Creationism - the anti-science.

LeBrok

Elite member
Messages
10,261
Reaction score
1,617
Points
0
Location
Calgary
Ethnic group
Citizen of the world
Y-DNA haplogroup
R1b Z2109
mtDNA haplogroup
H1c
Very fast... you just get the proof that you have no idea about time.
Nothing strange, that you, and people similar to you couldn't understand
how much it is hundreds of thousands or millions of years, becasue you
all do not understand even how much it is 150 years.
For new members. Poster Rethel believes in creationism and 5,000 years old world.


"Creation science" is a contradiction in terms.
A central tenet of modern science is methodological naturalism--it seeks to explain the universe purely in terms of observed or testable natural mechanisms. Thus, physics describes the atomic nucleus with specific concepts governing matter and energy, and it tests those descriptions experimentally. Physicists introduce new particles, such as quarks, to flesh out their theories only when data show that the previous descriptions cannot adequately explain observed phenomena. The new particles do not have arbitrary properties, moreover--their definitions are tightly constrained, because the new particles must fit within the existing framework of physics.


In contrast, intelligent-design theorists invoke shadowy entities that conveniently have whatever unconstrained abilities are needed to solve the mystery at hand. Rather than expanding scientific inquiry, such answers shut it down. (How does one disprove the existence of omnipotent intelligences?)


Intelligent design offers few answers. For instance, when and how did a designing intelligence intervene in life's history? By creating the first DNA? The first cell? The first human? Was every species designed, or just a few early ones? Proponents of intelligent-design theory frequently decline to be pinned down on these points. They do not even make real attempts to reconcile their disparate ideas about intelligent design. Instead they pursue argument by exclusion--that is, they belittle evolutionary explanations as far-fetched or incomplete and then imply that only design-based alternatives remain.


Logically, this is misleading: even if one naturalistic explanation is flawed, it does not mean that all are. Moreover, it does not make one intelligent-design theory more reasonable than another. Listeners are essentially left to fill in the blanks for themselves, and some will undoubtedly do so by substituting their religious beliefs for scientific ideas.

Time and again, science has shown that methodological naturalism can push back ignorance, finding increasingly detailed and informative answers to mysteries that once seemed impenetrable: the nature of light, the causes of disease, how the brain works. Evolution is doing the same with the riddle of how the living world took shape. Creationism, by any name, adds nothing of intellectual value to the effort.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/15-answers-to-creationist/
 
Last edited:
and 5,000 years old world.

It is obviously not true, that I belive, that world is 5000 years old.
You do not even know, how old is the world in the Book which you deny...:worried:
 
It is obviously not true, that I belive, that world is 5000 years old.
You do not even know, how old is the world in the Book which you deny...:worried:
Don't be ashamed of your beliefs and tell us exactly how old the universe is. You can only lose your "good reputation", so it shouldn't be a problem for you...
 
Don't be ashamed of your beliefs and tell us exactly how old the universe is. You can only lose your "good reputation", so it shouldn't be a problem for you...

Such educated person like you pretend to be, should know, how old is the world according to the Bible.
More than that - you claim, to know, that evolution is true, so you should be also familiar with the
concepts and arguments of oposition - obviously you have no idea, becasue then you would know
the age of the world, which is promoted by young-creationists. It means also, that you were only
indoctrinated, and your judgment about the world is only blind repeating what someone was told
you or what is fitting to your agenda. Zero open mindness. Why I am not surrprized?

How old is Universe it depends on the point of view, because this what can be said in 100% is,
that humankind exists 6000 years according to the hebrew text. The Universe - depending on the
interpretation - can be older, BUT there is a LOT of evidences for his youngness (so can be older
only 5 days). Btw, if the relativity of time is true, then the Universe can be older in other parts than
he is here even if he started 6k years ago, no big deal, because time would run there quicker than here.

Btw, I used to belive in old Universe for many many years, and even in old Earth, but after I became
familiar with evidences for young-one, I changed my views, especially, that text much more strongly
supports the young world than the old one. Even it is simply impossible for the world to be older than
couple thousands of years... Surely not millions, and much more not billions of years.

"Good reputation"? - Only among people like you. Nothing to be worry about.
 
Such educated person like you pretend to be, should know, how old is the world according to the Bible.
More than that - you claim, to know, that evolution is true, so you should be also familiar with the
concepts and arguments of oposition - obviously you have no idea, becasue then you would know
the age of the world, which is promoted by young-creationists. It means also, that you were only
indoctrinated, and your judgment about the world is only blind repeating what someone was told
you or what is fitting to your agenda. Zero open mindness. Why I am not surrprized?

How old is Universe it depends on the point of view, because this what can be said in 100% is,
that humankind exists 6000 years according to the hebrew text. The Universe - depending on the
interpretation - can be older, BUT there is a LOT of evidences for his youngness (so can be older
only 5 days). Btw, if the relativity of time is true, then the Universe can be older in other parts than
he is here even if he started 6k years ago, no big deal, because time would run there quicker than here.

Btw, I used to belive in old Universe for many many years, and even in old Earth, but after I became
familiar with evidences for young-one, I changed my views, especially, that text much more strongly
supports the young world than the old one. Even it is simply impossible for the world to be older than
couple thousands of years... Surely not millions, and much more not billions of years.

"Good reputation"? - Only among people like you. Nothing to be worry about.
LOL, why do you need to recall scientific concepts like relativity, if your all mighty god can do whatever it wants. Even screwing up scientific instruments and and pollute minds of scientists to make universe appear billions years older.

Do you believe in computer? I guess, you are using one to post on Eupedia, so I guess you do. You see, the same science and understanding of physics, which has allowed us to create computers, is also telling us that the world is 14 billion years old or some human remains are much older than 6k years. So you can't have both ways. If you believe in your computer it means that the world is 14 billion years old, earth is 4 billion years old and Mal'ta boy is about 20k years old. But if you believe in a biblical age of universe and other myths, then stop using your computer, because it doesn't exist for you.
 
LOL, why do you need to recall scientific concepts like relativity,

Why not?

if your all mighty god can do whatever it wants.

HE, not it, God is masculine, and is the male.

Even screwing up scientific instruments and and pollute minds of scientists to make universe appear billions years older.

It does absolutly not appear billions of years old.
This is your belive based on wishfull thinking and
wrong assumptions to justify own disbelief.

Do you believe in computer? I guess, you are using one to post on Eupedia, so I guess you do.

Yes, I belive in computer.
But you seems not to. You belive either that he made itself
or that he does not exist - or you would if you would live
1000 years ago...it would contradict your concept of the
world and natural rules which exist.

You see, the same science and understanding of physics, which has allowed us to create computers,

And this knowlegde that you have to CREATE something
should tell you, that much more advanced and complex
entities cannot made itself from nothing.

is also telling us that the world is 14 billion years old

It does not tell you that - you only assume it from the spped of light,
which does not have means, that the Universe is 14 billion years.
And btw, you have a problem with the speed at the beginning and
the existing of some galaxy 14 billions years ago - becasue if big
bang was 14 bln years ago, when and how the matter got there
and galacy formed - immidiatly? :D

or some human remains are much older than 6k years.

Surely they are not - 1) you can;'t check if method of datation is correct,
2) methods of datation are disprooved since long time. It is wishfull thinking.

So you can't have both ways.

Maybe you are not aware, but creation is based on science - on real science,
not on wishfull indoctrination like evolution, and certainly does not contradict
each other - especially there, if there is no contradiction. The only problem is
sometimes datation and ideology, not facts per se and their interpretation if
does not contradict the sanity and Scripture.

If you believe in your computer it means that the world is 14 billion years old, earth is 4 billion years old and Mal'ta boy is about 20k years old.[ But if you believe in a biblical age of universe and other myths, then stop using your computer, because it doesn't exist for you.

Very "clever" conclusion showing, you
have no idea what you are talking about.

200_s.gif
 
It does absolutly not appear billions of years old.
Get educated:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe

It does not tell you that - you only assume it from the spped of light,
which does not have means, that the Universe is 14 billion years.
And btw, you have a problem with the speed at the beginning and
the existing of some galaxy 14 billions years ago - becasue if big
bang was 14 bln years ago, when and how the matter got there
and galacy formed - immidiatly? :D
This is really funny, because first galaxy might have formed 200 million years after big bang, which should be eternity for a guy who thinks that universe is 6000 years old.

https://www.space.com/11386-galaxies-formation-big-bang-hubble-telescope.html

Maybe you are not aware, but creation is based on science - on real science,
not on wishfull indoctrination like evolution, and certainly does not contradict
each other - especially there, if there is no contradiction. The only problem is
sometimes datation and ideology, not facts per se and their interpretation if
does not contradict the sanity and Scripture.
Entertain us showing an example of your "science" dating the world by word of god.


Very "clever" conclusion showing, you
have no idea what you are talking about.

200_s.gif
If you were a real fan of Star Trek you would know that Jean Luc Picard believed in mainstream science and not your biblical mambo jambo. Wasn't he an atheist? lol. This is how I look listening to you.
 
Last edited:

You really don;t need to convinst me, that you know only
the one direct propaganda and that you do not even try to
think critically. Probably you are even unable to do that.

This is really funny, because first galaxy might have formed 200 million years after big bang,

1. Might
2. How do you know that? Did you see this? Did you live then?

which should be eternity for a guy who thinks that universe is 6000 years old.

Rather for you, becasue you don;t know how much it is 150 years.
You think, it was quick, and they didn't have the time to do something...

Yea, Canada is very quick... you cant do there anything yet... even marry an
Indian... you need for that ten times more time... or maybe miiiillions of yeeaars...

Maybe even Canada does not exists, becasue it is to short period of time...

If you were a real fan of Star Trek you would know that Jean Luc Picard believed in mainstream science and not your biblical mambo jambo. Wasn't he an atheist? lol. This is how I look listening to you.

Following your logic, which tells me not to belive in the computer, you must stop to belive particularly in:

- heliocentrysm - becasue guys who created this model were Christians. The main one was even a priest! Stop belive in that!
- genetics - becasue guy who created that discipline was a belibing christian.
- oceanography - you certanly can't belive in that branch of science, becasue it was developed under influence of the Bible - guy devoted itself to find one verse from the Book of Hiob, and created this science calle oceanography.
- you should also stop to belive in vaxines...
- in America, becasue this discovery was made by Christians, Bible beliving christians who cross the Atlantic...
- you should also stop beliving in dinosaurs, becasue those who discovered them where christians beliving in the Flood...

- you should also stop beliving... almost in everything waht was developed becasue everything was made by christians.
Even computer was made by christians or based on the mathematical and technological discoveries of christians.

So, be coherent, follow your own wirds, and stop to belive in all of that. Especialy you
must stop to belive in gravity, because Isaak Newton was deeply beliving christian, who
90% of his scientific works and all life devoted to the Bible. You cannot belive in gravity!
as I supposedly, according to you, cannot belive in computer and should stop to use it).

Aaa... I forgot, that you, as an higher but animal, can't think becasue you do not even know,
if you evolved enough to make reasonable judgement... maybe not, so all what you are saying
can be by definition wrong. More than that, you do not even have free will... so you cannot know,
if your choice of beliving is made rightly - you just was evolutionary determind to belive in such
things as evolutionary nonsense... because as such, you did not check other possibilities - you
just belived what you was told, and what you was determind to belive by evolutionary process,
who limited your brain to be able to get only such stories, not another, and which is ruled by
blind instincts. Such sad... such pity...
 
You really don;t need to convinst me, that you know only
the one direct propaganda and that you do not even try to
think critically. Probably you are even unable to do that.



1. Might
2. How do you know that? Did you see this? Did you live then?



Rather for you, becasue you don;t know how much it is 150 years.
You think, it was quick, and they didn't have the time to do something...

Yea, Canada is very quick... you cant do there anything yet... even marry an
Indian... you need for that ten times more time... or maybe miiiillions of yeeaars...

Maybe even Canada does not exists, becasue it is to short period of time...



Following your logic, which tells me not to belive in the computer, you must stop to belive particularly in:

- heliocentrysm - becasue guys who created this model were Christians. The main one was even a priest! Stop belive in that!
- genetics - becasue guy who created that discipline was a belibing christian.
- oceanography - you certanly can't belive in that branch of science, becasue it was developed under influence of the Bible - guy devoted itself to find one verse from the Book of Hiob, and created this science calle oceanography.
- you should also stop to belive in vaxines...
- in America, becasue this discovery was made by Christians, Bible beliving christians who cross the Atlantic...
- you should also stop beliving in dinosaurs, becasue those who discovered them where christians beliving in the Flood...


- you should also stop beliving... almost in everything waht was developed becasue everything was made by christians.
Even computer was made by christians or based on the mathematical and technological discoveries of christians.

So, be coherent, follow your own wirds, and stop to belive in all of that. Especialy you
must stop to belive in gravity, because Isaak Newton was deeply beliving christian, who
90% of his scientific works and all life devoted to the Bible. You cannot belive in gravity!
as I supposedly, according to you, cannot belive in computer and should stop to use it).

Aaa... I forgot, that you, as an higher but animal, can't think becasue you do not even know,
if you evolved enough to make reasonable judgement... maybe not, so all what you are saying
can be by definition wrong. More than that, you do not even have free will... so you cannot know,
if your choice of beliving is made rightly - you just was evolutionary determind to belive in such
things as evolutionary nonsense... because as such, you did not check other possibilities - you
just belived what you was told, and what you was determind to belive by evolutionary process,
who limited your brain to be able to get only such stories, not another, and which is ruled by
blind instincts. Such sad... such pity...
So on the top of nothing what you write making sense, there is a conspiracy of the world against christian scientists of the past. This is precious, lol.

I'm glad you opened up. Now everybody can judge you by themselves.

We are still waiting for your biblical "science" proving the age of universe. Com'on don't be shy.
 
So on the top of nothing what you write making sense,

So you admit, that your logic has no sense.
I only followed her...

there is a conspiracy of the world against christian scientists of the past. This is precious, lol.

Interesting, where did you read this, in my post.
Did you maybe confuse me with somebody else,
did you smoke something, or you are doing this
on purpose?In any case it only witness about you...

We are still waiting for your biblical "science" proving the age of universe. Com'on don't be shy.

You are not interesting in this anyway.
You simply want very badly the theory
of evolution to be true, no matter what.

But, here is your chance:

 
So you admit, that your logic has no sense.
I only followed her...



Interesting, where did you read this, in my post.
Did you maybe confuse me with somebody else,
did you smoke something, or you are doing this
on purpose?In any case it only witness about you...



You are not interesting in this anyway.
You simply want very badly the theory
of evolution to be true, no matter what.

But, here is your chance:
Were you lying to us? You have no "biblical scientific" proof, just conspiracy theory stories of delusional people. Show us the real scientific paper about an experiment, which was repeated and confirmed, by other independent scientists, confirming directly or indirectly age of universe to be 6,000. Otherwise nobody will treat you seriously with your conspiracies and creationist "science".

For example, we know that radioactive carbon dating is in agreement with know laws of physics. This dating method is used in dating organic material like bones. That's why we know how old the bones are. This method exists for 90 years and was confirmed to work by thousands or even million of scientists around the planet in every country. Do you have your "biblical scientists" disproved this method?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating
 
Last edited:
You have no "biblical scientific" proof,

I gave you one example, watch it.

just conspiracy theory stories of delusional people.

Aha... if someone is not supporting your delusional belifs,
then, even if he is talking about scientific facts, he is delusional.

You just created your own conspiracy theory. Congrats.

Show us the real scientific paper about an experiment, which was repeated and confirmed, by other independent scientists, confirming directly or indirectly age of universe to be 6,000.

No evolutionist would participate in such thing and any evulotionist
paper would published such result, just the same, as you are banning
everyone, who does not fit to your leftist agenda on this forum, proving
evey time, how close minded and intolerant leftist are.

But if you want a scientific material, here you have. Probably you will not
investigate this also, becasue you allready know everything. Guy and his
research was published many times, since decades noone disproved him.


Otherwise nobody will treat you seriously with your conspiracies and creationist "science".

Again you are showing indcotrination and closemindness assuming, that nothing
can be true and serious, what is not about evolution and billions of years old.

For example, we know that radioactive carbon dating is in agreement with know laws of physics. This dating method is used in dating organic material like bones. That's why we know how old the bones are. This method exists for 90 years and was confirmed to work by thousands or even million of scientists around the planet in every country. Do you have your "biblical scientists" disproved this method?

I do not need biblical scientists to disprove that method, becasue atheistic
scientists do this very well, dating one part of dea animal thosands of years
different, than other part of the same organism. But if you insist:
=>>> https://answersingenesis.org/geology/carbon-14/
 
I gave you one example, watch it.



Aha... if someone is not supporting your delusional belifs,
then, even if he is talking about scientific facts, he is delusional.

You just created your own conspiracy theory. Congrats.

I do not need biblical scientists to disprove that method, becasue atheistic
scientists do this very well, dating one part of dea animal thosands of years
different, than other part of the same organism. But if you insist:
=>>> https://answersingenesis.org/geology/carbon-14/
Com'on, just one research paper which was confirmed by others. Just one!
You don't want to say, that you bet all your understanding of the world on conspiracy stories?!
For god sake, just one!


I do not need biblical scientists to disprove that method, becasue atheistic
You don't get it. I'm not asking about disproving our science. I'm asking you to prove "your science". Show us the research papers about creationists "science".
 
Com'on, just one research paper which was confirmed by others. Just one!

But it change everything - of course you will deny it.

But interesting, that when they get what it realy
means, they kicked him out and stopped publish.
Very openminded people, very... just like you...

You don't want to say, that you bet all your understanding of the world on conspiracy stories?!
For god sake, just one!

Not only one, but even if, then what? You do not have brain?
You need other people to think for you? You need Komsomolską
Prawdę to tell you what it true and what is not? Terrible...
So 500 years ago you would belive in geocentrism... and
call people who belive in heliocentrism conspiracy theorists,
idiots and silly people... maybe you would call for burning
them as you used to do here...

You don't get it. I'm not asking about disproving our science.

So even if your science is disproved, you will still
belive in her, becasue you have nothing else?

I'm asking you to prove "your science".

I guy proved, that Earth couldn't be a hot sphere during billions
of years, but had to be created instantly. Otherwise, this aureoles
wouldn't be visible.

Show us the research papers about creationists "science".

How many times are you going tyo repeat it?
I just gave you couple of materials. Use your
head at once insted of using other people to
think for you...
 
But it change everything - of course you will deny it.

But interesting, that when they get what it realy
means, they kicked him out and stopped publish.
Very openminded people, very... just like you...
As we suspected there is no creationist science just storytelling and legends for people who can't grasp science, conspiracy theorists and schizophrenics.
I'm open to new ideas and new scientific hypothesis, but you failed to entertain us with even one scientific proof of 6,000 year old universe. Not mentioning, that this proof, should be validated by consecutive research of independent scientists and laws of physics. All you have are myths, conspiracies and video with attempts of poking holes in science. That's all you have!

You are the one who runs around like a chicken without head, complaining that everything doesn't make sense here, because it doesn't go with your "logic". Well, you are lost, because bible can't explain the complexity of the world, but only science does. We know science and it makes a perfect sense for us. You believe in creationism and science doesn't make sense for you. And you say that we must be wrong. It doesn't take a genius to figure that out.


Not only one, but even if, then what? You do not have brain?
You need other people to think for you? You need Komsomolską
Prawdę to tell you what it true and what is not? Terrible...
So 500 years ago you would belive in geocentrism... and
call people who belive in heliocentrism conspiracy theorists,
idiots and silly people... maybe you would call for burning
them as you used to do here...
Nope. You are the guy who believes in old biblical explanation of the world. The old and traditional creationism. Heliocentrism theory was confirmed through centuries, again and again, by real science. On other hand geocentrism was never ever confirmed. That's why we know that heliocentrism works and is the only true explanation. This is how science works, remember. On top of it heliocentrism is in agreement with laws of phisics, relativity and evolution of the universe. All of which were confirmed again and again. All our most complicated machines, computers and satellites work according to these laws and models. This is how we know this science is good and true!!!
In case your forgot history lessen, the christian biblical "scientists", were the once burning people for not believing in creationism and for supporting heliocentrism, and of course atheists like myself.
The funnies thing is that you think you are in a vanguard of new and true science, because it is based in bible. This is delusion. You are prescribing to old biblical beliefs and traditions which kept Europe in Dark Ages till onset of science in Renaissance. You are the typical anti-science religious zealot who prosecuted people of science, and all "the different".


How many times are you going tyo repeat it?
I just gave you couple of materials. Use your
head at once insted of using other people to
think for you...
Again you have no idea who you're talking to. Here is my research and deep thoughts:

I'm using science of genome and admixtures to model populations of ancient dna. Many more around Eupedia pages.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...mporary/page17?p=503238&viewfull=1#post503238
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/33560-Genetic-source-of-Unetice-Culture?p=501817#post501817

Here is my piece on beliefs:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28441-Beliefs-Explained
and
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28375-Beliefs-Spirituality-and-why-we-believe

My take on human nature:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...er-Gatherers-(The-genetic-memory-of-the-past)

Statistical correlation between number of sons and dominant haplogroups.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...ion-with-number-of-sons-R1b-I2a-Din-E-V13-G2a

Correlation between ANE and alcoholism:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...n-Europe-goes-up-with-increased-ANE-admixture
and "nomadic gene".
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29412-ANE-admixture-and-nomadic-gene

Here is my take on origin of morality:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26777-Right-Wrong-and-Morality

Roots of communism:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29142-Were-Hunter-Gatherers-first-communists

Control factor in spirituality:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/28417-World-control-factor-in-our-spirituality

Grammar simplification pointing to roots of a language:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26890-Is-complexity-of-grammar-pointing-to-roots-of-a-language

Christian values and modern world:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/26958-Is-modern-Europe-product-of-christian-values

And for fun solving egg and chicken conundrum:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/29690-Who-was-first-the-chicken-or-the-egg?p=429340#post429340

Now, reciprocate and show us your independent thinking.
 
I don't get it. Rethel, aren't you a Pole? I thought almost all Poles were Catholic. Where did you get this Creationist stuff? It's certainly not Catholic teaching on the subject. This is American Protestant/Evangelical stuff. Why would you adopt it?
 
Lebrok, can you please not give sarcastic insults like "your all might god."
 
Lebrok, can you please not give sarcastic insults like "your all might god."
How is it an insult to anyone?

Have you ever wondered, if All Mighty God can create a rock so big that even he can't lift?
 
How is it an insult to anyone?

Have you ever wondered, if All Mighty God can create a rock so big that even he can't lift?
Yeah, this right here is why there can't be an almighty god.
 
How is it an insult to anyone?

Have you ever wondered, if All Mighty God can create a rock so big that even he can't lift?

You say it sarcastically. Insults come in many forms, the most annoying are the ones which aren't direct and in your face.
 

This thread has been viewed 58592 times.

Back
Top