Evidence for creationism, Part 2.

[Tacitusitis]

You take such pride in being wrong

No kidding.

the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazca_Lines which could only be made if they used some type of flight

So ancient Britons knew how to fly?

Without the aid of Mary Jane?

Even your fellow creationists might find "ancient Americans drew on the ground therefore they either knew how to fly or were communicating with space" to be A Bridge Too Stupid for them.

 

[Ajidica]

this proves it took a phd scientist and a couple people with foresight and modern knowlege to accomplish this structure note the words "With careful planning" in the next sentence

So then you reject all of the theories on how the pyramids and stonehenge were built as all of the 'proofs' came from scientists doing tests with the benefit of foresight, modern knowledge, and careful planning?

 

[Brian Shanahan]

John Woodmorappe two B.A. degrees and an M.A. in geology

there is plenty of modern evidence to suggest that Noah had the know how to accomplish this.
look at how greeks and romans built incredible structures like aqueducts and that knowledge was lost to medieval Europe. the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazca_Lines which could only be made if they used some type of flight

First why would you link to something that debunks your crackpot theory.
Second why Nazca and not the Cerne Abbas Giant when people come up with these things? Is it the erect penis?
Third there are many good reasons why the Romans did stuff that Medieval Europe didn't, i.e. stable government, singular authority across Europe, large population of free labour, etc. And if the Romans and Greeks were so advanced why didn't they have the horse collar, or a decent system of numbering, or the compass. And yes there were Medieval aqueducts built, just nothing to the scale of Roman ones, "why replace what's not broken".

Do you know what "with careful planning" even means, it means drawing out a representation to scale of what you are going to do, and then using careful measurements to ensure that everything goes right. Here a very annoying and probably stupid person shows you how to do it:

Link to video.

 

[Ajidica]

And if the Romans and Greeks were so advanced why didn't they have the horse collar,

Or stirrups. It took the Avars to give us stirrups.

 

[Lone Wolf]

Wait, wait? The Nazca lines had been appropriated by the Creationists, too? Or is Magicfan an "Alien" creationist?

 

[SuperJay]

this proves it took a phd scientist and a couple people with foresight and modern knowlege to accomplish this structure note the words "With careful planning" in the next sentenc

Because "careful planning" is clearly a modern innovation?

And the quote says "by using tools and technology available to the Nazca people."

Seriously, do you guys even read the posts you're supposedly refuting?

 

[magicfan101]

the reason i use wiki is to use a source they you guys find "somewhat" credible if i linked to creationist websites you would say there were making stuff up.

i dont believe in aliens but here is what Im referring to http://www.nott.com/Pages/projects.php

aerial flight or not what they did is pretty impressive considering they use some "simple" tools to our standards and ancient knowledge. like i said it took a phd scientist to figure out what "primitive" people could have done to make those figures.

 

[Ajidica]

And what does any of this have to do with Creationism?

 

[Miles Teg]

bats are the only mammals that have wings(highly specialized) and live, sleep, breed upside down. plz explain how that could of evolve over "millions of years" when there are no "fossil evidence" of bat evolution. they just pop up in the fossil record.

Bat's don't fossilize well. The evolution of small animals isn't well understood for that very reason. It's not exactly a mystery why we don't have many fossils of a kind of animal that doesn't leave many fossils. With that said, let me point you to Onychonycteris, a primitive bat that could fly, but lacked echolocation. In any case, bats are actually commonly used as an example of parallel structures. Most mammals, from bats to cats to humans to whales, share a similar arm structure that differs in predictable ways. It's really quite fascinating to see how similar animals are once you get down to the skeletal level.

the continental drift theory makes an assumption of uniformitarianism that today's rates of drifting can be applied to the past. which is something that science can not prove. i can say god made the world 6000 years ago but i don't have proof of this date except what god said in the bible(faith based assumption). neither can scientist say apply todays present dates of drift to the past (faith based assumption)

Nope. Creationism would be entirely valid if you could find proof of it. doesn't just happen in a lab. The reason it's not valid is because it's not true. Continental Drift isn't accepted on faith, it's accepted because no one's offered a better model of how geology would work.

i believe in micro-evolution(variety in species which god built in) not macro-
evolution(molecules to man. through a random,blind,chance process)
i will be more than happy to provide more evidence.

Please do so. And of course, evolution isn't the result of just blind chance. It's blind chance filtered through a wonderful mechanism called natural selection. The organisms with the best mutations has more babies than the organism with bad mutations. I'd love to pull out some cool analogy, but unfortunately animals are just about the only things on earth that have sex and reproduce.

all dogs come from one wolf kind even the biased wiki confirms this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspecies_of_Canis_lupus

Dogs we Artificially Selected by humans, and even that process took a couple thousand years. Artificial Selection is a relatively fast process that changes little of a creature's genetic makeup. That's reflected in the fact that all dogs (wolves to chihuahuas) are the same species. By contrast, natural evolution is slow (or rather, it's fast, but with long periods of calm between the jumps).

Your friend John Woodmorappe considers tigers and lions to be the same Biblical "kind", but in reality they diverged over 2 million years ago.

John Woodmorappe two B.A. degrees and an M.A. in geology

From where? I did some googling, and all I can find is that he got his degrees from an unnamed Midwestern university. Given that Woodmorappe is actually a pen name, and the "Woodmorappe" once cited an a paper by his real name (Jan Peczkis). I'm under no obligation to honor Peczkis's degrees if they came from Dinosaur Rider Jesus University of Oklahoma.

When did the great flood occur according to the bible?
If it occured around 6,000 years ago, then you are claiming evolution happened far faster then even the most optomistic of scientists would assert.

To be nitpicky, it's important to remember that the process of evolution isn't a good or bad thing.

 

[negZero]

@Dom, I still want to hear this miracle that science can't explain away.

 

[PeteAtoms]

the reason i use wiki is to use a source they you guys find "somewhat" credible if i linked to creationist websites you would say there were making stuff up.

i dont believe in aliens but here is what Im referring to http://www.nott.com/Pages/projects.php

aerial flight or not what they did is pretty impressive considering they use some "simple" tools to our standards and ancient knowledge. like i said it took a phd scientist to figure out what "primitive" people could have done to make those figures.

Why can't the use of geometry, astronomy and mathematics be used to make the Nazca stuff? If you got a long enough rope you can make straight lines, circles, arcs, right angles, etc.

I watched a group of people on some Nova special awhile ago that recreated highly geometrically intricate crop circles with a pad of paper, pens, strings and 2x4's+rope.

 

[magicfan101]

Your friend John Woodmorappe considers tigers and lions to be the same Biblical "kind", but in reality they diverged over 2 million years ago<---- false statement no evidence behind it

http://www.liger.org/ and just google tigons. Proof of biblical kinds of cats. i can not give you exact kinds that were on the ark until we have mapped more genomes. which surprisingly takes supercomputers to map.

 

[sophie]

Let's think about this Nazca lines thing: Either the natives who made the thing were knowledgeable in geometry, and, through using some basic mathematical computations were able to design these neato designs,

or...

they invented airplanes, had one of their dudes fly around in it, while using some sort of communication (radios?) to tell his dudes on the ground where to dig.

Which one sounds more logical to you?

 

[magicfan101]

Bat's don't fossilize well. The evolution of small animals isn't well understood for that very reason. It's not exactly a mystery why we don't have many fossils of a kind of animal that doesn't leave many fossils.

if bats don't fossilize well how can jellyfish be fossilized

http://www.livescience.com/animals/071030-oldest-jellyfish.html
excerpt from the article

Fossil evidence of jellyfish dates back to the Cambrian Period, 500 million years ago. This fossil jellyfish shows similarity to the modern jellyfish, Cunina (right). It was one of four different types of jellyfish dated back to the Cambrian by researchers in 2007. These ancient jellyfish showed the same complexity as modern jellyfish, meaning they either developed rapidly 500 million years ago, or today&#8217;s varieties are much older

no change over 500 million years. cmon know

 

[Ajidica]

http://www.liger.org/ and just google tigons. Proof of biblical kinds of cats. i can not give you exact kinds that were on the ark until we have mapped more genomes. which surprisingly takes supercomputers to map.

Aren't ligers generaly sterile?

Furthermore, if we can't know which kind of animals were on the ark until the genome is mapped, how are you so sure ligers were on the ark?

 

[sophie]

if bats don't fossilize well how can jellyfish be fossilized

Fossilization isn't just about having or not having bones; it has more to do with the terrain in which they are most likely to die in. If bats don't live in and around areas that are conducive to fossilization, you aren't going to find very many bat fossils.

NOTE: I don't know for sure, this is just my best guess.

no change over 500 million years. cmon know

And one fila in thousands is enough to disprove evolution because...?

 

[magicfan101]

Let's think about this Nazca lines thing: Either the natives who made the thing were knowledgeable in geometry, and, through using some basic mathematical computations were able to design these neato designs,

or...

they invented airplanes, had one of their dudes fly around in it, while using some sort of communication (radios?) to tell his dudes on the ground where to dig.

Which one sounds more logical to you?

good point. i was just trying to show that the ancients some form advanced knowledge that can be lost through the ages

 

[carlosMM]

Your friend John Woodmorappe considers tigers and lions to be the same Biblical "kind", but in reality they diverged over 2 million years ago<---- false statement no evidence behind it

http://www.liger.org/ and just google tigons. Proof of biblical kinds of cats. i can not give you exact kinds that were on the ark until we have mapped more genomes. which surprisingly takes supercomputers to map.

utter nonsense! Just because relatively closely related species can produce (usually infertile) offsprings doesn't make them one species.

Let's get this sorted out real quick: Felis catus - same kind as Panthera leo? Panthera onca? Panthera pardus? Acinonyx jubatus? Lynx lynx? Leptailurus serval? Caracal caracal? Leopardus pardalis?

You see where this leads. either you have a plethora of non-itnerbreeding and highly different animals in a kind, or you have a gazillion animals to transport. Neither makes any sense.
And don't get my started on the extinct Felidae..... where do they fit in?

 

[Ajidica]

good point. i was just trying to show that the ancients some form advanced knowledge that can be lost through the ages

Oh, technological regression!
Which is complete and utter bullcrap.
The whole 'the ancients did it but now we can't' argument is bull. The Pyramids, a very impressive piece of enginnering, was primarily a logistical challenge with very little required in the way of actual engineering. Notre Dame on the other hand, requires fairly advanced knowledge or architecture and was both a logistical nightmare and architectural.

 

[magicfan101]

Aren't ligers generaly sterile?

Furthermore, if we can't know which kind of animals were on the ark until the genome is mapped, how are you so sure ligers were on the ark?

im not saying the liger was the cat kind that was on the ark but through micro-evolution we can have a great variety from the one cat kind that was on the ark.