Evolution vs. Creation Debate in Tucson, Arizona May 10

Calvery Chapel Tucson and Fellowship of Christian Athletes ^ | May 10, 2003 | Fellowship of Christian Athletes

[\/\/ayne]

Click on the image below for a PDF flyer



click here to get Adobe Acrobat Reader which reads PDF files

Saturday May 10, 2003

All Saturday meetings except the debate will be held at Calvary Tucson’s East Campus 8725 E. Speedway Blvd.

9:00 AM “Origins of Life and the Universe” . . . . .Hank Giesecke

10:00 AM “Fifty Facts Why Evolution Doesn’t Work” . . . .Russell Miller

11:00 AM Lunch

1:00 PM “Age of the Earth, and Intelligent Design” . . . .Hank Hiesecke

2:00 PM “Data from Mt. Saint Helens” . . . . .Russell Miller

3:00 PM Break

4:30 PM Dinner available at U of A’s McKale Center

6:00 PM Debate at University of Arizona McKale Center “Alternative World Views: Evolution and Creation”
Dr. Duane Gish and Professor Peter Sherman

Sunday May 11, 2003
Calvary Tucson East Campus
8:00 and 10:20 AM “Take Creation Captive”.......Hank Giesecke

Calvary Tucson West Campus
9:10 and 11:30 AM “Creation or Chaos”......Dr. John Meyer

Calvary Tucson East Campus
6:00 PM “Why 600 Scientists Reject Evolution” ......Dr. John Meyer

[razorbak]

That's too bad. I rather wish people wouldn't debate a charlatan like Gish. His debating style is more suited to Elementary school than any professional field. It involves throwing out many half truths and mis-statements in his speech as possible, knowing that his opponent can't answer them all in his time alloted. He also knows that his (predominantly bussed in) church going audience isn't going to know any better,

The self-deluded hubris in the above statement is the attitude of most evos who do show up for debates with creationists, and why they get their clocks cleaned. They rely on insults and name-calling instead of debating the issue with facts.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights;

[razorbak]

Well, it's usually a dumb idea for evolutionists to do these debates because the audience is always stacked full of creationidiots and the creationidiot participating in the debate is usually a demagogic tool like Gish.

Speaking of demagoguery...

[jennyp]

The door is a jar.

Coffee company creates Metro Detroit's navel oranges.

Pierogi/yak ravioli/laetoli/Stromboli

I saw the number "5" in gold. Then teacher showed the next slide.

Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.

[BibChr]

Or, more briefly (and cogently), "Yipe!"

That's another thing I meant to mention. Those rocks seem to keep bouncing.

Dan

[jennyp]

The self-deluded hubris in the above statement is the attitude of most evos who do show up for debates with creationists, and why they get their clocks cleaned. They rely on insults and name-calling instead of debating the issue with facts.

Here's why creationists hate to debate in writing. Baffling people with BS gets exposed pretty quickly when put down in writing & responded to in same.

[f.Christian]

jennypope ...

liberalism // atheism -- EVOLUTION is proclaimed to be an uncontested ...

UNQUESTIONED bolshevik monopoly --- jihad !

[jennyp]

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights;

Very good. Now, if the Creator was an unintelligent natural process instead of a supernatural person, we would still be endowed with these very same inalienable rights.

We're endowed with these rights because we're human beings. Human nature is such that the only political system that makes sense is one that supports individual liberty and holds individuals responsible for their actions (instead of collectives). This is true because of what human nature is. How we came to be humans instead of just another ape is irrelevant. The relevant fact is: Here we are, humans; now what does that fact imply about how we should live?

[Lurking Libertarian]

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights;

Many of us believe that God created us and that evolution is how He did it.

[f.Christian]

jp (( atheism )) on the FR means lenin -- stalin (( bolshevism )) ... state science --- evolution !

[f.Christian]

Like You're half sober (( science )) -- half drunk (( evolution )) ...

half virgin // half pregnant ---

half vegetarian --- half pig // meat eater !

[f.Christian]

This is the evo liberal disease ...

trivia (( fantasy )) ABSOLUTE (( chaos // anarchy )) ---

truth // reality void-- vacated -- RELATIVISTS (( flux // chance )) !

[f.Christian]

To: f.Christian

Dakmar...

I took a few minutes to decipher that post, and I must say I agree with a lot of what you said.

fC...

These were the Classical liberals...founding fathers-PRINCIPLES---stable/SANE scientific reality/society---industrial progress...moral/social character-values(private/personal) GROWTH(limited NON-intrusive PC Govt/religion---schools)!

Dakmar...

Where you and I diverge is on the Evolution/Communism thing. You seem to view Darwin and evolution as the beginning of the end for enlighted, moral civilization, while I think Marx, class struggle, and the "dictatorship of the proletariat" are the true dangers.

God bless you, I think we both have a common enemy in the BRAVE-NWO.

452 posted on 9/7/02 8:54 PM Pacific by Dakmar

[f.Christian]

Ideology nazis -- facsists --- Elites-- 'experts' ... overlords !

[Lady Eileen]

Many of us believe that God created us and that evolution is how He did it.

And many of us believe that God created us. Period. Evolution with God is a contradiction in terms. I don't believe in evolution, but I do believe in recognizing it for what it is, which is naturalistic (i.e. God free). You have to recognize that much to offer a fair critique.

[Aric2000]

The reason that evolutionists do not come to such silly debates, is because it is hard to sit by and watch a bunch of fanatics flip out over ridiculous statements made by a creationist expert, like it was true.

Your bible is NOT science, evolution on the other hand is science.

To watch a debate, with a myth pitted against science is not only ridiculous to watch, but stupid in the extreme.

All it does is excite the creationists, and throws the evolutionist debater to the lions, because he has no real time to respond.

I won't watch one of those debates, I find the creationists infantile, and easy to sucker. So the Creationist expert talks like the fed-ex man, and the evolutionist stands there with his mouth open because he has never heard something so stupid.

[Lurking Libertarian]

Evolution with God is a contradiction in terms. I don't believe in evolution, but I do believe in recognizing it for what it is, which is naturalistic (i.e. God free).

Do you believe that God makes the sun rise and set; that He makes the rain fall; that He makes the crops grow?

All of these things happen by "natural" causes, but God is the author of the laws of nature, and those laws are the means by which He accomplishes His will. So, too, did He create humanity, through "natural" processes that He created and set in motion, knowing they were sufficient to achieve His purpose.

[Dimensio]

Evolution with God is a contradiction in terms.

Only for a very specific and restricted definition of "God". Intelligent people, however, realise that what you have set up is called a "false dichotomy", and thus invalid.

Not everyone who believes in a god (or a God) believes in one that has the exact attributes that you claim that it has. They are not atheists merely because they disagree with the exact nature of God.

[Aric2000]

Nice fins JennyP, very nice find, and the woman is SOOO right.

[Saturnalia]

Hamburger cockatiel wordplay?
Evilutionist-GHEY conspiracy! Feldspar commies?
Pink shrimp banana, TRUTH!

*Gore3000 quote*

Cheeseball zoloft violence!

[f.Christian]

evolution on the other hand is science ? ? ?

flux -- flip -- leap and morph is not hard science !