I'm working on my Nobel thesis. Here's more proof. Note the distinct eco-systems -- all formed within just a few minutes!!!
Posted on 02/14/2003 5:41:19 PM PST by Remedy
The president of a Christian apologetics ministry says there is a bias within the mainstream media to present anything that seems to support evolution or undermines the Bible.
When evolutionists claimed they found a meteorite from Mars with life in it, the report received front-page headlines around the world -- and even then-President Clinton got involved. Yet when even secular scientists agreed that there was no evidence of life in that rock, the story received little attention from the press.
Ken Ham, president of Answers in Genesis, says that was not an isolated case of bias. He explains that the secular media -- which he describes as atheistic and anti-Christian -- publishes most anything it can that appears to indoctrinate people and "hits against the Bible."
"It's very hard for us to get anything in there because coming from a biblical, creationist position and worrying about biblical morality [and believing] that the Bible's true, the secular world by and large doesn't want to hear it -- and secular media certainly don't want people to hear it," he says.
Ham says II Peter 3 tells us that men are willingly ignorant, deliberately reject, or choose to disbelieve. Certainly, Ham says, that is being exhibited in the media. And according to Ham, that even extends to scientific journals.
He explains that his ministry, which defends the biblical account of creation, has had to produce its own scientific journals because of censorship by evolutionists. He says it is nearly impossible to have creation research papers published in magazines like Nature or Science.
"They say [our articles] are not scientific [because] they have the creationist philosophy," Ham says. "It doesn't matter how scientific our scientists are, if they come from a creationist perspective, they won't publish them.
"And then they turn around and tell the public [it] can't trust creationists because they don't publish reputable papers in scientific journals," he says. "In fact, they won't let us publish the papers."
Ham says when this occurs, he is often reminded of the passage in scripture which says: "The heart of man is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked."
Sediments deposited by Mt. St. Helens are not only one formation, but they are also unlithified...therefore very easy to quickly erode.
The Grand Canyon, however, is composed of many lithified formations and is tough to erode. Translation: Rocky formations take much longer to erode than simple sediment.
I'm working on my Nobel thesis. Here's more proof. Note the distinct eco-systems -- all formed within just a few minutes!!!
Click on the link in post#71 and read all of it.
The truth will set you free of your evolutionary BIAS.
3.The media will turn a blind eye towards, or is completely ignorant of evolution's religious roots.
Well, then, what is it, religion vs. religion? Certainly isn't science vs. science.
7.) Finally, how were the steep walled canyons of the Grand Canyon region carved into the newly deposited, unconsolidated sediments of the Colorado Plateau? As Wise notes, there is an interesting problem here:Conclusion (Evaluating the Noah's Flood Hypothesis)."In the Austin model (1994) the sedimentary rocks of the Grand Canyon were all deposited during the early part of the "flood-year," later to be incised into a canyon by the receding waters. The model requires the newly deposited rocks to become strong enough within a few months after deposition to stand as mile high cliffs in violation of all reasonable calculations from hydrology, soil mechanics, and strength of materials. Some rock types, for example, some limestones, become lithified soon after deposition, but most sandstones and shales require major loss of water, compaction, and/or chemical cement to become a strong rock, processes which involve significant amounts of time. This is especially true for very fine grained muds in which low permeability makes complete dewatering almost impossible in any short period of time. Simple loading of other materials on top will not do; trapped water in the muds would cause sudden liquifaction of the entire mass, a phenomenon known to hydraulic engineers as the 'sudden draw down condition.' Rapid drainage commonly results in collapse of oversteepened cut banks as flood swollen rivers subside. Mudstones in the young Grand Canyon model should have behaved in the same way but would have collapsed even more readily than canal and river banks considering Canyon cliff heights are measured not in meters but more than a thousand meters."
im getting frustrated with these people again its making me type like a madman
Think like one (evolutionist) and type like one.
Hey, that assertion is scientific, and is in no way derived from religion. The fact that the Bible also implies that the earth is 6000 years old as well is pure coincidence.
Realize that they destroy themselves by being evidence-proof. No, they never ever ever say, "OK, you got me." But that in itself gets pretty spooky after a while. (Say, four years in my case.)
if your only response so far have been attacks
Nope any evidence that is made up of lies and deceptions by creationists with an ax to grind against scientific research can pretty much be disregarded.
If the creationists came up with anything that was halfway scientific real scientists would take a look at it. . 51 posted on 02/15/2003 11:21 AM CST by Sentis
Start at post #51 and read your own responses on this thread. BIASED AND HYPOCRITICAL!
Isa 40:22
He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers.
He stretches out the heavens like a canopy,
Isa 42:5
This is what God the LORD says— he who created the heavens and stretched them out,
The Biblical account supports a round earth (Isa 40:22) as well as the expanse of the universe. True science will always line up with Scripture if the Bible comments on that topic. If your theory doesn't line up with the Bible immediately begin looking for errors.
Remember we do not claim the Bible is a science textbook. But where the Scripture comments you can count on its truth and accuracy.
They conspire against me by eating the evidence! I think they must be crypto-Darwinists!!
Except that much of the rock in the Grand Canyon isn't soft sedimentary; it won't just "wash away" in a flood of water. A lot of of heavy metal mining (tungsten, uranium, etc) has been done inside the Grand Canyon from the metamorphic and igneous layers that make up its geology. To erode these types of layers to a level that deep requires extraordinary amounts of time. Extrapolating from a mud-n-ash dam in Washington is specious reasoning.
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.