Are there any NEW Creationist arguments? (v.2)

Can you help me out here Fraggle? I've heard of Laplace and I've heard of rules, but never the two in combination. Where can I learn more? Neither Wikipedia, Encyclopedia Brittanica, or Google, seem able to help me. Is this something that was expressed in his Théorie analytique des probabilités?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

This is because the arguements have not confronted the issues correctly and they still apply. Creationism comes from the Hebrew bible. The christion creationists are wrong because of their limited and self centred reading of a document which preceded them by 2000 years; the anti-creationists have exploited the deficient arguements of Christians. E.g. The creation museum in USA is a raging, cringing mockery of the text, aside from science. Other examples:

That the earth, according to Genesis, is 6000 years old.

Incorrect: The Hebrew calendar, the oldest, begins after the ch. 1 creation days; indeed there is a list of a prior time period of the elements being critically seperated [light; water; lands] prior to life emerging. How dumb does that make such a grotesque conclusion of the text and the issue? This is again indicated by the 4th day being the focus of luminosity [not 24 hour days].


That Noah's report concerns all life forms in a boat - and a global flood.

Incorrect: Noah's story is limited to his possessions and household [the text]; and a regional flood - namely how it appeared to that town's people, who never ventured outside their villages all their life. Tasmania never existed at this time.

THAT SPEECH [AS OPPOSED COMMUNICATION] IS NOT 6000 YEARS OLD.

The most astonishing thing has been ignored: Genesis gets it right to the day with speech - we do not even have a 'NAME' pre-5770. And no excuses apply - we should have millions of names via oral transmission. The speech factor was and is the greatest KO's against ToE and the greatest affirmation Genesis knows this planet, the universe and their science, math and history.
The 60K period for Australian natives is totally bogus: their population would have been 6 Trillion today. Again, no excuses apply . Measuring caves is not equal to cave marks.

THAT GENESIS' MODE OF EVOLUTION IS MYTHICAL COMPARED TO ToE.

Incorrect: The text does not even contradict cross-speciation, but merely lists the life form categories by their most fundamental divisions, namely by terrain [immobile veg, water, air, land based]. Because each life can follow its own terrain based kind, man could have emerged from another land based life. Darwin said nothing new - Genesis gives the first record of life form groupings and sub-grouping; and correctly protocolled; and a program chip [seed] containing a program directive, allows repro. This is great science. Darwin falls without the seed factor [chip/dna, essence].

But Genesis does say, controversially but correctly, all life emerged complete, but were not yet alive. This is true at least in reference to each life forms overiding factors - e.g. a cat could have been a saber before [feline; canine; etc]. Genesis says the complete life forms emerged complete, follow their 'kind' [species], and were ignited to be alive only when a life sustaining cycle was triggered [next chapter]- namely the cycles of rain, water seperation from land; etc. How else - the life could never survive or emerge without pre-determined critical factors applying before and after life emerging [science!].
A car does not move till completed and then ignited [science!]

SUB-ATOMIC

An atomic particle is a pre-programmed entity with a directive program. Its traits and values are determined by the orbital speed variations of its electrons - these are akin to the variations in finger prints and dna. The atomic structure is an internal construct and not resultant from the external environment; most probably the reverse applies.

This aligns with Genesis - the atom acts as a seed, able to reproduce only that what is allowed in the core program, and can interact only with other particles which can read and cater to this data. Stone particles will not interact with water to produce a pineapple - they have different sub-atomic attributes. Random and interaction are contradictory premises, and Genesis is saying even random cannot occur unless this is factored in a program. Tick YES.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Speech is 6000 years old - there is no extraordinary proof against this manifest claim.

Please produce a NAME [the most definitive imprint of speech], KING; WAR; NATION; MONUMENT; HISTORY - anything which contradicts Genesis here. And remember:

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.".

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

there are post holes at stonehenge that date back to 8000BCE

evidence of burial rituals dates back 120,000 years. A book of myths by a bunch of mystics in the desert isn't history and almost all of it has been proven false.

 

120,000? But none of them had NAMES. And the world population does not concur - nor do you have any transit grads for 120,000 years. Nor can we say all of today's writings and names are 120,000 years old. Genesis has never been proven wrong. Genesis wins here because:



"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

history(ie what was written down) only goes back 6 or 7 thousand years but we have acheological evidence going back much further. hell palentology disproves your bs alone.



and if you continue to pass religion off as scientific fact you will be reported for trolling

 

And:

The Jerusalem temple is a myth.

Jerusalem is not the first sacred place of Jews - it is the third sacred site of Pretend Palestineans.

Hebron is not the birthplace of Judaism - its a zionist myth.

COMING SOON:

NY is the 69th holy place of Islam.

Don't forget Muslim Zionists.

Plus Tasmania.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

You have not a single name. That is the most effective scientific proof and nothing can replace it.

You are the one that is trolling, dishing out ficticious science and history. Those who desecrate history - cannot talk science. And that's not a myth.

 

carbon dating. a name isn't really much in the way of scientific proof.

so calling myths myths and asking for science on a science forum is trolling? how about instead of whining you post real history and science.

 

Yes it is. Paleontology is a division of science, and is substantially governed by writing designs - and writings have writers. Speech is substantially aligned with names of humans, speech being unique to humans. If you cannot give a name, it means no names existed pre-6000. Genesis wins. Rocket science.

I have answered all your charges of myth - including your version of mythical history which denies the existence of a sovereign Jewish nation, and its Capital desecrated by a mosque. You cannot present mythical history then boast about science - both these faculties are inter-twined.


Aside from toothless imams, I have not heard of a scientists who denies the existence of a temple once existing in Jerusalem. History and histerical are not the same.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Your an idiot. paleontology has nothing to do with writing your thinking archeology. I'm sorry mods but come on the claim that Paleontology is governed by writing is sheer idiocy

no you haven't you just went back to a book of myths.

I have never made a claim to anything of the sucfh other than to deny the existence of the united kingdom for which there is no proof of.

a chronological immpossibilty since Islam only came into existence some 600 years have the Destruction of Judea

but your the one presenting myth. everything I have said is backed by real hard science.

I will ask you this once and only once please quit lying about what claims I have made.

 

Re: the op, there will always be new gaps every time we learn something new.

 

Your deviating. Paleontolgy, a science faculty studying fossils for very old life forms, also subscribes to writing for recent human history. Archeology, the most used method, is also a science faculty, and uses writing evidences for some 90% of its determinations. None of these faculties has proven speech pre-6000, and we have no NAMES either. This makes Genesis the winner at this time and you the loser:

Its not a myth we have no proof of speech or a name pre-6000. Nor is it a myth there was a Temple in Jerusalem and a mosque was dumped here, as a genocidal aspiration to Jews and their 4000 year history. The only myth applies to 'sacred Islamic soil' derived by robbery and open, blatant denial of factual history none can deny. If still in doubt, I can produce a book called the Gospels - it says one Jesus vistied this mythical temple! Also we have Roman archives if you understand latin or greek.

Wrong again. There is proof, and it is perhaps the most commonly known history on this planet. It is most known by Arab muslims - why else would they dump a mosque here after assuming themselves the heir of the Hebrew bible by changing NAMES! Here you are:

Everyone knows when Islam emerged, and this does not mean there was no temple, that the pre-Islamic Arabs did not know of it, or that a mosque was not dumped exactly and intentionally on the temple site. This is traditional Islamic history throughout this planet: destroy temples and churches, commit mass murder, enforce everyone to believe your belief, dump a mosque on the inhabitant's most sacred sites, then deny it.

I recommend you cease using words such as myth, idiot, lier, etc. I also suggest you stop sending private messages to me I should leave this forum, but you can keep bombarding the monitors - you don't like an opposing view of your nonsense, and this is understandable.

Was I lying in this post - did I post false links and quotes from an encyclopedia, and one which is often charged with anti-Israel portrayals? Gee, your hard to please!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

The only new in creationism is that what was once thought as myth are being scientfically vindicated today. Where can one find a document 1000's of years old, which declares human speech is 5770 years old today - via the world's oldest calendar - and have no conclusive proof otherwise?

One may present fossils dating 100's of 1000's of years - but why no NAME even 5771 years ago - that's just one year before the Hebrew calendar dating? Is it an anomaly or the greatest scientific/historical claim ever made?

 

say what?

 

allow me to provide an explanation through the medium of hand gestures:


:crazy:

 

Because I expect both ToE & Genesis science to show surrounding imprints in real life.

Whatever the lab masters in white coats tell us, thus far Genesis prevails, to the extent of declaring a date and year, with surrounding evidence on the ground: we do not have a name pre-5770 - when we should have millions. No excuses apply. One need not say any more, and one must not ignore the pivotal factor here.

Neaderthals with burial evidence does not suffice, nor do we find graduated imprints of speech evolution on the ground in this offering. That writings was not available is not a premise in your favor - it is a proof of Genesis!


The evidence favors only Genesis and its astonishing and eerie accuracy of a specific date. Why does this overiding factor not even measure any place in your conclusion!? :bugeye:

 

This still makes Genesis right. No speech.

Give to Rome what is Roman - give to Genesis what is Genesis.

Speech is ToE's greatest stumbling block - this was stated by the world's most prominent minds in science. It is also the reason ToE ventures into non-scientific escapism to an infinite universe: let us not fool ourselves there is no motive here. But this also leads to a circular path - proof it is not an answer.

My conclusion: the Hebrew bible is not equivalent to other scriptures. Atheists better get this fact around their heads and cease dumping all scriptures in the same green bag. They are showing only their poor perception here.