Evidence for creationism

Status
Not open for further replies.
Those Ancient Greek philosophers were amazing. :)

Berzerker, since I seem to have missed it, can you link me to your posts where you provide compelling evidence of the truth of Genesis 1:1-10?
 
Cleared due to large gap...
 
You know, Classical Hero, we're really missing your input in this thread. Is that because the topic is about providing evidence for creationism, rather than simply rubbishing the theory of evolution?
 
Not wanting to read the whole 34 pages (read the first few pages) ... but is there any evidence posted, we can look up and research ... or is it just "It's not evolution (it's wrong) ... so it must have been created" rhetoric.
 
I'm actualy surprised there hasn't been more reliance on the 'Answers in Genesis' site by the Creationists. Of all the creationist sites I have seen, they tend to be the least nutty.
 
Not wanting to read the whole 34 pages (read the first few pages) ... but is there any evidence posted, we can look up and research ... or is it just "It's not evolution (it's wrong) ... so it must have been created" rhetoric.

No, it's mostly either dodging the question, or "The bible says X, the bible is right, science is wrong". So you've saved yourself a couple of hours at least. Though there are some nice shiny pictures IIRC.
 
No, it's mostly either dodging the question, or "The bible says X, the bible is right, science is wrong". So you've saved yourself a couple of hours at least. Though there are some nice shiny pictures IIRC.

Meh, I found the thread as a whole to be rather lulzy, so net gain for me! :thumbsup:
 
Meh, I found the thread as a whole to be rather lulzy, so net gain for me! :thumbsup:

It wasn't too bad but reading the whole lot in one go would probably be a bit too much, especially when the conclusion is that the YECcers are talking out of their collective posteriors and won't admit it.
 
It wasn't too bad but reading the whole lot in one go would probably be a bit too much, especially when the conclusion is that the YECcers are talking out of their collective posteriors and won't admit it.

The constant *headdesk* would at least get you into the ER, so better not read it in one go ;)


hey, creationists - hic Rhodos, hic saltas!
 
I have a lot more doubt than faith coming out of this thread. So thanks YECers for having it all together. I guess I can only blame myself for reading it though. Ignorance is bliss.
 
You gotta feel for Creationists. They're not scientists and don't understand the cruel unforgiving nature of science. And I found a fitting analogy for this thread.

When Darwin made his discovery he was upset with what he found, but couldn't deny the evidence he found. He didn't set out on his voyage to find evidence of Evolution. Creationist "science" by origin can't be science. When Creationist "scientists' created it, they already knew what the conclusions of their "studies" would be. They set out to prove Evolution was false and God created everything. Now I'm sure that the Creation "Scientists" were, just like Darwin, not happy with what they found. So, instead of going with the actual discoveries they had to make due with a Museum which did not display actual things dug out of the ground like fossils.

Nope, to support their theories they had to build a 27 million playground with lots of puppets and assorted nonsense but sans actual real world evidence. I went to Naturalis this summer and could see and touch what had been in the ground for million years. That is one thing Creationism cannot provide and that is what has been missing in this thread. One side has:

0819-creation-museum_full_600.jpg


The other

hominids2_big.jpg


No. It's not fair. And thank Zeus it isn't.
 
Now I'd like to see the article in the Christian Science Monitor that included that photo. :)
 
That raptor in Ziggy's photo must be a vegetarian, otherwise the girl would be lunch meat. I guess people just don't see through this stuff because of what they want to believe. Ironic that the brain's reward system makes us feel good for being close-minded.
 
That raptor in Ziggy's photo must be a vegetarian, otherwise the girl would be lunch meat. I guess people just don't see through this stuff because of what they want to believe. Ironic that the brain's reward system makes us feel good for being close-minded.

I believe Creationists do say dinos were actually vegetarians. Or maybe that was just before the fall of Adam and Eve.
 
Enormous razor sharp teeth certainly are an advantage when devouring peaches.
 
Correct. After the fall, some of them became meat eaters.
Why only some?
Furthermore, if prior to the fall they had been plant eaters, where did they get the carnivore teath from?

If you say 'God did it', you are creating two period of creation rather then just one. Following the logic that the change was driven by God, one can proceed easily to the belief that all changes were started by God, numerous times whenever the phenotype changed.
 
Why only some?

Prior to the fall, the system was very simple. You ate plants, as did all animals. There was no reason for animals to die, there was plenty in the form of plant food, and life was perfect, so death to sentient life would not happen in a perfect world.

After the fall, food webs developed. And I'm fairly certain some dinosaurs were herbivores, I thought that was established fact.

Furthermore, if prior to the fall they had been plant eaters, where did they get the carnivore teath from?

I'd say they always had them, just that in a perfect world it was not a problem for them to use them to eat plants. Though I don't pretend to know.
 
I'd say they always had them, just that in a perfect world it was not a problem for them to use them to eat plants. Though I don't pretend to know.
Have you tried eating a salad with a chefs knife? Tell me how that goes.
By asserting that carnivorous dino's were able to eat plants and survive off it, you are rejecting observable science.
Furthermore, why would carnivores rise to prominance rather then omnivores? Shifting from Vegitarian to Omnivore is far easier then shifting from Vegitarian to Carnivore.
 
By asserting that carnivorous dino's were able to eat plants and survive off it, you are rejecting observable science.

No I am not because that would have stopped at the fall. So I am not rejecting anything. I no longer believe this is possible. Not that I have any proof besides the Bible for my theory, but if Creationism is not proven false than neither is that.

Furthermore, why would carnivores rise to prominance rather then omnivores? Shifting from Vegitarian to Omnivore is far easier then shifting from Vegitarian to Carnivore.

Before the fall, everyone and everything was vegetarian. After the fall, the curse instantly changed everything into a world much like we have today.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom