Posted on 12/21/2004 7:59:02 PM PST by postitnews.com
But you said energy changes form when if fact it is CREATED from mass. Just like when you light a candle, you are converting mass into energy as the flame burns.
Good.
Do you accept that creation may have been the work of a Creator?
I accept is as possible but it is irrelevant to the theory of evolution.
jwalsh07 wrote:
This website is dedicated to conservatives offering opinions on all manner of things. When technofascists attempt to silence those opinions based on the possession of advanced degrees in the issue they are commenting on, I'm gonna give you the "get real" alert.
RussP replies:
When I mentioned that Spetner is a prof. of information theory at MIT, I was accused of "appealing to authority." Evolutionists love to bring up that one. But some "dim-bulbs" (won't mention names) on this thread routinely appeal to the authority of the entire scientific establishment. "Appeal to authority" is their main argument and their trump card. They routinely pull it out when they can't debate the facts.
I didn't mean to insult Ptolemy, he was an excellent scientist for his day. I was just noting that the earth-centered universe was not a Biblical concept. It was a popular and generally accepted notion among educated people by the time Copernicus and Galileo came along to challenge things.
LOL, so is the origin of life according to dogmatic Darwinists, but that didn't stop you from enquiring. I'm familiar with the talking points, no reason to reiterate ad nauseum.
The scientific community at one time declared the world to be flat, that blood letting was an effective way to cure illness. You put far too much faith in man's scientist.
A sure sign of a fool is when he professes to have the answer, even more so when his proposition is that he knows the secrets of the Earth and life.
Anyone that suggests evolution to be anything other than an educated guess, backed up by as yet inconclusive findings is most certainly a fool.
Oy vey.
I don't understand your response but as long as you believe that evolution is a possibility, all is not lost.
You want a real laugh? Click on Patrick Henrys name and take a look at their oath.
Let me try to explain something to you. For some evolution is the brass ring, the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, the winning ticket of powerball. To me it is just a possible mechanism that God used to create. Nothing more, nothing less.
You really have no clue as to what you're talking about, do you?
BS. You are not going to fool anyone with such a weak reply. Back up your point. It is not enough just to say it.
I generally agree with you on this statement. However, you can't compare the proof for evolution with the proof for intelligent design (at least scientifically).
Yes, you can. It is not in the details of science, it is in the details of science that science can not and never will be able to answer. To put it simply, we can understand how a tree works, but we don't know why. Your science conveniently never seeks to answer the question why. Leaving out an important question like this of course leads you to your position. But it is very incomplete science.
I never understand why people that profess to be so smart miss so obvious and significant a detail as this.
In a science class they should not be taught as equal theories. They are not.
On this I agree with you. They should not be taught as equal theories. They should be taught as competing theories. To teach it any other way is preaching. And they should not be taught as fact.
The bottom line for me is that I do not want evolutionists preaching their beliefs to my children in the classroom any more than I want creationist preaching to them in the classroom. Everyone has a cause. They all want to dump it on our kids. And they want only their beliefs taught, no one Else's.
There is a word for people like this: a$$#@!&$. Not you, of course, just people that want to preach to my kids, think they have the only answer, their answer is irrefutable, and that everyone else is, how did you put it, silly and uneducated.
You're back with this after being shown the errors of this statement on a previous thread? Proof positive that creationists start all threads as a blank slate, never having learned anything on any previous thread.
God forbid any information should ever stick in y'all's minds.
Again, you say it but that does not make is so. Nothing was settled in the other thread except that which was settled in your mind before you entered it.
If you have evidence to the contrary, then produce it. And a helpful hint. I don't know if you are hear to change minds or simply to show yourself how smart you think you are. If you are hear to change minds, then the attitude in your posts shows how stupid you are. The same attitude also shows you to be the only one convinced of the later.
Again, you say it but that does not make it so. Nothing was settled in the other thread except that which was settled in your mind before you entered it.
If you have evidence to the contrary, then produce it. And a helpful hint. I don't know if you are here to change minds or simply to show yourself how smart you think you are. If you are here to change minds, then the attitude in your posts shows how stupid you are. The same attitude also shows you to be the only one convinced of the later.
You mean matter can not be created? That is silly. I've got the iron ore to prove I can make steel. And a match to light the kiln.
Except that ID is not a theory because it makes no predictions that would allow falsification. ID makes no predictions that would distinguish itself from evolutionary theory.
False. Darrow did not withdraw. Must Creationists lie even about well documented events?
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.