Professor Rigid on Evolution (must "believe" to get med school rec)

The Lubbock Avalanche Journal ^ | 10/6/02 | Sebastian Kitchen

[Hila]

Other "professors" and schools would probably not require to have their theories (unproven) believed upon. It just has to be an issue to deny accountability to a very real Divine person. The evolution fairy tale has so many wholes it is not even funny any more, to have semi-educated people believing in it.

[Alamo-Girl]

Egads! So sorry... Here's a big HUG!!!

[Ready2go]

jennyp wrote: And yet there was no sea near the Garden of Eden, and every picture I've ever seen of the Garden has the serpent up in the tree. QED.

LOL....that was what the evolutionist said when they ran into a problem.

Evolutionist said:But the fossils also have obvious legs and lived in the sea. That doesn't jibe with the traditional view of ancestral asps, which are thought of as legless burrowing reptiles..

So in the April 17 issue of the Journal Nature, Caldwell and Lee advance the bold suggestion that snakes are most closely related to the mosasaurs, giant swimming reptiles that lived at the time of dinosaurs..

That was from evolutionist...not me.

And remember camera's hadn't been invented yet, so we don't have a real picture of the event as it happened, just man's drawings & ideas...man is only using his imagination to try and figure out how everything evolved...but I go by what God said & He said this: :)

Gen 3:1 The serpent was the craftiest of all the creatures the Lord God had made. So the serpent came to the woman. "Really?" he asked. "None of the fruit in the garden? God says you mustn't eat any of it?"

Gen 3:2 "Of course we may eat it," the woman told him.

Gen 3:3 "It's only the fruit from the tree at the center of the garden that we are not to eat. God says we mustn't eat it or even touch it, or we will die."

Gen 3:4 "That's a lie!" the serpent hissed. "You'll not die!

Gen 3:5 God knows very well that the instant you eat it you will become like him, for your eyes will be opened--you will be able to distinguish good from evil!"

Gen 3:6 The woman was convinced. How lovely and fresh looking it was! And it would make her so wise! So she ate some of the fruit and gave some to her husband, and he ate it too.

Gen 3:7 And as they ate it, suddenly they became aware of their nakedness, and were embarrassed. So they strung fig leaves together to cover themselves around the hips.

Gen 3:8 That evening they heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden; and they hid themselves among the trees.

Gen 3:9 The Lord God called to Adam, "Why are you hiding?"

Gen 3:10 And Adam replied, "I heard you coming and didn't want you to see me naked. So I hid."

Gen 3:11 "Who told you you were naked?" the Lord God asked. "Have you eaten fruit from the tree I warned you about?"

Gen 3:12 "Yes," Adam admitted, "but it was the woman you gave me who brought me some, and I ate it."

Gen 3:13 Then the Lord God asked the woman, "How could you do such a thing?" "The serpent tricked me," she replied.

Gen 3:14 So the Lord God said to the serpent, "This is your punishment: You are singled out from among all the domestic and wild animals of the whole earth--to be cursed. You shall grovel in the dust as long as you live, crawling along on your belly.

[Hila]

Creationism is not anti-scientific. It is the only theory of the origin of the universe that abides by scientific laws. Laws that the entire scientific community abides by, laws that were approved and formulated by Evolutionists. Laws are laws, and according to the Second Law of Thermodynamics all systems tend towards disorder (entropy). In every reaction that takes place, the amount of useable energy decreases, until there's nothing left. We see this in the slowing down of our solar system, in batteries, in rotting wood. If you leave something alone it decomposes. There are about a million other ways to refute evolution. Evolution is a shady belief with missing holes. Try and find two evolutionists with the exact same views on evolution theories. As much as you hate it, Creationism is the only theory that has stood the test of the laws of thermodynamics and other governing principles.

[gore3000]

The author (geneticist and anthropologist) is not speaking against evolution per se , but rather the overstatement or misrepresentation of the facts. He observes that biological anthropology is much needed because pronouncements such as 99% Chimpanzee fail on closer inspection. For instance,

The point is where you start the counting. For example, let's say I have a 1000 instruction program and I add to it 100 instructions for printing after the first hundred instructions. Now if you start counting both from the beginning you will have them be some 90% different whereas if you knew the code you would realize that they are only 10% different because you have all but the 100 instructions you inserted as different. Also, many of the differences may be trivial such as hair, skin or eye color which do not matter much, we cannot tell without knowing what the entire organism is about and we are nowhere close to knowing that.

[Hila]

THe evolution fairy tale has too many holes.

[jennyp]

Laws that the entire scientific community abides by, laws that were approved and formulated by Evolutionists.

LOL!!! OK, then tell me: What is the penalty for violating the Law of Gravity? Do I get any points, or is it 3 strikes & you're out?

[AndrewC]

So your point is, that the picture is wrong? I would agree, but I know of no one attributing anything to that particular picture in these discussions. However, Scientific American has untruth about this following program(previously posted on this site) and actually uses it in argument

THE COMPUTER PROGRAM IN APPENDIX E IN "UPON THE SHOULDERS OF GIANTS" BY 
RICHARD HARDISON

10 REM 1984 R. HARDISON
11 PRINT "RANDOMIZING ALPHABET"
12 PRINT "WRITE HAMLET, KEEPING"
13 PRINT "SUCCESSES."
14 PRINT :; REM N-COUNTER: # OF TRIALS
15 REM T=COUNTER:REUSE "TO BE"
16 PRINT "SUBROUTINE TO
17 PRINT "RANDOMIZE AND SELECT"
18 PRINT "LETTER"
30 N = 0
40 FOR G = 1 TO 10
50 T = 0
60 GOTO 80
70 X = INT (26 * RND (1)) + 1: RETURN
80 GOSUB 70
90 N = N + 1
100 IF X = 20 THEN PRINT "T": IF X = 20 THEN GOTO 120
110 GOTO 60
120 N = N + 1
130 GOSUB 70
140 IF X = 15 THEN PRINT "O": IF X = 15 THEN PRINT : IF X = 15 THEN GOTO 160
150 GOTO 120
160 N = N + 1
170 GOSUB 70
180 IF X = 2 THEN PRINT "B": IF X = 2 THEN GOTO 200
190 GOTO 160
200 N = N + 1
210 GOSUB 70
220 IF X = 5 THEN PRINT "E": IF X = 5 THEN PRINT : IF X = 5 THEN GOTO 240
230 GOTO 200
240 T = T + 1
250 IF T = 2 THEN GOTO 460
260 N = N + 1
270 GOSUB 70
280 IF X = 15 THEN PRINT "O": IF X = 15 THEN GOTO 300
290 GOTO 260
300 N = N + 1
310 GOSUB 70
320 IF X = 18 THEN PRINT "R": IF X = 18 THEN GOTO 340
330 GOTO 300
340 N = N + 1
350 GOSUB 70
360 IF X = 14 THEN PRINT "N": IF X = 14 THEN GOTO 380
370 GOTO 340
380 N = N + 1
390 GOSUB 70
400 IF X = 15 THEN PRINT "O": IF X = 15 THEN GOTO 420
410 GOTO 380
420 N = N + 1
430 GOSUB 70
440 IF X = 20 THEN PRINT "T": IF X = 20 THEN PRINT : IF X = 20 THEN GOTO 60
450 GOTO 420
460 PRINT "N=";N;" KEYS PRESSED TO WRITE 'TO BE OR NOT TO BE'"
470 PRINT "FOR";G;" RUN(S) OF PROGRAM"
480 PRINT
490 NEXT G
500 END
510 REM  IF THE PROGRAM WERE
511 REM  WRITTEN TO INCLUDE
512 REM  PUNCTUATION MARKS ETC.
513 REM  THE PROGRAM WOULD
514 REM  TAKE LONGER, BUT WOULD
515 REM  STILL NOT BE PROHIBI-
516 REM  TIVE
517 PRINT
518 PRINT  "WITH 3000 RUNS, THE MEAN"
519 PRINT  "# of trials=333"
520 PRINT  "THE MEAN TIME REQUIRED"
521 PRINT  "WAS .14 MINUTES TO PRINT"
522 PRINT  "TOBEORNOTTOBE"
-------------------------------
From this analysis of Darwin, Hamlet, Dawkins, Hardison, coincidence, and 
selective evolution, we may conclude that whether the reality of evolution is 
to be believed or not to be believed, methinks it is like a weasel of truth 
nonetheless.

Michael Shermer

[Dimensio]

Of course you cannot cite any, you are a laugh

Another example of gore3000's lying. I did cite references to studies of evolution of bat echolocation on a previous discussion. That wasn't good enough for gore3000, however, as he wanted me to post the entire contents of the report in my message (which would have been a waste of bandwidth).

[Dimensio]

A lot more than that Dr. Dini has that you need to be an atheist to be a scientist.

Fine. Present this documentation. I'll be generous and offer a lesser standard of evidence than you require for refutations of your 'facts': I'll accept links to said documentation rather than demanding that you simply present it outright.

Oh, and where did Dr. Dini claim that atheism is a requirement for a scientist? Oooh, that's right. You use a definition of 'atheist' that is totally divorced from reality, wherein people who express a belief in a deity are still 'atheists' simply because they do not believe exactly as you do.

[Dimensio]

You are really scared to death of belief in God aren't you?

You might want to specify exactly to which God you are referring. I won't speak for balrog666 but if he does not believe in any Gods then a mention of a God without context is confusing, as the one in which you believe is not the only God postulated throughout human history.

[Dimensio]

It is the only theory of the origin of the universe that abides by scientific laws.

What is the "theory of Creationism"? What does it predict, how can it be tested, what observations should result from those tests and how can it be falsified?

Oh, and trying to use the 2nd law of Thermo to discredit evolution simply shows that you lack knowledge of thermodynamics, evolution, or both.

[jennyp]

Humor, Andrew. Humor.

[American in Israel]

Well to have authority you have to be given authority, so the bad vibes bit? Hey this is pretty new ground, and these are pretty new times. My guess is you are going to be seeing a lot more of this stuff in the near future.

No we live in the same world. Second hand descriptions with text is very hard, but think a boulder the size of a car placed in a streambed with mellon sized rocks on the side of a hill. First, keep in mind that a stream bed sorts rocks. The water speed and force is directly related to the "fallout" size of the rocks, that is why you will find small rock streambeds placed around round rocks, not random sized rock streambeds. A closer look at any placer streambed will show layering. The more wide ranged the size of the rocks in a given layer the more unstable or turbulant the water at the time of the layer, where the more matching the layer in size and mass the smoother the transition. After a normal flood condition the rocks will "shift gears" on down as the waters abate and the stream will layer all the way to sand.

So you can read the relative fury, time, surge pattern by the rocks. After a good storm you can read the streambed like a book, the pages tell the story of the storm.

A large rock placed On a normal stream bed means that the flood was ripping into the streambeds, a large rock placed in a normal stream bed means the stream bed is later than the rock. It is in how the rocks are deposited under/around the large rock. It is pretty important to a prospector, do you follow a pay streak around a rock or under it?

It also means you can tell if a pattern of deposit was done with a huge flood (which is what it takes to rain out car rocks over a wide area) or a localized one that deposits them in a line formation following the stream bed.

Not just any rocks mind you, just placered ones.

Now go look. But let the streams speak for themselves, if you go look with brown glasses it will all just look like a bunch of, uh brown stuff to you. Take the glasses off. I assure you we are on the same planet, I live on earth, and there was this guy named Yeshua...

-grin-

[AndrewC]

Smile, sorry I guess I got stuck in my leg chomping mode.

[jennyp]

As for the gold, I still have to ask: Why do you assume the hills were 4500 feet tall when the gold was deposited crosswise over them? In between the original shallow sea and the current upthrusted 4500 foot canyon walls, there were many different intermediate states - including hilly intertidal areas, etc. Secondly, I wonder how many ice ages there were between 1.8mya and today? Up in WA State, there was a natural ice dam in ID that burst and flooded to create what is now eastern/central WA high plateau. Then of course there's the earth dam that burst & let in the Mediterranean into the Black Sea, likely giving rise to a certain myth about a guy named Noah...

Hey, apparently tsunamis in inland lakes are not unheard of! Can you believe that?

Now the rules are, according to the Bible that you are suposto lay a hand or hands on the hurt spot and pray, but I figure God may make an exception for a round the world prayer. If one leg shows up shorter, let me know. I would like to pray and see if a round the world prayer works.

OH THANKS A LOT. If it works, you will be hearing from my lawyer! >:-O

Seriously, if you think you're getting consistent results with faith healing, then I can point you to someone who could set up a blind test. They're offering a million $$$ if you can show results.

[American in Israel]

As for the gold, I still have to ask: Why do you assume the hills were 4500 feet tall when the gold was deposited crosswise over them? In between the original shallow sea and the current upthrusted 4500 foot canyon walls, there were many different intermediate states - including hilly intertidal areas, etc.

Well you got me there. If you can move mountains at any point to any level then anypoint on earth could have been anywhere at any time. There is no zero on the ruler, no reference. So in return how do you know there was not a flood if every moutain top has fossils?

Then of course there's the earth dam that burst & let in the Mediterranean into the Black Sea, likely giving rise to a certain myth about a guy named Noah...

Uh, myth? Myths dont create fossils. Nor do bodies of things laying around. That creates stink. I have seen a lot of dead deer and other critters in water and out of it. Never saw a fossil in progress, just maggots. You know maggots stir feathers? What ever makes fossils is faster than maggots or keeps flys away.

Hey, apparently tsunamis in inland lakes are not unheard of! Can you believe that?

Sure. Never seen one tho...

OH THANKS A LOT. If it works, you will be hearing from my lawyer! >:-O

NO NO NO! First do the leg length test and if one is SHORT let me know. Trying to curse someone in Gods name is like trying to fly with lead baloons. Don't work, never will.

Seriously, if you think you're getting consistent results with faith healing, then I can point you to someone who could set up a blind test. They're offering a million $$$ if you can show results.

Hmmm, I think they should try to go see it happen themselves, would be much cheaper. I don't have much use for a million bucks, but what is the point? Is it to heal someone or to put a silly test on God? If it is to play with Gods mind I don't think it would work, I or the child were not the healers, we were just the messengers. I don't like trying to force God's hand. He lets me sometimes when I am being stupid, but you have to understand that I love God. This is not a game to me, and I feel pretty bad if I misuse his grace. Kinda like finding out you took advantage of someone you love. You feel loved but feel icky at the same time. I don't like icky.

God is pretty smart, don't think anybody has ever pulled the wool over his eyes. There is a lot of healing in the Church, it seems the person who is willing to risk a million bucks at this point is a pretty even bet that they got heart problems that would prevent them from using their eyes to see. My bet is that it is a waste of time.

I was just giving my own first person perspective. Hey, just grab a girl friend and do the leg check for a lark. Don't need to make a big deal of it, just say you have heard it causes back problems and you wanted to check yours and hers. The dice are loaded a bit against it working as per the rules above but I know God lets His hand be moved. To remove a lot of the dice loading, publish the results if it does not work as you wish, but if it does publish it privately if you wish. I am not offering to prove something but to test something, and if you get a healing in the course of the test good. Perhaps we should take this to email at this point, I am getting way off thread...

My apologies to ya all on my long chat here.

[BMCDA]

How do you know that half a wing isn't in any way useful?
So for instance it can help a bipedal animal to make bigger leaps while running (IOW fly a little bit) or it can be used to glide from trees.

Feathers on the other hand existed for the purpose of insulation so the more nested their structure the more they are suited for this purpose since they can better store the warm film of air (I think VadeRetro provided some examples of flightless dinosaurs with primitive feathers). Only later they also proved to be suitable for flight.

Also, a mutation doesn't have to be beneficial to spread in a population, a neutral mutation can do that as well. It may not be as likely to spread as a beneficial one but the chances for this are not zero. Especially in small populations this can happen quite often (-> founder effect, genetic drift).

[BMCDA]

Here is a website debunking the Noachian flood. I thought you might read it before claiming that a world wide flood is responsible for the fossils and especially for the order in which they are found.

http://www.glenn.morton.btinternet.co.uk

[PatrickHenry]

Placemarker.

[Note to moderator. Hi, Phaedrus. You deleted my last placemarker, #572. If posting yet another placemarker gets me banned, well, that's life. I've already contributed to the freepathon, so now's a good time to ban me.]