I brought it up, since it was conceivable that such a prediction could have been made on the basis of the fossil record, and if it was, then would indeed have been damaging, at some level to the theory. I defer to your expertise though, and we can agree that such is not the case.
Predictions in science are specific statements.
I couldn't agree more...general as it is.
Expectations are the logical consequences of the evolutionary thought process.
I'm not quite sure how to interpret this, nevertheless, do you think that incorrect expectations regarding the dynamics of matter in the hard sciences, such as physics and chemistry, have a negative impact on a given, or related, theory.
I can not make head or tails out of your post, except that you hope that my husband is doing well...he is doing quite well, thanks to the surgery he underwent...his cancer surgery is what cured him, according to one of the best cancer centers in the country...thanks for the good wishes for him, and his health...
...and that's all that really matters.
...thanks for the good wishes for him, and his health...
You're very welcome, and I pray that he continues to do well.
I am sure he will be fine...his follow checkups have been excellent, and he is diligent in keeping all his follow up appointments(with me checking up that he is following up on everything), so the ‘expectation’ (there is that word again), is that he will have no further problems in the future..
Again, thanks for your good and kind wishes for his health...and for your prayers as well...tho you and I may disagree on this whole creation/evolution debate, I would assure you that the hubby and I both have a fine personal relationship with our Lord, lean heavily on prayer, and are confident of our futures, no matter what may happen..
Gotta go, I'll check the trhread later. I'll leave you to your um.. morning coffee.
A living Terry Dactyl.
Evolution Happens.
I have no problem with Evolution. I thought we were talking about the supposed "errors" in scripture? You cited three, two of which did not even refer to something taught in the bible, and the third was such a morass of incoherence that I could not even figure out if you were trying to say something, nor how you were supporting yourself in the argument.
I can understand you wanting to change the subject, and if you don't respond, we will mark this down as "another sophomore biology student who knows way more than the facts will allow." If you prefer, you can go back to the original response and we can follow up from there.
there is no Hebrew word for "dome." The closest we have is the word for "cupola" found in the description of the sacrificial laws in Exodus and Leviticus, but that word is not used here. The word is indistinct, with possible meanings of " expanse" or " belt" or "radius" or "region." I am not sure what translation you are using, but I think the choice of english words is a poor one. It has clearly confused you.
I am not sure what it (the "dome") refers to. Some people argue for a "layer" of moisture surrounding the earth, a kind of thick water cloud. This would - as present pseudoscience re: global warming has pointed out - tend to warm the planet and reduce the extremes, making the entire planet relatively tropical in temp.
quite possibly one of the most stupid statements ever made on free republic.
Do you know how deep the Grand Canyon is? What is your mechanism for preventing the sides of the canyon slumping in as it is cut, since they would be just layers of mud in a global flood model?
layers of mud? The canyon walls are rock, and I’m sure the walls did cave in at points whatever hte erosion mechanism was, but if you go to thosel inks I gave, it shows canyons cut with steep walls during massive rapid catastrophies in our recent past. Mt. St. Helens even has canyons that were created when the mountain erupted.
The grand canyon Actually has quite a bit of ‘evidences’ that might suggest rapid formation, and flood model as well as some features that would ‘seem’ to suggest another mechanism for erosion such ax slow erosion- the point being that while some evidences that seemingly point ot rapid creation can be hypothesised away, other evidences simply can’t, and somne evidences that seemignly point toslow erosion can be hypothsised way, but other evidneces can’t- but to state that there isn’t evidences for rapid erosion isn’t being quite honest. Both sides have strong points, snd it’s a situation where people should just agree to dissagree.
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.