Products of Creation Science

I just discovered the existance of creation museums but I dont have one in my state of Missouri.

http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=...iscover_museum

Has anyone ever been to one? Would you visit one?

What is your opinion on creation science?

Mine opinion is that even though the subject matter is touchy for many of us I am glad there are people who find ways to keep the debate alive. Stuff like this maintains the thrill of living through my book the bible.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by SCHWARZE-1

Your reply is the most imaginative. I actually laughed.

C'mon guys you have to be a little curious. I would go just to see if they made a hash of things or if they really have a viable argument.

Originally Posted by Denicalis

Creation isn't science. At all. I don't care how often the other side wants to claim it is.

Also, the bible isn't your book. You didn't write it. Neither did God or Jesus. Fuck off and die.

I will let you in on a little secret. I am skeptical too.

The folks that tell you what science is dont have my unconditional support.
Why, cause I see the effect of their teaching in your words.
You are in effect becoming the feces throwing ape you are conditioned to believe you are.

I invite all of you to climb out of the primordial slime and wash yourself clean with this concept: We are created with the capacity for unparalleled intellectual interaction for the betterment of each other & our world.
Please folks lets play nice.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Stop Sign

See, see, because to stimulate a scientific debate, you gotta push your agenda, associate the other side with Nazis, and pit dueling trees against each other in your exhibits. Best museum ever already, right, guys?

Ok, now we are geting somewhere. I didnt see a review thanks.

In their defence there are no rules on agenda pushing. We know the agenda of a place that talks about creation and really, are any of their statements untrue?

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Stop Sign

Science, in its purest form, is free of agenda. That means waving SCIENCE around like a banner and then associating competing theories with moral depravity and genocide is, at best, hypocritical and completely cynical.

Science is free of agendas but people are not. Fraud for the sake of proving evolution has been tried many times by its proponents. http://www.time.com/time/2007/crimes/3.html

Folks we eat sleep & breath agendas please spare me of all the judgments.

Originally Posted by Stop Sign

Besides. If the evidence for creation science was strong enough to stand on its own, there would be no need to manipulate the emotions of the visitors by invoking Nazism and bestiality, right

Without knowing more about the basic intent of this place I can only conclude that it is built to manipulate people. Nothing new, we can go anywhere else and say the same thing.

Originally Posted by Denicalis

We're not getting into it, LordSword, because it's been discussed here ad nauseum with a defender of your idiocy who was much more talented at it than you. And, you fucking moron, science never claims to be absolutely right. However, overwhelming evidence is overwhelming evidence.

I'm glad a more talented person failed to change your mind. This means I get a turn.
I see this overwhelming evidence statement and wonder if you folks have seen it yourselves.
"I want to see" "Prove it" you say.

What is it about the sources of your overwhelming evidence that has your complete unquestioning trust? Remember after all youre being taught survival of the fittest doctrine whos to say youre not the one being eaten alive?

I noticed skepticism is the reigning authority here, funny you dont use it against the sources that provide your evidences.

Thanks folks for the replys. That review was the most helpful. It helps me to see the other side of things.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by sprouticus

Science, research, billions upon billions of dollars spent on finding out the truth, I'd say that is pretty fucking convincing,

Who told you about the millions of dollars & research? Do you really know where your answers come from?

Originally Posted by sprouticus

Food chain, bitch. We're at the top. Animals don't deep fry us, we deep fry them. The only thing above us is inclement weather and the bubonic plague.

People eat each other daily. There are more sophisticated methods of consuming your prey.

Originally Posted by sprouticus

Because our reigning authority consists of actual human beings and not mythical figures, you fucking dolt.

What human beings? Do you know them as well as a person who says they got their instruction from God?

Originally Posted by LeHah

Okay, so lets go to the Creation Museum and see what you have as evidence, shall we...?

I knew someone here would provide what I was looking for. Thanks.
I can see your point. The slant that I see leaves out what the science mind is looking for.
Dont get me wrong.
Science is one of my favorite subjects. If I wasnt so big into art I would be in the radio & electrical field.

Originally Posted by Denicalis

Actually, we have. That's why science is constantly reworking and moving away from the initial theory and expanding.

Expand on this please.
I read this book, your view sounds like theirs.
In Six Days

You people and your language. You only demean yourselves with your tirades. Show me how intelligent you are by using your intellect. Rough statements only undermine what you have to say.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by knkwzrd

That's pretty much what he was doing for the rest of the paragraph.

Not to my satisfaction. The statement of "moving away from initial theory..."
Precisely what theory & where to is what I am looking for.
The notion that I am & idiot does work to my advantage, educate me please.

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by Encephalon

We can't educate you. One can only be educated when he or she is willing to at least acknowledge the facts presented to them.

You can pound the table and say "fact" but it takes more than that to get me to listen.
I purposfully frustrate because I search for the mature among you to converse with. Some here have risen to a higher standard because they believe that they can educate me.
Its the can do people that have made the best points, with the review and images. Those are the types I listen to.
Humor us, by just answering my questions. I only want to learn.

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Stop Sign

And, you do realize that it was, uh, other scientists who discovered the forgery, right?

Yes and many more after the one I pointed out.
My point was that the poeple who crank out "facts" need to be checked on.
The folks here have yet to tell me if they personally have seen or checked anything for themselves. Well there is one but I am waiting to see more of their view...

Originally Posted by Stop Sign

You're simply assuming that all people have agendas, and all institutions are manipulating emotions in the same naked, ham-fisted way the Creation Museum is doing. You don't seem to understand the simple difference between emotional manipulation and persuasive argument based on evidence. That is either sheer ignorance or sheer cynicism, and good science doesn't have either.

Manipulation is what it is. Just because somebody does not do it YOUR way doesnt mean they are wrong. Lawyers do this all the time. Give me a break.

Originally Posted by Stop Sign

Tell me this, then - why is it, then, for a institution that purports to promote Biblical philosophy, why do they spend all that effort slandering the people who disagree with them? Yessirre, that's a real paragon of Christian values there, golly-gumdrops!

Hmmm, this is a point I agree with. I like the fact that you demonstrate a knowlege of and respect for the virtue of Christian values and the proper adherance to such values.
This ladys & gents is a person after my own heart.

Originally Posted by Stop Sign

Again, this shows your ignorance. Scientists in academia have to work their asses off to win money for their research through government, institutional and corporate grants. Anyone's who in the sciences knows this. You really need to get yourself educated in this before mouthing off like that.

The Spock avatar of Arainach reminds me of the cloaking device of the Romulans.
Its a useful tool the cloaking device. Assumptions are what makes it work so well.

Your post is by far the best. I get what you are saying thanks.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Originally Posted by The Lord

...

Finally, I get a word with you. I have a sence of humor too. I love our conversations in my time away from here and I suppose you have graced us with your presence because many folks dont understand your plan. Many of your servants have come here and like the old testament days these guys don't listen.
Please break it down for us as to why you keep sending folks like me to repeat the same message for this unbelieving croud.

Originally Posted by whinehurst

So, evidently, you'll only listen to statements you already agree with.

Of course but I know that even without a bible in hand you have been equiped well enough to come to the same conclusions as the book. Many here are already "christians" by the fact that they seem to know how the religion should be practiced. I'm just helping folks find their way.

Originally Posted by Locke

LordSword, one question.



Do you honestly believe that?

Yes. A six day creation too. I also believe in a God that can make 10 million year old rocks in a fraction of the time. Scientists can tell me what they observe but they don't run anything and they dont have a blueprint of the laws of the universe. They may act like it & expect me to fall in line but I'm not game for that.

Originally Posted by RacinReaver

As someone with a published paper, I've also had my own work go through the peer review process.

This is good. We need more people here like you. Please give this a look. I have yet to get a reply about this book http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/ISD/index.asp
Because of your experience your opinion weighs heavily on this issue.

Originally Posted by Watts

Most of the eugenicists and organizations pushing eugenics were forced into the scientific underground. They changed over into genetics or other areas of biology. This doesn't mean their
underlining ideology has been stamped out.

The abortion industry and specifically planned parenthood is rooted in eugenics. Any science heads here support eugenics?

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Ridan Krad

And why would God create 10 million (and older) year old rocks, exactly?

Please pardon the refrence but I feel it to helpful in my explanation.
Isaiah 55:9
"As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.

It is not clear as to what brand new matter is like to us. Let alone a brand new Earth.
Consider for a moment that it may not be helpful to the support of life. I think radioactive decay is the most poplular dating method. Imagine the radiation levels of the early earth.
The the term God helps us imagine an entity that has complete mastery of all aspects of reality, not just of what we we can measure.
A God could wind the clock forward on matter for the purpose of our current state of comfort.
Consider again the application of pursuing this idea. Toxic waste could be "aged" to meet safety requirements. Stockpiles of nuclear waste processed for some other purpose.

Originally Posted by RacinReaver

I'm not really sure what you want me to say about the book, but looking at just one testimonial makes me kinda feel I know how all of it will be.

You have done all that I asked, thanks.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Rychord

If it were so, then why wouldn't he have done something about the already existing nuclear waste?

Thats our job remember?
Genesis 2:15
The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.

Originally Posted by Ridan Krad

Your explanation has two problems.

First, why would God need to create old rocks when he could just let nature take its course? You seem to be suggesting that God does not exist outside of time, which is odd since the Bible indicates the opposite ("With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day", 2 Peter 3:8)...

Ephesians 1:11
In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will,
"Old rocks" are made for the purpose of our current environment which He wanted from the beginning.

Originally Posted by Ridan Krad

Second, why would God create a system of nature only to contradict it right away? And I do mean right away, because according to the strict reading of the Bible, God created the universe and the Earth all in a matter of days. Your explanation suggests that God made a system and then right afterwards went, "Oh well, better just make the Earth differently cause that isn't gonna work too well for my Saturday deadline." This suggests poor planning on God's part, hardly what I'd expect of an omniscient being.

Wouldnt God see the point in creating a thing correctly in the first place. I explained things in a way that you would understand.

What about the application I put forward? I know its a tough one to wrap ones mind around but I demonstrated how a person uses the creation point of view to forward research. Its not the first time science has had help from religious sources.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Ridan Krad

What I don't understand, and what you have yet to clearly answer (despite your best efforts to explain it so I can understand) is why God wouldn't just let the natural laws he had just developed create the Earth, instead of just blinking it all into existence.

God makes a point from time to time to show how powerful He is. I see it as a teaching tool to help us stretch our minds outside the box of uniformitarianism.

Originally Posted by killerpineapple

Myself and many of my practicing Christian brethren look at evolution and wonder how something so carefully analyzed and tested can possibly be false.

I'm one of the oddball Christians who does not agree with this. Earlier Denicalis hinted at something I already knew....

Originally Posted by Denicalis

That's why science is constantly reworking and moving away from the initial theory and expanding. It's the reason I took evolutionary and vertebrate biology in university.

Scientists are starting to bump into dead ends when it comes to explaining things through the evolutionary perspective.
I think the notion of irreducible complexity & intelligent design is the next step forward. As in the past fear and hate rear its ugly head again because the established majority is threatend by change.

Originally Posted by Bradylama

The view of the universe as artificial is sort of necessary in a creationist perspective, because without God creating the universe, the universe would not exist. Therefore God is the state of nature.

Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

The notion of a universe that is filled with purpose is supported by creation science. Everywhere science turns there is a discovery of some new system of complex order surpassing our own creative intentions. Scientists have yet to find evidence of "accidental creation".

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by Lord Styphon

If I may interject, just how much longer is this merry-go-round of religious bickering going to keep going?

I ask because I get the sense that people grow weary of pointlessly arguing theology with you and would rather move on to other topics of discussion, such as anything else at all.

As long as there is doubt in the hearts of men.
I know people get angry with me and the supporters of this subject because deep down there is something unsettled that points to a God. Its pulling now drawing us together, the ultimate end of creation science is to bring people to the acceptance of what they already know.

I was speaking idiomatically.