The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 27    Average: 3.9/5]
83 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 14899
Rating: 3.9
Category: Misc
Date: 06/09/12 05:05 PM

83 Responses to The Creation Museum [Pic]

  1. Profile photo of kitteh9lives
    kitteh9lives Female 70 & Over
    8044 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 11:07 am
    Link: The Creation Museum - Yep, this pretty much sums it up.
  2. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36647 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 5:17 pm

    I`ve been to the local Creation Museum here in San Diego, I recommend to all! It`s affordable and it`s a WHALE of a good time!

    Example: In Bible days people lived a long, long time. Neanderthals are like everyone else but just more square framed, like Eskimos. Now if you live 300-600 years you get more squat and denser so you see children, Neanderthals aren`t evilution, they are just really, really old Eskimos!

    I kid you not. That`s what it said in the display.


  3. Profile photo of Smutleybutt
    Smutleybutt Male 18-29
    1377 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 5:24 pm
    Religion + dinosaurs, I`m there!


  4. Profile photo of Otto67
    Otto67 Male 40-49
    438 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 5:53 pm
    It would make more sense if it said

    "The key to understanding Dinosaurs is watching the Flintstones."
  5. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 6:07 pm
    Gerry, I have a dream of getting high and going to a Creation Museum. I didn`t know San Diego has one. The next time I`m in town will you make that dream come true?
  6. Profile photo of Zuriel
    Zuriel Male 30-39
    554 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 6:09 pm
    now you know.. and knowing is half the battle
  7. Profile photo of Xerasia
    Xerasia Female 18-29
    1181 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 6:10 pm
    lol @Otto67... that`s precious. also, great avatar!

  8. Profile photo of mesovortex
    mesovortex Male 30-39
    458 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 6:37 pm
    In before some creationist actually defends this and makes themselves look like a doofus.
  9. Profile photo of CaptKangaroo
    CaptKangaroo Male 50-59
    2343 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 7:02 pm
    I didn`t know that dinosaurs used litter boxes- Gee, I DID learn something new...
  10. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36647 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 7:07 pm

    @ markust123 - next time you`re down this way we will visit the museam and take photos to show our IAB frenamies.
  11. Profile photo of godthaab
    godthaab Male 18-29
    220 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 7:07 pm
    Freaking scary! See what happens when Republicans run the joint?
  12. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 7:10 pm
    Gerry: Not to be argumentative, but scientists have made a connection between diet and body height/shape. America used to have one of the tallest populations in the world and now we are getting shorter and fatter. That`s a rather rapid change within just a few generations.

    I`m not saying mankind walked with dinosaurs or anything like that, but there is evidence that science just ignores because it doesn`t fit their narrative of evolution.
  13. Profile photo of mesovortex
    mesovortex Male 30-39
    458 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 7:13 pm
    CrakrJack, you don`t seem to know anything about evolution.

    If humans are getting taller OR shorter both would be supported by evolution.
  14. Profile photo of Otto67
    Otto67 Male 40-49
    438 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 7:20 pm
    Thanks Xerasia,

    But what the hell is your avatar? Is that a gremlin?
  15. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 7:39 pm
    mesovortex: Adaptation and breeding is not evolution. If all the dogs disappeared and their bones were discovered thousands of years later, scientists would claim that Corgis and Dalmatians were different species based only on the size of their bones. They do the same thing now simply based on the location, isolation or appearance of certain breeds of animals.
  16. Profile photo of markust123
    markust123 Male 40-49
    3889 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 7:48 pm
    Oh my God I`m excited Gerry. I visit my parents every Spring in Borrego Springs. I`ll let you know when I`ll be in town.
  17. Profile photo of OldOllie
    OldOllie Male 60-69
    15841 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 8:21 pm
    ...right, because the Bible has so many references to dinosaurs.
  18. Profile photo of mesovortex
    mesovortex Male 30-39
    458 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 8:29 pm
    CrakrJak:

    Adaptation and breeding IS evolution. Evolution is the non-random selection of naturally varying replicators.

    Whether the environment selects organisms to procreate and survive or we do, it`s still evolution.

    As far as what scientists would say about dog fossils, it depends. It`s hard to tell what they`d say. The term `species` is a very vague definition anyway and is man made. If you were to have every organism that ever lived (remember only a small fraction ever become fossils) and lined them up generation to generation you would not see much variation at all from one generation to the next.

    Only when you take a small fraction of them (like we have with fossils) and look at wider gaps over larger numbers of generations will you see bigger differences.

    Of course DNA confirms evolution, too, so it`s not just the fossils.
  19. Profile photo of mesovortex
    mesovortex Male 30-39
    458 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 8:32 pm
    OldOllie:

    Some creationists reference the bible verse that mentions `behemoth`. However that animal had a navel, and dinosaurs had none. Creationists aren`t good at figuring out the details.
  20. Profile photo of mesovortex
    mesovortex Male 30-39
    458 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 8:35 pm
    CrakrJak:

    You also know nothing about paleontology or how fossils are identified. It`s not just about the size of the bones. It`s about the layers they are found in, the dating of the layers they are found in, the features that the skeletons have, and the similarities they have DESPITE the size.

    It`s obvious that many organisms grow larger as they get older, so why would they just go by size alone?

    It`s like you haven`t even cracked the first book in evolution, biology, geology, or paleontology.
  21. Profile photo of lauriloo
    lauriloo Female 40-49
    1803 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 8:43 pm
    "...right, because the Bible has so many references to dinosaurs."

    You`d think people being chased and eaten by a lizard bigger than a house would warrant a sentence or two at some point.
  22. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 8:59 pm
    @Lauriloo: Chuckling here at your comment. That was good.
  23. Profile photo of Draculya
    Draculya Male 40-49
    14620 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 9:00 pm
    "I`m not saying mankind walked with dinosaurs"

    Therefore the bible is not 100% correct.
  24. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 9:02 pm
    P.S. @Lauriloo: You need a real (non-generic) avatar for this site. You`re an artiste, for heaven`s sake! =^.^=
  25. Profile photo of mesovortex
    mesovortex Male 30-39
    458 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 9:03 pm
    CrakrJak:

    Also, how an organism handles diet isn`t evolution per se. But, if the diet weeds out organisms that can or can`t adapt, then over time and over generations a species or population will adapt.

    A rapid change in diet doesn`t mean that a population will rapidly change UNLESS it puts pressure on survival of that population.

    For example, if a population depends on plant A, and it dies out and plant B pops up, then the population will probably adapt their genes to digesting plant B over time.

    However, since the diet in America can change growth and weight, but since it isn`t putting pressure on a species to adapt through natural selection, then the genes wouldn`t really change that much based on that factor alone.

    As the population has become more global and as diversity has increased along with population, we will see much more variety just as we do now. However, since we are usually smart enough to adapt in spite of natural selectio
  26. Profile photo of mesovortex
    mesovortex Male 30-39
    458 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 9:07 pm
    CrakrJak: (cont.)

    natural selection, evolution will play a smaller role.

    However, if a population has much variety, like we do, and natural selection (food, climate, etc.) plays an important role, then you will see more rapid evolution over a population. If the genetic diversity is low, evolution will be slower unless some mutation evolves which enhances the survivability of a sub-group. Then, that mutation will likely expand rapidly into that population.

    This is how the cambrian `explosion` happened. Things like hard shells and more complex eyes made organisms more resistant to what was killing them, and more susceptible to fossilization. Even though the `explosion` happened over 80 million years, it shows that a beneficial mutation will often rapidly spread in a population once it shows up.
  27. Profile photo of CodeJockey
    CodeJockey Male 40-49
    5611 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 9:08 pm
    "You`d think people being chased and eaten by a lizard bigger than a house"
    It does have unicorns. Gotta have unicorns...
  28. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 9:39 pm
    P.S. @Lauriloo: You need a real (non-generic) avatar for this site. You`re an artiste, for heaven`s sake! =^.^=
  29. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 10:33 pm
    It does have unicorns. Gotta have unicorns...

    I`ve gone on a bit in the past about inaccurate or unreliable translations of the Christian bible when it comes to homosexuality. This is another one. `Unicorn` only appears in some translations and it doesn`t seem to be the right translation. It`s possible, since there are references to unicorns in Greek writing, so some people did believe unicorns existed in about the right area and about the right time, but the meaning of the Hebrew word is uncertain. There are one-horned animals (e.g. a rhino*) and there are animals with symmetrical horns that were sometimes depicted in flat profile, showing only one horn.

    So it`s probably not a unicorn they were referring to.

    * A rhino`s `horn` isn`t actually a horn, but they wouldn`t have known that ~3000 years ago.
  30. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 10:38 pm
    Here`s a bit about it. It`s only Wikipedia, but it`s a starting point. They go with it probably being an aurochs, which fits. They were around in the right time and place, they were impossible to tame and use for farming and they were immensely strong.

    Probably not a unicorn
  31. Profile photo of whodat6484
    whodat6484 Male 30-39
    3908 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 11:02 pm

  32. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 11:29 pm
    mesovortex: Nothing we have ever observed has changed species from one to another. Natural selection means extinction, 99.9% of everything that`s ever lived is extinct. Science cannot explain the pre-cambrian explosion, cannot explain the explosion of diversity after the KT boundary. In fact scientists say the dinos died out before the KT boundary event. Several animals, like horseshoe crabs and nautilus, haven`t changed since the cambrian era.

    Instead of slow change brought about by natural selection, it seems explosive change only occurs after a massive sudden extinction event. We`ve found mammoths frozen in permafrost with green leafy matter still in their stomachs. We`ve found animals that we thought`ve been extinct for millions of years, like the coelacanth.
  33. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    June 9, 2012 at 11:40 pm
    Paleontologists are recreating what they deem to be `new species` based not on whole bones but small fragments of bones, then imagine the rest. That is like putting a jigsaw puzzle together with only 10% of the pieces then painting in the missing pieces.

    No other job in the world would be considered credible with such scant evidence and supposition to support it`s conclusions.

    Humans themselves are completely antithetical to evolution. We waste our young strong people in wars, we overpopulate, we are the least physically adaptable beings on earth, we have no natural defenses to speak of, we try to stop extinction/natural selection at every turn and we are powerful enough now to make ourselves, and most of the rest of worlds animals, extinct.
  34. Profile photo of Barnk
    Barnk Male 30-39
    486 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 12:01 am
    CrakrJak, you`re just regurgitating Duane T. Gish. He`s a boob. Please present fresh arguments that haven`t already been refuted decades ago,
  35. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 12:07 am
    What you don`t seem to understand are the vast grand canyon sized gaps in the fossil record that make the theory of evolution just a imaginative guess. The sheer variety and abundance of life on earth is no chance accident, there are microbiological clues that point to a designer. symbiotic mechanisms within our own cells require each other to survive and we couldn`t live without them. So now we`re talking about multiple organisms having to evolve at the same exact time otherwise the whole mechanism doesn`t work.

    And please don`t tell me viruses evolve because viruses can`t exist without hijacking cells and their inner mechanisms to survive. That`s not evolution, that`s adaptation because viruses don`t even have a complete DNA chain of their own.
  36. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 12:17 am
    Barnk: The supposed refutations you speak of have been refuted themselves. The blacklisting of scientists that even mention anything akin to `design` is not unlike Galileo being subdued by the Pope.

    The evidence of design is mounting yet no one dares upset the elitists in academia or be banned and shunned. Science only changes one coffin at a time. Eventually the facts will come to the surface once those in control are too few to deny it`s existence further.
  37. Profile photo of Neoptolemos
    Neoptolemos Male 30-39
    625 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 12:28 am
    Hah!
  38. Profile photo of GolfPunk69
    GolfPunk69 Male 30-39
    58 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 12:30 am
    "No other job in the world would be considered credible with such scant evidence and supposition to support it`s conclusions."

    Quote of the century from religious man. Those in glass houses really shouldn`t cast stones.

    So the fact that nowhere, anywhere, in any of the millions of digs around the world, have dinosaur bones ever been found in the same sedimentary layers as human bones provides no information at all? The reality is that no evidence found to date flies directly in the face of evolution. Sure there are plenty of gaps in our knowledge, but nothing proves that it`s not a valid solution. On the flip side, the length of information to suggest that intelligent design is a pile of crap grows by the day.
  39. Profile photo of uunxx
    uunxx Male 30-39
    120 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 1:13 am
    How it`s possible that life created by "itself" is unacceptable by some people yet concept of incredibly complex and mighty mind that came out of nowhere and has a power to create everything from nothing is completely reasonable for them?
  40. Profile photo of Buiadh
    Buiadh Male 30-39
    6739 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 1:23 am
    Oh totally! Haha!
  41. Profile photo of paddy215
    paddy215 Male 18-29
    1677 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 3:30 am
    Dinosaurs are easy to explain. They just couldn`t fit on the Arc,


  42. Profile photo of paddy215
    paddy215 Male 18-29
    1677 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 3:49 am
    "The evidence of design is mounting"

    There is literally no evidence and anyone who believes that design is true genuinely needs help. The only thing that was mounted to create you was your ma by you da.
  43. Profile photo of LemonCurry
    LemonCurry Male 40-49
    1106 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 5:54 am
    "The sheer variety and abundance of life on earth is no chance accident, there are microbiological clues that point to a designer."
    ---------------
    no doubt he left his name engraved.

    "The evidence of design is mounting yet no one dares upset the elitists in academia or be banned and shunned. Science only changes one coffin at a time. Eventually the facts will come to the surface once those in control are too few to deny it`s existence further."
    ----------------
    sure, it`s all a big conspiracy, lol.

    oh boy, this is such a load of bullocks, i need a drink now.
  44. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36647 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 6:28 am

    Allowing religious dogma to determine what is scientific truth.
    Is this the damn middle ages or the middle east?
    But the Bible says there are unicorns {Job 39 9-12} so it must be true.

  45. Profile photo of mesovortex
    mesovortex Male 30-39
    458 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 6:52 am
    CrakrJak:

    How can you possibly lie so much? Almost everything you say is a fabrication.

    1) How can you possibly say science can`t explain the `pre cambrian` explosion - when it`s really the cambrian explosion. There`s a huge difference.

    2) Science not only explains the cambrian explosion quite well, it also explains the diversity of life after the KT boundary.

    3) Some organisms haven`t changed much because of low genetic diversity and a stable environment. The ocean hasn`t changed much in a longtime. Many organisms there won`t change as rapidly as they would on land.

    4) You have absolutely no clue how fossils are identified. They don`t take a tiny fraction of it and make up an entire skeleton. This is a lie. Careful work is taken to figure out what fossil skeletons are and how they fit into the phylogeny of life. Careful work is taken to date them accurately.

    5) We have observed speciation in the lab. Have you ever heard of nylon e
  46. Profile photo of Barnk
    Barnk Male 30-39
    486 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 6:55 am
    CrakrJak, what would Lebowski say about creationism? Your Abide image suggests to me that your assertions may have trollish origins.
  47. Profile photo of mesovortex
    mesovortex Male 30-39
    458 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 6:57 am
    CrakrJak:

    You claim all of these things but offer ZERO evidence for it. All you have is rhetoric and things that are either lies or nowhere close to the truth.

    How can you possibly make such sweeping claims against evolution when you don`t even know what evolution is or aren`t even able to correctly define it?

    How can you possibly make claims against science when you can`t even tell the difference between the cambrian and pre-cambrian eras? You don`t even know what the cambrian explosion was. You aren`t even clear on when the dinosaurs died out. Hint: They died out because of chuxulub which created the KT boundary - meaning of COURSE the fossils will be found below that strata.

    On top of all of this ignorance and dishonesty, you make claims that there is evidence for a designer. Well where is it? Michael Behe, under OATH said that for ID to be considered science, so would Astrology. Under OATH he admitted ID had zero scientific evidence.

  48. Profile photo of mesovortex
    mesovortex Male 30-39
    458 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 7:00 am
    Barnk:

    I would like him to be a troll, but as Poe`s Law says it`s hard to tell the most rabid creationists from trolls because their points are so silly and so ignorant.

    If he wants to be taken seriously, wouldn`t he need to actually know what evolution is?

    CrakrJak is against some notion/definition of evolution that is not the real scientific definition of it. I`m not even sure what his definition is, but it`s akin to calling a chicken a Volkswagen.

    Most creationists I talk to have no clue what evolution is, or even what is and isn`t science. It`s sad that they are so stuck with their per-conceptions that they don`t want to actually find out anything that might show they might be wrong.

    As such, they refuse to study what is and isn`t science, and what is and isn`t evolution. So, they rail at length against some straw-man or some definition that doesn`t really exist and wonder why they can`t be taken seriously.

    They didn`t use l
  49. Profile photo of mesovortex
    mesovortex Male 30-39
    458 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 7:04 am
    Barnk:

    They didn`t use logic to get to their conclusions.

    But I am reminded of a saying.

    Arguing with a creationist is like playing chess with a pigeon. The pigeon will just knock over pieces, crap on the board, and then fly away thinking it`s won.

    The only reason I even talk to them is not to educate creationists - they don`t want to be educated or actually learn anything.

    I refute their posts because in the process I learn more about science (since I research things before I post) and I might be able to educate others.

    Creationists will make themselves look bad regardless, but it doesn`t hurt to have a wall of text refuting every claim they make - especially when they come back offering nothing but lies, distortion, hyperbole, and rhetoric.

    People like CrakrJak can`t possibly say they have honestly looked into the evidence going by how much they get wrong. And, here I thought Christianity was against lies and dishonesty.
  50. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 8:21 am
    CJ`s museum.
  51. Profile photo of AtheistAlien
    AtheistAlien Male 30-39
    809 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 9:20 am
    Stupid creationists are stupid.
  52. Profile photo of Hisky
    Hisky Male 18-29
    117 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 9:24 am
    Damn straight.
  53. Profile photo of LordJim
    LordJim Male 60-69
    6932 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 9:49 am
    Creationism is not about science, it`s not even about religion since most mainstream christian churches have no problem with it.

    It`s about being special. Special because my grandpa weren`t no monkey. Special because even without a science background or een a basic understanding of science you can see through all them smart-ass scientists. Special because you get to tell the school-boards to teach what you believe.

    You might think you are putting forward logic, reason and evidence, but what the creationist is hearing is, `You are not special, you damned dirty ape.`

    It wouldn`t matter except that is damaging American education in general and science education in particular. As a Brit I want to see America leading the world in scientiic endeavours, not retreating into superstition and dogma.
  54. Profile photo of hi2pi
    hi2pi Male 30-39
    736 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 10:14 am
    I`ve got nothing against Jesus, it`s his fan club that I`m scares me.
  55. Profile photo of hi2pi
    hi2pi Male 30-39
    736 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 10:17 am
    I like it when Crakr posts his usual garbage - helps display to the rest of us how ignorant some people can be.
  56. Profile photo of 8BitHero
    8BitHero Male 18-29
    5414 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 10:19 am
    Too much trolling.
  57. Profile photo of FoolsPrussia
    FoolsPrussia Male 30-39
    3446 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 10:19 am
    `I`ve been to the local Creation Museum here in San Diego`

    Ha, I`ve been meaning to go there Gerry. For the lulz, of course.
  58. Profile photo of FoolsPrussia
    FoolsPrussia Male 30-39
    3446 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 10:21 am
    It`s funny that Crakrjak has the audacity to call something like anthropogenic climate change "junk science" but at the same time denies evolution. So what qualifies as actual science?
  59. Profile photo of Otto67
    Otto67 Male 40-49
    438 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 10:22 am
    "The evidence of design is mounting yet no one dares upset the elitists in academia or be banned and shunned."

    Crakr:

    The evidence of design gets smaller and smaller, there is not one scientist that denies evolution that is taken seriously. You do not dare upset your dogma for fear of realizing the cognative dissonance you would have to face. If a scientist would be able to disprove evolution they would give him a Nobel prize and he would be famous. In religion if someone attempts to disprove dogma or god they are labeled a heretic and shunned.
  60. Profile photo of banjolegs
    banjolegs Male 30-39
    176 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 10:29 am
    CrakrJak:
    "No other job in the world would be considered credible with such scant evidence and supposition to support it`s conclusions"
    What apart from every preacher, cleric or vicar?
  61. Profile photo of Barnk
    Barnk Male 30-39
    486 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 12:29 pm
    CrakrJak, you`re just regurgitating Duane T. Gish. He`s a boob. Please present fresh arguments that haven`t already been refuted decades ago,
  62. Profile photo of Zeegrr60
    Zeegrr60 Male 40-49
    2106 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 12:45 pm
    Carjack, you`re still funny. If there is a god, why doesn`t he kill the idiots who work for him? And if the design is so damn intelligent,explain birth defects. If you Bow before anything, you are just stupid.
  63. Profile photo of mesovortex
    mesovortex Male 30-39
    458 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 1:00 pm
    10 to 1 CrakrJak won`t read the rebuttals (or understand them) and will go to another thread to cut and paste the same garbage.

    Isn`t there a commandment against lying? How come creationists lie so much?
  64. Profile photo of PierreJeanFR
    PierreJeanFR Male 40-49
    1360 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 2:39 pm
    Crakrjakass is proof evolution exists: a turd who became an assshole
  65. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 2:42 pm
    The problem is that people like CrakrJak have a huge advantage.

    All they need to do is copy&paste lies repeatedly and make up anything that happens to fit what they want at any particular time. That`s quick and easy to do, requiring neither knowledge nor thought.

    Refuting them requires knowledge, thought and time because it has to logical rebuttal based on knowledge and reasoning.

    In short, spewing creationist lies is inherently easier than properly refuting them and it`s inevitable that some of the spew will stick before rational people with integrity can clean it up.
  66. Profile photo of Zeegrr60
    Zeegrr60 Male 40-49
    2106 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 9:55 pm
    You guys know crackerjack is trolling and means none of what he says...if he did believe it,it wouldn`t be funny.
  67. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    June 10, 2012 at 11:39 pm
    I`m skeptical of any science that can`t take criticism of it`s conclusions, that bans and shuns other scientists for not "towing the line".

    Our ancestors didn`t crawl out of a slimy tide pool, sorry even most scientists now know that didn`t occur. If life just spontaneously erupted like that, then why hasn`t it ever happened again? They haven`t even been able to recreate it in a laboratory.

    "The Fashion" in science used to be gradual change and natural selection, now it`s sudden change prompted by extinction. Eventually fashions change, science would not come to an end if design was embraced, the task would still remain of deciphering how genetic information is communicated, and how the whole system works. What scientists would lose is the illusion of total mastery of nature. They would have to face the possibility that there is a further reality which transcends science.
  68. Profile photo of Colors
    Colors Male 18-29
    96 posts
    June 11, 2012 at 1:07 am
    Here is my thoughts on why Creationist are not dumb. Noah`s arcs dimensions are given, it was about as long as a football field if I remember correctly. Anyways, that`s not big enough for every animal to fit on it, so the bigger ones like dinosaurs got left out.
  69. Profile photo of stonker
    stonker Male 40-49
    88 posts
    June 11, 2012 at 2:50 am
    Why do religious people not make the leap of logic, that people that have `faith` in science seem to miss also, that evolution and the existence of a divine being aren`t mutually exclusive. Maybe that`s all part of the plan. Neither side will EVER prove that ultimate truth.

    We could fill that "ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance" and not find god. Doesn`t prove a thing. If a god exists it would be outside all that anyway.

    I`m a Fortean btw.
  70. Profile photo of LemonCurry
    LemonCurry Male 40-49
    1106 posts
    June 11, 2012 at 5:43 am
    "Here is my thoughts on why Creationist are not dumb. Noah`s arcs dimensions are given, it was about as long as a football field if I remember correctly. Anyways, that`s not big enough for every animal to fit on it, so the bigger ones like dinosaurs got left out."
    ---------------
    and no doubt noah made an extra effort collecting all the microbes, bacteria, viruses that survive today. (hey, at least there was enough space on board!)

    guys, frankly, let`s put the discussion to rest. a monkey will sooner understand the theory of relativity than creationists understand reason and logic. beati pauperes spiritu (the bible does have some nice quotes once in a while ... ;-) )
  71. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    June 11, 2012 at 6:39 am
    LemonCurry: Evolutionists would rather make monkeys of themselves than admit God may exist.
  72. Profile photo of GRadde
    GRadde Male 18-29
    2556 posts
    June 11, 2012 at 6:42 am
    >Crakr
    First off, that`s "toeing the line", as in putting a toe beyond a drawn line.

    Second, I`m sceptical that you`re sceptical of any science that can`t take criticism of its conclusions; see, you say that the general concensus of the scientific community changes. Well, see, that`s because criticisms are put forward with discoveries supporting these new claims. Thus, mistakes in previous versions of what`s considered to be true are corrected as new knowledge emerges.
  73. Profile photo of LemonCurry
    LemonCurry Male 40-49
    1106 posts
    June 11, 2012 at 6:48 am
    "LemonCurry: Evolutionists would rather make monkeys of themselves than admit God may exist."
    ------------
    lol, q.e.d. thank you for proving my point ... :-)
  74. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    June 11, 2012 at 7:01 am
    Crakr: I try my best to treat you with respect, but your posts in this thread make me wonder if you`re functionally retarded.
    "I`m skeptical of any science that can`t take criticism of it`s conclusions, that bans and shuns other scientists for not "towing the line"."

    If this *were* the case, it sounds an awful lot like your christianity to me, so I wonder why you`d have a problem with it?

    "They haven`t even been able to recreate it in a laboratory."

    If you`re implying that fully grown organisms crawled out of slime then yes, but no one said that`s what happens. Otherwise the Miller-Urey experiment demonstrated that amino acids can spontaneously form in early-Earth like conditions,
  75. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    June 11, 2012 at 7:03 am
    ...and Sidney Fox demonstrated how protobionts can form from primitive amino acids.

    "now it`s sudden change prompted by extinction."

    No, it isn`t. Do you even know what the difference is between gradualism and punctuated equilibrium? Of course you don`t.

    I just love how when the overwhelming evidence and scientific majority refute your ideology, you just claim it`s rigged, and that the "real" science is brushed under the carpet. You`re ridiculous.
  76. Profile photo of patchgrabber
    patchgrabber Male 30-39
    5812 posts
    June 11, 2012 at 7:07 am
    Oh and stop bringing up fossil gaps, because you just look silly. Just because there`s a gap means nothing. Learn about the rarity with which fossils are formed, i.e. specific conditions required, and it`s a wonder we even have what we do. There never will be a complete fossil record, and if that`s part of your reasoning for why evolution is "false" then I`d rather jingle my keys in front of you than argue with you.
  77. Profile photo of stonker
    stonker Male 40-49
    88 posts
    June 11, 2012 at 9:41 am
    Talking to myself here.

    Creationists, please, why can`t evolution and the existence of `god` both be true. Science has laws and maybe god`s a smart cookie.

    Atheists, science hasn`t answered everything, yet, please don`t be so roostery. (But to be fair while creationists are making such dumbass arguments I can`t really criticise your position.)
  78. Profile photo of stonker
    stonker Male 40-49
    88 posts
    June 11, 2012 at 9:42 am
    Roostery?

    What I actually said wasn`t a profanity but nvm.
  79. Profile photo of cahalla
    cahalla Female 18-29
    961 posts
    June 11, 2012 at 10:52 am
    No words for this bullcrap
  80. Profile photo of Essersmith
    Essersmith Male 18-29
    275 posts
    June 11, 2012 at 1:52 pm
    "I`m skeptical of any science that can`t take criticism of it`s conclusions"

    You are talking about creationism, right? The guys that refers to the (almighty) booooble when in doubt, right? The guys who have faith rather than proof, right?
  81. Profile photo of thescotsman
    thescotsman Male 50-59
    54 posts
    June 11, 2012 at 7:35 pm
    God created evolution...
  82. Profile photo of Barnk
    Barnk Male 30-39
    486 posts
    June 11, 2012 at 10:44 pm
    Blug.
  83. Profile photo of UDUMASS
    UDUMASS Male 30-39
    60 posts
    June 12, 2012 at 11:49 am
    The theory of evolution is a mockery of actual science

Leave a Reply