Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Common Creationist Arguments
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Creationism/Arguments/index.shtml ^

Posted on 03/08/2002 7:55:48 AM PST by JediGirl

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281-299 next last
To: Dimensio; RnMomof7
Can anyone verify the truth (or lack thereof) of this disturbing quote?

I can verify that is the correct Pledge to the Christian Flag and that the flag is about 100 years old.

The pledge is an affirmation of faith. Why would you consider it disturbing? It is used by homeschoolers and by churches in various settings, but I'm not aware of any efforts to incorporate the use similiar to the Pledge to the Flag.

Under the terms of the 1st Amendment, why would you find an affirmation of faith disturbing? Seriously.

21 posted on 03/08/2002 9:07:36 AM PST by Ward Smythe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Exnihilo
"Plenty of people believe in evolution of some kind but are not naturalists.

OK. So naturalism (by which, I assume, you mean scientific secularism) is the enemy, not evolution. I see.... no... wait... I don't see. I have a difficult time seeing how a Creationist can subscribe to the scientific method w/r to Creationism. Creationism is a doctrine, not a theory.

22 posted on 03/08/2002 9:13:07 AM PST by Harrison Bergeron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Ward Smythe
"Under the terms of the 1st Amendment, why would you find an affirmation of faith disturbing? Seriously"

As a Catholic, I can see how some protestants might see the whole pledging (swearing) allegience to a religious flag thing might conflict with the First Commandment and the whole graven images taboo. I know it's not meant that way, but the concept gives even me the creeps with it's connotations of religious nationalism.

23 posted on 03/08/2002 9:17:07 AM PST by Harrison Bergeron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Exnihilo
Saying some of them don't understand science isn't name calling. It's a fact, and relevant to the discussion.
24 posted on 03/08/2002 9:20:33 AM PST by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Ward Smythe
I found the quote disturbing not because of the content but because of the context. That it was allegedly uttered at a conference called "Reclaiming America" hints at the motives of those orginazing the conference.
25 posted on 03/08/2002 9:22:34 AM PST by Dimensio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Ward Smythe
Under the terms of the 1st Amendment, why would you find an affirmation of faith disturbing? Seriously.

"...with life and liberty for all who believe."

26 posted on 03/08/2002 9:23:04 AM PST by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Harrison Bergeron
So... you're saying that if I take the theory of evolution as serious science then I don't believe in God? I think we've identified where the break is in the comm link.

I'm saying that God might have something to say on the issue. Arguing in the absence of absolutes is akin to arguing that one marble is prettier than another. Without an absolutes is pretty pointless. So - let's deal with the issue here... where did we come from and why? Even more to the point - how can the impersonal (evolution) generate the personal (mankind)?

27 posted on 03/08/2002 9:23:54 AM PST by Frapster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
Yeah---evolution has created a philosophical bigotry--tyranny---a chokehold---deathgrip on the American consciousness...

makes Catholicism and popery look really tame!

Nothing like the obligatory cheap shot at someone else's faith while you bash evolution. It's a twofer.

If nothing else, evolutionary theory gives me hope that someday in the distant future, your descendants will evolve away from this "style" you're so fond of...

28 posted on 03/08/2002 9:24:32 AM PST by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: JediGirl
Hi, Jedi!

May I suggest the reading of the New Testament? Salvation lies within, and is available to you.

God bless!

29 posted on 03/08/2002 9:27:31 AM PST by rdb3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: general_re
The more you... evolve--the further from the Truth you are!
30 posted on 03/08/2002 9:30:04 AM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
To the evolutionist theory position, I ask the following scientific questions:

1. Show me any transitional forms from one species to another. There aren't any, and top curators admit it.
2. The earth loses 1/1000 of a second in rotation per day. Rounding, this is slightly over 1 second every 3 years. If, according to evoultion theory, that assumes the earth has been behaving the same way for billions of years, and knowing a 24-hr day is composed of (24x60x60) or 86,400 seconds, about 260,000 years ago we all were living on an earth with a rotational period of 1 second.
3. If according to evolutionary theory that the earth is billions of years old, and the mechanics of the earth operate today just as they have for billions of years, given the known, measured rate of decay of the earth's magnetic field, that if we calculate backwards 10,000 years, we come up with a field so strong that life on the planet would not have been possible.
4. If the planet is billions of years old, and is proven by the fossil record, why are human skulls, jewelry, shoes, skeletons found in untouched layers of rock previously dated to be hundreds of millions of years old? If these layers were laid down over millions of years, like the geologic column theory says they were, how are vertical fossils of trees found in these layers? Trees do not live millions of years, and they would have decayed away.
5. If evolution is true, and evolution is continuing just as it has for the last billions of years, why can't we get a cat from a dog? Why can't we get a plant from an animal? Not even one example exists, nor any kind of hybrid cat-dog or horse-cow. We always assume to expect that cats bring forth cats, etc.
6. The scientific principle demands observable, repeatable results. Show me where scientists created life out of nothing. This has been attempted for decades and all that was created were several amino acids. Not even a "simple" virus was created. Not even, in the evolutionist lingo, not even a "simple 1 celled organism" was made.
7. Logic theory dictates that something that is designed inherently implies there was a designer. I can look at my watch, which is a complex device, and I know that this was a device that had an intelligent designer behind it, and it created the watch for a specific purpose (to measure time). I don't have to actually meet or touch the person who built it, I naturally assume it because from my own experience as a designer and watching others design complex devices. We look at a boeing 747, the Cray computer, or the Statue of Liberty, and would call someone crazy if they said these things only exist because of random chance. Yet we look at humans and their DNA, the most complex, self-replicating, self-correcting and preserving mechanism, and we deny an intelligent designer.

8. The old Cray 1 computer took kilovolts to power it (inefficient), weighed a ton, a roomful of space, required a huge cooling system, and calculated about 4 billion bits of info a second. A honeybee, in contrast, takes very little space, weighs almost nothing, has a much smaller computing brain mass, can go about a million miles on a gallon of honey (efficient), and can calculate info input at about 1 trillion bits/second. Evolutionists state the computer is designed, and the bee is random chance.

9. The conclusion that the more complex something is, the likelier the item came from random chance, is not observable nor repeatable. It is illogical.

31 posted on 03/08/2002 9:30:56 AM PST by Secret Agent Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Frapster
You are correct, God does have something to say on the subject: Genesis chapters 1-3.
32 posted on 03/08/2002 9:32:35 AM PST by Secret Agent Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Psalm 73
JediGirl Has a religion, It is evolution. It takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does Christianity. there is more evidence for Christ's resurection.(Eye witness accounts) than anything to support evolution. Evolution requires if it is to be believed, "Transitional Species" 1/2 reptile,1/2 mammal to show the supposed crossover to the next level. they find thousands of fossils in the rocks. Of animals of specific Species, but not one single Transitional has ever been found. yet there should be thousands found. JediGirl or others might site Archiopterix as a transitional Species, but it fails. It is a fully functional Bird. the reptile "scales" could be in fact the fossilised tiny leg feather patterns typical on some birds today. all the so-called transitional examples today are no more than single species with no transitional evidence. JediGirl is at war within Herself, Trying to fill a hole in her sole that only the Love of God can occupy. as with all evolutionists, They need something to believe in because the alternative is too believe in a Creator,and The creator says we are sinfull and separated from him, yet in His Love for Jedigirl and all of us, He sent his Son Jesus to Die on the Cross for Jedigirl's sins and Mine,So that we would have a way back Home to our Father. Evolution is a Lie, generated by the "Father of Lies" Satan, To decieve Man, and woman, and take them on a path away from God and toward spiritual Destruction.! If Jedigirl looks deep enough into Herself, God has placed a desire inside us all to want to know Him, and He Promises that if We ask, He will answer. Surrender, Jedigirl, To the greatest Love there is and to a Truth that will set you Free. I bought into the Lie of Evolution, But My eyes are open now I have thrown away Man's Knowlege, For God's. Its path is upward. Creation and Evolution both take a faith. Choose this Day whom you will serve.
33 posted on 03/08/2002 9:37:46 AM PST by LtKerst
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Harrison Bergeron
I won't debate whether swearing to this flag is an appropriate thing to do, but the oath itself merely affirms what Jesus taught.

"I am the way, the truth and the life; no one comes to the Father, except through me."

"To as many as received Him, to them He gave the power to become the sons of God, even to as many as believed on His name."

34 posted on 03/08/2002 9:40:07 AM PST by rwt60
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man
The rest of your questions I'll leave until I have access to better research resources (so I can pount out specific transitional species that have been found) or others answer before me, but I can address these right now.

2. The earth loses 1/1000 of a second in rotation per day. Rounding, this is slightly over 1 second every 3 years. If, according to evoultion theory, that assumes the earth has been behaving the same way for billions of years, and knowing a 24-hr day is composed of (24x60x60) or 86,400 seconds, about 260,000 years ago we all were living on an earth with a rotational period of 1 second.

From here:
"Presently, the earth's rotation is slowing down 0.005 seconds per year per year (Thwaites and Awbrey, 1982, p.19). At least Dr. Hovind doesn't use the horrendous rate of 1 second per year which Dr. Walter Brown employed as a result of a total misunderstanding of time keeping. I believe that Dr. Brown discarded that argument upon realizing his error, but don't expect it to disappear from the creationist literature. Only a towering optimist could expect that!

"The actual rate of 0.005 seconds per year per year yields, if rolled back 4.6 billion years, a 14hour day. The subject is a bit tricky the first time around, and I'm indebted to Thwaites and Awbrey (1982) whose fine article cleared away the cobwebs."

The calculations are shown on the webpage, follow the link to see them.

3. If according to evolutionary theory that the earth is billions of years old, and the mechanics of the earth operate today just as they have for billions of years, given the known, measured rate of decay of the earth's magnetic field, that if we calculate backwards 10,000 years, we come up with a field so strong that life on the planet would not have been possible.

The magnetic field of the earth is on a constant decay. The magnetic field oscillates and even reverses itself regularly, and its current decline is part of that oscillation, not part of an exponential decay.

Like I said, no understanding of science.
35 posted on 03/08/2002 9:40:12 AM PST by Dimensio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man; Exnihilo
See what I mean?
36 posted on 03/08/2002 9:40:41 AM PST by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: LtKerst
It is a fully functional Bird. the reptile "scales" could be in fact the fossilised tiny leg feather patterns typical on some birds today. all the so-called transitional examples today are no more than single species with no transitional evidence. JediGirl is at war within Herself, Trying to fill a hole in her sole that only the Love of God can occupy.

1) Learn to use proper HTML tags so your post doesn't all run together.

2) I don't understand how accepting evolution and rejecting the flawed arguments against it is an attempt to fill a hole in her soul. Of course, I'm not even sure what a soul is, how it is defined or where a hole in it would appear.

3) It's spelled "soul". And it's a hole in the soul that we fill with dope, and we fill it fine...

Er, nevermind that last part. Got a song stuck in my head.
37 posted on 03/08/2002 9:42:56 AM PST by Dimensio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: general_re
"Nothing like the obligatory cheap shot at someone else's faith while you bash evolution. It's a twofer. "

Man, even I saw that he was being sarcastic. Try decaf.

38 posted on 03/08/2002 9:44:55 AM PST by Harrison Bergeron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: rwt60
"I won't debate whether swearing to this flag is an appropriate thing to do,"

Why not? That was the context of the original post.

39 posted on 03/08/2002 9:46:08 AM PST by Harrison Bergeron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: JediGirl; vaderetro; longshadow; jennyp; radioastronomer; scully; thinkplease
Ping.
40 posted on 03/08/2002 9:47:03 AM PST by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 281-299 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson