Posted on 08/18/2008 9:35:10 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
As you can see, Creation Scientists have an EXCELLENT PEDIGREE:
NOTABLE INVENTIONS, DISCOVERIES OR DEVELOPMENTS BY CREATION SCIENTISTS |
|
|---|---|
| CONTRIBUTION | SCIENTIST |
| ABSOLUTE TEMPERATURE SCALE | LORD KELVIN (1824-1907) |
| ACTUARIAL TABLES | CHARLES BABBAGE (1792-1871) |
| BAROMETER | BLAISE PASCAL (1623-1662) |
| BIOGENESIS LAW | LOUIS PASTEUR (1822-1895) |
| CALCULATING MACHINE | CHARLES BABBAGE (1792-1871) |
| CHLOROFORM | JAMES SIMPSON (1811-1870) |
| CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM | CAROLUS LINNAEUS (1707-1778) |
| DOUBLE STARS | WILLIAM HERSCHEL (1738-1822) |
| ELECTRIC GENERATOR | MICHAEL FARADAY (1791-1867) |
| ELECTRIC MOTOR | JOSEPH HENRY (1797-1878) |
| EPHEMERIS TABLES | JOHANN KEPLER (1571-1630) |
| FERMENTATION CONTROL | LOUIS PASTEUR (1822-1895) |
| GALVANOMETER | JOSEPH HENRY (1797-1878) |
| GLOBAL STAR CATALOG | JOHN HERSCHEL (1792-1871) |
| INERT GASES | WILLIAM RAMSAY (1852-1916) |
| KALEIDOSCOPE | DAVID BREWSTER (1781-1868) |
| LAW OF GRAVITY | ISAAC NEWTON (1642-1727) |
| MINE SAFETY LAMP | HUMPHREY DAVY (1778-1829) |
| PASTEURIZATION | LOUIS PASTEUR (1822-1895) |
| REFLECTING TELESCOPE | ISAAC NEWTON (1642-1727) |
| SCIENTIFIC METHOD | FRANCIS BACON (1561-1626) |
| SELF-INDUCTION | JOSEPH HENRY (1797-1878) |
| TELEGRAPH | SAMUEL F.B. MORSE (1791-1872) |
| THERMIONIC VALVE | AMBROSE FLEMING (1849-1945) |
| TRANS-ATLANTIC CABLE | LORD KELVIN (1824-1907) |
| VACCINATION & IMMUNIZATION | LOUIS PASTEUR (1822-1895) |
Good find!
All the scientists on that list used the scientific method, not superstition and witchcraft, nor creation "science," in their research.
==Exactly right. He left off the part where I asked about any specifics about the I.D. or Creationist “research” he keeps talking about.
As for current Creation Science research, you might want to start right here:
Journal of Creation
http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/24/68/
==Exactly right. He left off the part where I asked about any specifics about the I.D. or Creationist “research” he keeps talking about.
As for current Creation Science research, you might want to start right here:
Journal of Creation
http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/24/68/
Your just jealous d:op
And if the origins of life aren’t explained by evolution, then why is it so necessary for godless liberals to sue propenents of ID into silence again?
And what you’re essentially saying is that since nothing explains origins INCLUDING evolution, godless liberals are satisfied for all children to “learn” or more accurately be programmed: when in doubt....just offer nothing and say things like “that’s not science” when someone else comes along and does?
And since science has nothing to offer concerning origins, I'm still trying to figure out their objection to others being able to present their ideas.
If creationism is about origins and science doesn't address that, then why the fuss about teaching creation in schools? It's not supplanting their theory since they have none. Teach the creationist origins and then the scientific explanation of how they think life got to where it is.
"We don't have a clue but we're not going to let you present your ideas either and we'll sue you into silence if we have to" smacks so much of jack booted thought police.
It really goes to show that it's not about science. They don't have anything to lose in that area since they have nothing to offer. It's not like creationists are offering an alternative to a scientific theory; by the evos admission, they have nothing.
It's all about keeping God out.
No. He said to take the Bible literally and when he was asked to take a passage literally and when it conflicted with his belief, he started the smears.
If they say that interpretation is needed, they're treated with condescension and contempt, as if they admitted defeat, which they didn't.
He was treated with contempt because he said the Bible was to be taken literally, except when it couldn't and then it was to be taken in conceptual context.
A favorite ploy by the evos is to demand the impossible where no matter what answer is given, one is damned if they do and damned if they don't. It's intellectually dishonest.
Oh. it is intellectually dishonest to insist someone else be intellectually honest?
My attack was NOT on the Bible, but how certain people 'interpret' the Bible.
I notice that you spend a lot of time attacking me but never addressing the issue of MrB’s position that the Bible has to be taken literally.
I never attacked him. The only ridicule was how he responded to my non-personal questions to him. All the attempted ridicule and contempt has come from him, not me.
As described in Genesis .... Man was alone and God found that that was not good so he set out to create for Adam a help-mate and so he created all the animals from the earth and brought them to Adam but Adam found them wanting so he created Woman from Adam.
Translation: God created Adam, then the animals THEN Eve.
Bingo!
You nailed it.
godless liberalism is vacuous and dangerous.
And it’s the same thing with science as it is with everything else they touch and destroy...you won’t see algore debate the science with a single soul because of this. He has nothing to offer except more mind control and programming and he’s simply incapable of debating because he knows the truth will expose him for the fraud he is.
This is why he has to say things like the debate is over.
Eerily similar to the cultists on here.
And anyone that points it out is a mind numbed robot.
It’s creepy, like dianetics that way.
They attempt to control science, education...all by hijacking the courts with godless activist judges and then claim those that disagree are the fascists.
Meanwhile they’re so arrogant they think they’re placed in charge like arrogant elitists, only they have the answers all others are stupid, psychotic, deluded, evil, sociopathic, liars and so on.
They demand others to answer questions while never having to answer anything themselves.
It must be a very helpless existence.
As I said if it weren’t for them hijacking the courts and govt, if they were a business...they’d be fired.
Which is why they’re so desperately against capitalism and so forth.
The cult of godlessness is truly something to behold!
here’s another one....you know how they’re always whining about not mixing religion with science or not replacing science with religion...????
here’s some insight into why this is...
hint: godless liberals project their own behavior onto others time and time again...it’s a tactic that works well for them, in their own deluded minds and there are LEGIONS of deluded people out there...
you see a glimpse of it when liberals like Obama and Hillary say things like “restore our nation in the eyes of the world...”
what they won’t tell you is the world they are speaking of is:
socialist europe
N. Korea
Angola
Cuba
Venezuela
Iran
Syria
Somalia
Sudan
China
Russia...
Frankly I’m happy a good part of their world sees us the way they do! And I want to keep it that way!
Anyway, here’s the godless proponents of the cult of godless science attacking religion, so the next time you hear them squeal about this, point this out to them...not that they’re remotely capable of understanding their hypocrisy!
It’s ok for their science to impose itself onto religion.
just be prepared for the names and head-spins and realize it’s just all they’ve got!
http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/5788
creationwike.com
What is your definition of a creationist. If you go to a 'creationist' website, it says that in order to be a creationist one has to put the Bible first and if science conflicts with the Bible, then one must alter the science to match the Bible.
We should present alternate ideas in the religious classes also?
You can teach it in the religious classes. Just keep it out of the science classes.
You can teach it in the religious classes. Just keep it out of the science classes.
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.