01-09-09, 02:06 PM #1
i here to show you what evolution really is hope you enjoy my paper
November 6 2008
The creation worldview says that God made the universe approximately 6000 years ago. The evolution worldview teaches that the universe made itself from nothing approximately 20 billion years ago. Although 40% of Americans believe that both creation and evolution are true, (J. Morris) both can't be true because they contradict One another. Of these opposing worldviews obviously, one must be wrong.
The entire theory of evolution is built upon the faulty assumption that the origin of the universe was "billions of years ago.” The human mind cannot grasp "billions of years." As with most fairy tales, evolution relies on "long ago" and "far away" to make the impossible seem true.
Here are Questions to ask evolutionist. In the Big Bang, what exploded? Flesh out. And where did it come from? When evolutionist admit they don’t know, ask, "Which is easier to believe: In the beginning God,’ or ‘In the beginning Dirt’?" (Henry Morris)
Some Christians try to compromise with Evolutionists. (Dembski) They invent the gap theory which says that the days of creation are not really days. The days are really years, thus making the world billions of years old like the evolutionists surmise. However, the Bible does not need to be compromised. By changing the meaning of "day" in the Bible, the door is wide opened to questioning other events. For example, Jesus' death and resurrection can also be questioned.
The oldest living tree in the world is about 4300 years old. (Gary Parker)The oldest living coral reef is less than 4200 years old. (Gary Parker)
Factual evidence: If you believe in evolution, and that man has been here for 3 million years, you have a problem. In 3 million years, the population would have grown so that there would be 150,000 people per square inch! That would be crowded! The Sahara desert is the largest desert on Earth. The Sahara Desert has a prevailing wind pattern. The wind almost blows the same way. The hot wind of the desert cooks the trees at the edge and they die and that area becomes desert. Once the soil is sterilized, it is done for. Deserts grow on themselves. This process is called desertification. The Sahara desert is 1300 miles North to South. It grows 4 miles per year. (Duane)
The Earth's magnetic field is getting weaker and weaker. It cannot be billions of years old. Carbon dating can not work for more than a few thousand years. Earth’s magnetic strength has declined 6% in the last 150 years.
“Earth’s Rotation is slowing down. To compensate for this lagging motion, June will be one second longer than normal. This ‘Leap second’ announced by the International Earth Rotation Service in February, will keep calendar time in close alignment with international time.” (Olson)
The rotation of the earth is gradually slowing due to the gravitational drag forces of the sun, moon and other factors. Did you know we have a leap second every year and a half now because the earth is slowing down?
If the earth is six thousand years old like the Bible says, this is not a problem. Adam wouldn't notice. He didn't have a watch anyway. However, if the earth is billions of years old, the days and nights would be pretty quick. The earth would be spinning twice as fast as it is now. Loosing 2/1000 of a second every 179 years means a exponential decay of 2.3 percent per 179 years.
AT FORMATION OF EARTH
5,000,000,000/179 =~ 28,000,000 periods.
24 hours /(1.000 000 023 ^ 28,000,000) = 12.6 hours per day. (Kerkut) This is based upon the assumption of a constant loose of kinetic energy hence the exponential decay. (Thompson) This is a very simplified illustration but it serves its purpose. The oldest known historical records are less than 6000 years old.
Scientist that believe in evolution already proved themselves wrong by their experiments and there fossils research; but there research lines up with the Bible so is that proof of it being real? Some scientists still lie when their research doesn’t match their data. But that doesn’t stop them because they can’t admit that they were wrong for so many years. I think the main reason scientist don’t come out with the truth is because then they have to answer to someone else instead of themselves.
Let look at the planets they are perfectly put in place. But let start where we live at known as earth. If earth was moved in any direction over we wouldn’t be living. And this was by chance right. And we evolved from animals that appeared after time because of this rock. That another chance we have to add on right. And know we have to go down the chain with animals. That’s by another chance of us existing at all. I can go all day with this but you’re getting the point. It liking rolling billionth sided dice and rolling a one every time you roll it. That impossibility especially when u have no facts to back up evolution. It only theories but it’s not even that because we already have proof it’s wrong.
If we look at the rest of the solar system there no planet that we can live on except earth which we already live on. The earth is on a tilt which makes us have seasons right. Because a rock as big as moon hit us. That seems reasonable right, one problem with that it had to hit earth at a tremendously speed estimate of at least a million miles per hour. Just to make it move but it would be impossible to make it tilt because every thing centers the core of the earth which can also be known as gravity pulls down to the core of the earth. so by that reason it already had to be on a tilt.
Let get to the question I ask before how did the big bang happened. Most of them say it was a bright light and space was there. Let go back to the first words a bright light. That exactly what’s in the Bible I wonder why it similar. Verse one in the Bible it says God said, “Let there be Light.” And there was light.
This is just some of the facts that prove that evolution is a fairy tale, a bed time story, or a dream. Plus you can’t make nothing into something it's impossible so that also proves evolution wrong. To answer the question there was a big bang I just know who banged it.
01-09-09, 02:26 PM #2
Your basic premise is gravely flawed. Evolution and creation aren't contradictory. The theory of evolution doesn't have to deal with creation, just what happens to a living system over time, given a parameters. Your conflict is with abiogenesis, not evolution. To deny evolution would be to deny gravity or electronics.
01-09-09, 02:43 PM #3The evolution worldview teaches that the universe made itself from nothing approximately 20 billion years ago.
Factual evidence: If you believe in evolution, and that man has been here for 3 million years, you have a problem. In 3 million years, the population would have grown so that there would be 150,000 people per square inch! That would be crowded! The Sahara desert is the largest desert on Earth. The Sahara Desert has a prevailing wind pattern. The wind almost blows the same way. The hot wind of the desert cooks the trees at the edge and they die and that area becomes desert. Once the soil is sterilized, it is done for. Deserts grow on themselves. This process is called desertification. The Sahara desert is 1300 miles North to South. It grows 4 miles per year...
Your ignorant screed (ignorant of the facts, not a personal insult) is full of factual errors. You seem young, there is plenty of time to educate yourself as to what the Theory of Evolution really is, and what science has revealed about the Earth, the Solar System, and the Universe. I like Jesus too, but he was representative of his time, when people didn't know even what lightning was, everything was seen as an example of God's actions. If you won a war, that was god favoring you. If you lost a war, that was God punishing you for sin. We know now that most things are the result of inanimate natural laws. If there is a God, and He is the origin of everything, then He most certainly created everything according the natural laws that science has revealed. Some people make the argument that natural laws explain so much, there is nothing for God to have done. Still, we do not know what the Big Bang was exactly. That leaves room for a supernatural explanation (God of the Gaps argument), but this is still not supported by any evidence.
Last edited by spidergoat; 01-09-09 at 02:52 PM.
01-09-09, 03:10 PM #4Here are Questions to ask evolutionist. In the Big Bang, what exploded?
When evolutionist admit they don’t know, ask, "Which is easier to believe: In the beginning God,’ or ‘In the beginning Dirt’?" (Henry Morris)
The oldest living tree in the world is about 4300 years old.
01-09-09, 03:16 PM #5
01-09-09, 03:41 PM #6existence only operates ONE way, and the math to define it
01-09-09, 03:41 PM #7
Perpetual motion is real. Ah, well.
The magnetic field varies in strength over time, both up and down. At present it is decreasing somewhat. This will change. (You remember change - that thing you don't like.)
What possible relevance is it that carbon dating does not work accurately for more than fifty thousand years. My diary does not work accurately for more than one year. Does that mean 1856 never existed?
01-09-09, 08:15 PM #8
I can't believe I spent 10 minutes of my life reading a 4 year olds thesis.
To be fair, I'm including intermittent and uncontrollable laughter in that time.
01-09-09, 08:21 PM #9
01-09-09, 08:30 PM #10
01-09-09, 08:53 PM #11
No. Exasperated at the stupidity of man (and let's be politically correct, and woman).
01-09-09, 10:14 PM #12
01-10-09, 02:01 AM #13
01-10-09, 02:30 AM #14
01-10-09, 07:26 AM #15
01-10-09, 08:29 AM #16
Driving a Stake into the Heart of Evolution
The cover story of the October, 2004, issue of Wired is “The Plot to Kill Evolution.” There certainly are many efforts to kill evolution, but the term “plot” is not entirely accurate. The word “plot” implies secrecy and underhanded manipulation. The attacks on evolution are open and straightforward. If anything can be described as a "plot", it is the effort to try to keep evolution alive.
Recent articles show that since the theory of evolution can’t win on its own merits, backdoor politics have to be employed to keep it in the public schools. The cover story in Wired is one of two current examples.
The Wired article discusses the controversy in Ohio over the public school science curriculum. Despite what you might have heard, there is no effort in Ohio to remove the theory of evolution from the classrooms. Instead, the desire of creationists is to “teach the controversy.” That is, creationists say students should be taught the arguments for and against the theory of evolution.
In this instance, the school board was considering an alternative “intelligent design” explanation that could be included in the curriculum. Evolutionists don’t want to allow this because it is so much more convincing than the evolutionary myth.
Freedom of speech in general, and academic freedom in particular, are fundamental American values. Therefore, the evolutionists are in a difficult position because it is difficult to justify censorship of scientific facts. So, they try to portray criticism of evolution as some kook-fringe idea. In large letters, splashed across the middle of the page 202, Wired proclaims, “Some people deny the holocaust, but we don’t teach that in history.” In the text of the article, Evan Ratliff said,
The debate’s two-on-two format, with its appearance of equal sides, played into the ID [Intelligent Design] strateg--create the impression that this very complicated issue could be seen from two entirely rational yet opposing views. 1
An exasperated Krauss claims that a truly representative debate would have had 10,000 pro-evolution scientists against two Discovery executives. 2
Notice the two sneaky tricks that are employed here. First, there is an attempt to lump people who don’t believe in evolution with people who don’t believe in the holocaust. Second, there is the suggestion that for every two “executives” who doubt evolution, there are 10,000 “scientists” who believe it.
The two “executives” are Stephen Meyers (more about him later) and Jonathan Wells, who both have outstanding scientific credentials. But rather than call them “scientists”, Ratliff calls them “executives,” clearly with the intention of painting them as stupid bureaucrats.
The 10,000 to 2 ratio of evolutionary scientists to creation scientists is certainly overstated, but we have been unable to obtain data as to what the ratio actually is. 3 We suspect that the number of working scientists (that is, those who are not college professors) who believe in evolution is probably smaller than the number who don’t believe. Regardless, truth is not determined by the number of people on one side or the other, or by educational credentials of those on either side.
Imagine a debate of five holocaust-deniers against two World War II historians. Does the fact that there are five holocaust-deniers make their case stronger? Don’t you think the two historians could win the debate regardless of the number of opponents?
The comparison between the holocaust and evolution is invalid because the facts support the tragic truth of the holocaust, but are overwhelmingly against evolution. The holocaust-deniers were mentioned in the article just to try to create “guilt by association,” which is a shady debate tactic.
The reason why evolutionists don’t like to debate creationists is because the evolutionists always lose. The facts are against them. So, evolutionists have to make up excuses why they won’t debate.
And yet, the Discovery Institute’s appeals to academic freedom create a kind of catch-22. If scientists ignore the ID movement, their silence is offered as further evidence of a conspiracy. If they join in, they risk reinforcing the perception of a battle between equal sides. Most scientists choose to remain silent. 4
In other words, they claim that they don’t want to justify the charges against evolution by dignifying them with a response in a debate. The truth is that they don’t respond because they have nothing to say. If the facts were on their side, evolutionists could defeat creationists in a debate as easily as historians could defeat holocaust-deniers. Can you imagine a historian who would not debate a holocaust-denier? We can’t.
Earlier we mentioned the Discovery Institute “executive”, Dr. Stephen Meyers. He recently published an article, titled “The Origin of Biological Information and the Higher Taxonomic Categories” in the peer-reviewed Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington.
Evolutionists love to claim that creationists never publish in peer-reviewed journals. Creationists counter-claim that it is because evolutionists control peer-reviewed journals and won’t let creationist articles appear. Well, here is an example of what happens when a peer-reviewed journal does publish an article critical of evolution.
BIOLOGY JOURNAL SAYS IT MISTAKENLY PUBLISHED PAPER
A small scientific society has publicly distanced itself from a paper, published last month by its journal, which challenges Darwinian evolution. The Biological Society of Washington issued a statement saying that the paper, which supports so-called intelligent-design theory, should not have appeared in the journal. The controversial article is by Stephen C. Meyer, who directs the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute, in Seattle, and is a professor at Palm Beach Atlantic University, which describes itself as a Christian institution. The paper appeared in the Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington. According to the society's governing council, the paper "was published without the prior knowledge of the council, which includes officers, elected councilors, and past presidents, or associate editors." "We have met," the statement said, "and determined that all of us would have deemed this paper inappropriate for the pages of the Proceedings." The statement said nothing about retracting the article. The paper was accepted for publication by the journal's previous editor, Richard Sternberg, a fellow at the National Center for Biotechnology Information, part of the National Institutes of Health. Mr. Sternberg is also a fellow of the International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design, which promotes the idea that nature has a purpose. He did not respond to repeated telephone calls from The Chronicle. … Mr. Meyer's paper on the much broader issue of the origin of animal phyla represents a significant departure, said the society's president, Roy W. McDiarmid, a scientist at the U.S. Geological Survey. He received several complaints from society members, prompting the council to issue its statement. 5
Notice that Meyer and Sternberg are called “Mr.” rather than “Dr.”. Notice that Sternberg is no longer the editor. Is that just a coincidence? Notice that the Chronicle felt it necessary to mention that the previous editor was a member of an organization that “promotes the idea that nature has a purpose.” But Roy McDiarmid is “a scientist.” Notice the use of the terms “so-called” and “describes itself.” The prejudice just drips off the page.
The Plot is Exposed
Evolutionists just can’t stand to have the theory of evolution examined openly and honestly. Any means that prevent criticism of the theory of evolution are justified in their eyes.
There is a plot alright, but the evolutionists are the ones doing the plotting. Evolutionists are the ones pressuring school boards to censor the science curriculum. Evolutionists are the ones putting pressure on peer-reviewed journals that publish articles critical of evolution.
Evolutionists are desperately afraid that someone will tell you, “Science is against evolution.” We hope to have struck fear into their hearts this Halloween season. The oldest tree is 9500 years old right and the answer wrong bec look what its under rock asfault but of course he doesn't mention that the plant strictly be seen it hasn't been growing there bec of the altitude in Switzerland for he past 1000 years been demolished and also do u c any other trees around of course you know when a pine grows it always has a buddy and what i mean is that it grows another tree that rooted to the same tree only if there rooted to the ground that includes why it cant be and this is just observation but why is there only russles in front of the tree hmm to cover up something so how it can it be 9500 years. spidergoat the big bang theory is false can you make nothing in your hand and make it something without anything impossible evolutionist studies astronomy but evolution is been proven wrong and as i keep showing diffrent proves then you will c that im right
01-10-09, 08:43 AM #17
01-10-09, 10:15 AM #18
lol i know what im talking about i didnt start this not knowing what im talking about i just put my senior paper just to start the conservation
01-10-09, 10:18 AM #19
01-10-09, 11:43 AM #20
Freedom of speech in general, and academic freedom in particular, are fundamental American values. Therefore, the evolutionists are in a difficult position because it is difficult to justify censorship of scientific facts.
By Tnerb in forum Religion ArchivesLast Post: 01-12-09, 04:48 PMReplies: 13
By Lawsinium in forum Religion ArchivesLast Post: 08-28-08, 04:43 AMReplies: 19
By w1z4rd in forum Biology & GeneticsLast Post: 04-07-08, 02:16 PMReplies: 40
By TimeTraveler in forum Earth ScienceLast Post: 12-17-07, 12:41 AMReplies: 1
By spuriousmonkey in forum Biology & GeneticsLast Post: 10-26-06, 01:24 AMReplies: 2