Posted on 02/06/2014 1:58:22 PM PST by celmak
May I take it as a given then, that the physicists you know do not understand General Relativity, since they can't explain to you the roughly Avogadro's number of ways in which this theory is laughably wrong?
Actually 96.7% of geneticists are evolution adherents.
No, I can disabuse you of that notion, having been to so many stock holder open house days at genetic labs.
Creationists are numerically dominant and also in fairly full management dominance too. They are just better scientists.
.
Then can you explain why Freepers on the anti-evolution side seem to ALL be throwing their weight behind Ken Ham?
I agree, 6.5 days and 6000 years is so bad it’s not even wrong! Now 15 billion, from one perspective, and 6.5+ from the opposite direction, well that tends to make sense, especially the way Fr. Schroeder explains it. But hen he is also a Torah scholar.
Some opiates would sure be helpful if I go to Ken Ham's theme park and ride the dinosaur ride. It might help numb the stupidity...
>> “Avogadro’s number of ways...” <<
.
Oh Freddie, you’re killing us!
When can we stop laughing?
.
BTW, I stole that ‘not even wrong’ from Freddie’s tagline.
I admit that my claim is based on opinion and no real evidence. Just like yours.
And you foe the liberal religion of Darwinism. And there is a reason why the theory of Evolution and its "we came from apes and they came from ooze" only has a presence with government schools and liberal philosophy - its religion.
Yes, I agree.
I just read “In the Beginning...we misunderstood”, a book by a couple of good Christian men who don’t necessarily buy into the young earth idea.
Their book made a lot of sense, trying to interpret Genesis 1 in the context of the ancient Hebrew world.
I highly recommend it—not very expensive.
I certainly do object to that.
And you can be a HUGE help here metmom. You must not have been paying attention to the Ham/Nye debate threads here lately, but anti-evolution Freepers have come down almost exclusively on the side of Ken Ham's Young Earth Creationism, which posits that the Earth is literally 6,000 years old, all animals originated on the Ark, and that the global flood several thousand years ago is responsible for all geology.
This is, admittedly, quite different from Intelligent Design, which has a large following in the conservative community and is generally seen as not very scientific in the mainstream science community, but light years ahead of "flood geology". The adherents to Intelligent Design, spearheaded by the Discovery Institute, have actively tried to marginalize Ham and distance themselves from his literal Biblical creationism. They see equalling ID and YEC as pejorative.
My question for you is why Freepers seem to have TOTALLY ABANDONED Intelligent Design and decided to support 6,000 year old creationism. Do they do not know there's a difference and that they are mutually contradictory?
Time dilation isn't the only problem. It creates an enormously massive universe at the start of creation that no amount of inflation would be able to overcome. I sketch why this is true in #93. It creates a problem because objects inside of our Hubble Neighborhood with known time constants would have to appear to be slowing down, while the same objects in the distant universe would have to compensate by evolving even faster. It creates a time-energy uncertainty relation which makes the strong and weak nuclear forces to have approximately zero range -- atoms actually could not form. And it violates all of the following laws: energy conservation, conservation of linear momentum, conservation of angular momentum, and the Creationists favorite whipping boy: The Second Law of Thermodynamics. It means either the known spectral lines of distant starlight are all wrong -- and deliberately deceptively rearranged to be so -- or that distant stars have entirely different and unknown chemical compositions from atoms with electron structure that do not exist.
In fine and in sum: it turns God into a very evil being, whose sole purpose is to deceive people to their destruction. Now you bozos can say all the nasty things you want about science, because science will stand or fall on its own, but I will not have you insulting God, who is way too patient to defend himself against such slander.
It applies to you.
Once again, these hilariously goofy statements are the reason that you're the target market for creationism. They know you'll pay $12 to see an animatronic caveman riding a dinosaur and think it's "SCIENCE". Haha!
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiggggggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhtttttttttttttttttttt.
Take it up with the guy who heads the largest denomination of Christians on the planet.
So you give me sources that quote yourself, that's spectacular. There were many other liberal Evos that thought great things of him, even gave him awards! They just didn't want him to give Ken Ham any air time. Now that he did, they, and you, attack him personally. At least he's out there defending what he believes, unlike the cowards that stay behind the curtain of "separation of church and state (SOCAS)" in academia. If it were not for SOCAS, Creation would be argued in government schools.
So how many other points do you agree with him? I think I agree with him on a lot more points than you agree with him. How about that Jesus is our Lord and Savior? Do you agree with him that Jesus was telling the truth, or was He a liar and/or a lunatic?
You told me that I was throwing Bill Nye overboard because he "lost." No, I threw him overboard because he's a moron. And I did that a long time ago.
Since your charge was against me who else would I quote? Gunga Din? The Book of Daniel?
Bill Nye isn't a scientist. He'll "debate" you because he's a exhibitionist-clown-attention-slut. Scientists won't debate you because they're afraid of you? Please. Scientists won't debate you for the same reason they won't debate The Flat Earth Society, or people who believe the Earth is at the center of the universe, or that there are advanced civilizations thriving in the interior of the planet.
Then you might want to rethink that ‘see post #93’ for refutation foolishness, skippy. Bwahahaha
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.