Poll - Age Old Question Evolution or Creation

[Reichsmarshal]

I thought the Turin shroud had been proved to be a fake through carbon dating tests?

The shroud of turin is a piece of cloth. And carbon dated to
Be from the renaissance.

Let's take at look at page 193 of the book The Blood And The Shroud

"Archaeologists, who reoutinely call upon radiocarbon-dating labortaroies' services, tend to shy from openly criticising the results they recieve, even if they do not necessarily agree with some of them, but one who certainly has has no such qualms is Greece's Spyros Iakovidis, speaking at an international conference in 1989: 'In relation to the reliablity of radiocarbon dating I would lke to mention something which happened to me during my excavation at Gla [in Boeotia, Greece]. I sent to two different laboratories in two different parts of the world a certain amount of the same burnt grain. I got two readings differing by 2000 years, the archaeological dates being right in the middle. I feel that this method is not exactly to be trusted.'

Nor are such examples isolated and anecodtal. In the same year of 1989 Britain's Science and Engineering Research Council commissioned a special inter-comparsion trail for radiocarbon-dating laboratories in which altoghether thirty-eight different laboratories took part, collectiely representing both the conventional Libby method and the accelerator mass spectrometer one. Each laboratory was given artefacts of dates known to the oragisers, but unkown to them. The shock finding of this totally scientific trail was that the laboratories's actual margins of error were on average two or three times greater than those that they quoted. Of the thirty-eight who participated, only seven produced results that the organization considered totally satisfactory, with the laboratories using the new accelerator mass spectormeter technique faring particularly badly. It is also a matter of record that the Oxford laboratory, inevitably the highest profile of any, actually declined to take part. Yet this is the method that we are supposed to believe 'conclusively' proved the Shroud a mediaeval fake."

Also the bloodflows and nailing are perfectly depicted. How did a mediveval artist with such incorrect knowledge of medical information know all that?

It is proven that is was not painted! There is no evidence whatsover that is was!

Critics have yet to explain the negative image!

And as for Noah's ark, well, ermm, 'whatever'.

Originally posted by CurtSibling


The ark on noah proves some one built a boat.

A boat made like the Bible describes and built on a mountain in Turkey?

[/B]Goodbye to this debate,
Science wins again, just check the polls!

Ho-hum... [/B]

More people believe in Theistic evolution rather than naturalistic evolution.

Actually the vast majority believes in Creation.

Such as?

In Revelation, the Bible mententions a man whose name in Greek means New Destroyer. This is refering to Napoleon Bonaparte whose name does indeed mean New Destroyer in Greek.


The evidence stands.

 

[sumociv]

did some christian college assign this thread to their apologetics program on march 17th?
You guys need to chill with your 50 year old comebacks to evolution. They were only slighltly convincing back then and are totally laughable now.
The shroud of turin??? Only a religious fanatic would accept that as evidence. In Kabul, the head of the Taliban used the "cloak of Mohammed" to convince people that he was God's newly annointed messenger. The fact that he wasn't struck down
when he put it on was one of the reasons he was accepted by the masses as appointed by God.
The ark of Noah has been found????? I know all about this because I used to believe that too. Then I did some research and found that many people had climbed Ararat to photograph the Ark, but their cameras always were stolen by armenian bandits or stepped on by their camels, or the film mysteriously wasn't developed right. "Damn it! I had proof too!". UFO advacates also know that UFO's have been proven to exist by the same types evidence.
quote: originally posted by some 1st grade sunday school teacher:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Revelation, the Bible mententions a man whose name in Greek means New Destroyer. This is refering to Napoleon Bonaparte whose name does indeed mean New Destroyer in Greek.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Dude, have you even taken greek. I have 6 years of Biblical Greek to my name and even I don't know how to convert a french word like Napoleon Bonaparte to greek! I'll take a stab at it. (Greek: "napoleanos bonapartos". hmmmm I think that probably means Napolean Bonaparte in greek!) Now yes Apolytonos does mean destroyer in Greek but the N in "napoleon" probably would indicate a negative. "Bonaparte" has no clear Greek derivation. But if we were desperate to translate it into greek I guess you could use "bounas" greek for exactly with a tweaked form of"aparti" which means hill. So the closest I can get to translating the greek form of Napolean Bonaparte is "The undestroyer of this exact hill" Clearly this is proof of biblical prophecy!
Now if his name was something like "Keinos Apolytonos" with French endings then I think you'd be a little more credible. Of course you would also have to completly ignore the context and authorial intent of whatever verse in Revelation you are trying to twist into justifying your blind and embarrising attempt to use scripture as a trump card on the theory of evolution.
Your approach to scripture is indistinguishably from that of the crusaders, David Koresh and Osama Bin Laden, and people like you are the reason that christianity is non-existent in western, intellectualism!

We need a prerequisite to post on this thread. If you have not had even one critical thought in your whole life about your religious or scientific beliefs then you shouldn't post.
----sumo

 

[FearlessLeader2]

In response to me giving up on this and similar threads, and being 'replaced' by young-earth creationists, and people who believe in the Shroud of Turin (and probably Bigfoot and Nessie too), I can only think of one thing to say, and that is a quote from the New Testament:

"Jesus wept."

I will occasionally re-enter this topic and similar ones, for the sole purpose of dismantling YEChs and their ilk. If I'm not going to argue against the ToE anymore, I can at least keep the ones who do honest...

 

[Vrylakas]

FearlessLeader2 wrote:

In response to me giving up on this and similar threads, and being 'replaced' by young-earth creationists, and people who believe in the Shroud of Turin (and probably Bigfoot and Nessie too), I can only think of one thing to say, and that is a quote from the New Testament:

"Jesus wept."

I will occasionally re-enter this topic and similar ones, for the sole purpose of dismantling YEChs and their ilk. If I'm not going to argue against the ToE anymore, I can at least keep the ones who do honest...

In a rare turn of events, Fearless and I find ourselves on the same side on this thread.

The Shroud of Turin? I thought only desperate old Catholics believed in that crapola. I always pictured little old Polish or Italian ladies lined up for that; I didn't know people here in the U.S. also believed in it.

It flies in the face of so much evidence that I can't believe people buy into it. The old traditions of relicry just won't die, will they? First of all, as I recall, doesn't the Bible describe Jesus as being wrapped in layers, rather than a single shroud (Book of John, methinks)? Also, I noticed that the image's face on the shroud has a full beard and long hair, the medieval European conception of what Jesus must have looked like; short cropped hair was the standard in Jesus' time in Judea & Israel, as indeed all the earliest Christian art portrays him. Also, the blood stains on the shroud also follow European legend rather than historical probability; the Romans tended to crucify people by nailing through the wrists, not the hands. Hands, especially palms, were a source of energy and power in early European paganism and Christian mysticism; early Christians used to pray the way modern Moslems do, with level cupped palms facing up towards the sky. Without being too graphic, there's nothing in a human hand to hold the whole body's weight so the Romans usually nailed through the wrists. Medieval European artists thought the hand a more fitting and symbolic place for the wound though. The shroud follows the European conception.

Pope Clement VII sometime at the end of the 14th century declared the Shroud a fabrication and gave it away or sold it off (mostly because it had no Biblical basis), and it didn't come back to the Church's possession until sometime in the early 1980s at which time Pope John Paul II decided to showcase it.

We in the 21st century now pine for the wisdom of Clement in the 14th....

 

[Reichsmarshal]

Learn some evidence then post. At least have the decency to argue instead of simply labely someone as "desperate" or fundamentalist, or something similar.

Go read some books on these topics. Espically the Ark.

Get knowledge about what you are talking about.

Read the Blood and the Shroud, it deals with the wrist thing.

This thread is finally dead.

 

[Scrimshaw]

Originally posted by FearlessLeader2
In response to me giving up on this and similar threads, and being 'replaced' by young-earth creationists, and people who believe in the Shroud of Turin (and probably Bigfoot and Nessie too), I can only think of one thing to say, and that is a quote from the New Testament:

"Jesus wept."

I will occasionally re-enter this topic and similar ones, for the sole purpose of dismantling YEChs and their ilk. If I'm not going to argue against the ToE anymore, I can at least keep the ones who do honest...

Hey don't go knocking my belief in Bigfoot and Nessie!! They're both real but what exactly they are is an argument for another thead.
I agree the shroud of turin is crap though. It's been dated to the 14th century. but they of course have a good sounding explanation for that so you never quite know

Disclaimer: Although I used the mad smilie, I'm not actually mad and this post is intended to be light hearted It does reflect my actual views though.