[PatrickHenry]

So that everyone will have access to the accumulated "Creationism vs. Evolution" threads which have previously appeared on FreeRepublic, plus links to hundreds of sites with a vast amount of information on this topic, here's Junior's massive work, available for all to review: The Ultimate Creation vs. Evolution Resource [6.0].

[PatrickHenry]

Bump

[PatrickHenry]

Bump.

[PatrickHenry]

Bump.

[PatrickHenry]

Bump.

[PatrickHenry]

Creationists welcome.

[elephantlips]

I so enjoy pseudo-intellectuals who argue that their theory is better than someone else's theory.
I am not a bonafide "young earth" creationist, I am however aware enough
to know that we don't know a great deal about time, space and the workings of our
Creator's mind to speak intelligently on the subject. I am
continually amazed at the never-ending supply of ignorance that condescends to instruct
the rest of we sub-humans. A better approach might be
to have discussions on what we imagine the situation to have been,
all along with the understanding that NO ONE KNOWS WHAT TOOK PLACE.
Unless you have prime facia evidence to the contrary,
I'll assume that you number among the ignorant numbers of us.

[PatrickHenry]

Bump.

[PatrickHenry]

Bump.

[Barak]

The author is correct when he says that the biggest argument between evolutionists and Christians is not scientific, but philosophical. Evolutionists believe that the universe began in chaos and is evolving toward perfection: normativist Christians believe that the universe was created perfect and is degenerating into chaos. These two philosophies are absolutely irreconcilable, and any attempt at reconciliation (such as "theistic evolution") is doomed to failure from before its inception.

As a matter of fact, Zionism and fundamentalist Islam have much more in common than do Christianity and evolutionism. Perhaps we ought to practice by making permanent peace in the Middle East before we try to take on a task as gargantuan as the evolutionist-Christian debate.

[Paradox]

Oh gee, THANKS ALOT, sheesh :)

[jackbob]

I find it pleasurable seeing intelligent, educated people revealing their narrow minded thought patterns. Thus is the case of this debate. Both sides attached to their own particular 'ism' and unable to comprehend an alternative view. On the other hand, the use of distorted irrelevant arguments, ridicule. and black propaganda, has and is still the most common method used by those promoting evolution(ism), as it is with most ismic thinkers.

Since I do not believe in creationism, I think I'll pass on defending them against such unnecessary distorted attacks.

[exmarine]

Not all creationists are YEC. Typical stereotypical poppycock. What is your answer to the old-earth creationists like Hugh Ross? Do you have a rebuttal for that too? I'd love to see it.

[DouglasKC]

I don't have a dog in this fight, but this (from the article) isn't correct:

All available evidence shows that the speed of light is always constant

There has been plenty of evidence to show that this might not be so. Click here for a good treatise on the subject.

If you're going to have a religion bashing thread, at least make sure you're posting facts.

[medved]

For the full article, go to the site: Creation Science .

No need to. I mean, I don't need anybody to tell me that some aspects of creationism are stupid. The only claim I make is that, stupid as any aspect of creationism or anything else might be, there is no such thing on this Earth as a theory which sounds stupid compared to evolution.

Consider some of the testimonials you read from people who have tried the talk.origins/Ediacara indoctrination system on the WWW. For instance, Marty Z. Renfield writes:

"I'd tried everything; drugs, narcotics, weeklong drinking bouts; I'd listened to rap music at ear-splitting levels for days on end; I'd taken all of the yuppie science courses at our local community college, and I'd worked for years at becoming both politically and scientifically correct, but nothing helped. Nothing I could think of or do was making me STUPID enough to get that big government grant. As you can see in the before picture, I had achieved some noticable results, but I just wasn't where I needed to be.

The after picture shows me today, after the brain-deadening effects of the Ediacara propaganda/indoctrination program on the WWW. This program has turned my whole life around. I now drive a BMW and can take my pick of government grants and research projects.

Thank you, Chris!!!

---

Granted that might be the best the "Juniors", "PatrickHenry's" etc. etc. of the world can hope for but most people can do better. Check out the Bearfabrique Evolutionism Page for details.

[ThirstyMan]

Please, I have no desire to get into the crevo crotch kicking game. I'll try to post an idea about creation and science that might send the discussion into a more fruitful direction.

Guided or unguided?
Isn't that the critical question we so often debate?
I've heard it said:
"We have no evidence of any divine guidance. End of story."

BUT... I'll remind you.
We don't have any evidence because we cannot begin to formulate a method of testing for such influence.

So it's not really true that we have no evidence of the species' development being guided.
We just have no method of testing for such guidance and...that is not in and of itself, evidence to say the guidance hasn't always been there, active behind the scenes.
I challenge anyone to suggest a way of ruling out guiding influence before they insist that "no evidence" exists.

[Old Professer]

Neils Bohr once told Einstein to quit telling God what to do; (playing dice with the world), it is too bad that Bohr is dead because these endless threads are getting quite boring.

God doesn't care about what scientists think, and scientists aren't afraid of God, so how can this ever be resolved here in this simple forum?

[Rebelbase]

Here is on of our local creation science teacher's website, Sixdaycreation.com .

I have a hard time accepting the 6000 year old earth stuff. I believe God created it, just that in our units of measure, its been longer than 6000 years.

[gore3000]

The only thing the evolutionists are good at is at religioun bashing, however, they will all deny that they are atheists.

What they are not good at is at science. They cannot seem to give any proof of their theories or to explain how the miracles they claim for an immaterial force could have occurred.

They forget that even if all the religions of the world were false it would not make evolution scientifically true. But then, they really do not care for science or scientific truth. They really care about materialism and no moral restraints. They do not want God to exist because they think of themselves as little gods.

[roughrider]

I see you posted this under "Philosophy." I thought evolution was the province of the PHYSICAL SCIENCES.