Evolution vs. Creation being taught in schools

[BTGBullseye]

Evolution != Speciation

 

Define your terms.

What?

 

The mere fact that carbon dating isn't the ONLY form of dating shows that your complaint is debunked.

And what other methods are those? The rock surrounding the fossils is dated by the fossils in said rock, so you can't use that one...

 

So. No evidence of the Biblical flood.

If you take the biblical flood as a literal story... But for most people in the past: world = everything they knew. (usually that meant about as far as they could see from the top of the nearest Date tree)

[danielsangeo]

Evolution != Speciation

 

Define your terms.

What?

 

In the immortal words of Inigo Montoya and your use of the word "evolution":

 

"I do not think it means what you think it means."

 

So, define 'evolution'. In your own words.

 

The mere fact that carbon dating isn't the ONLY form of dating shows that your complaint is debunked.

And what other methods are those? The rock surrounding the fossils is dated by the fossils in said rock, so you can't use that one...

 

Sure. Here's an abridged list:

• Uranium-lead
  
• Samarium-neodymium
  
• Potassium-argon
  
• Rubidium-strontium
  
• Uranium-thorium
  
• Fission track
  
• Chlorine-36
  
• Argon-argon
  
• Iodine-xenon
  
• Lead-lead

 

And so on.

 

So. No evidence of the Biblical flood.

If you take the biblical flood as a literal story... But for most people in the past: world = everything they knew. (usually that meant about as far as they could see from the top of the nearest Date tree)

 

Ah, I see. So, any flood is Biblical.

[BTGBullseye]

In the immortal words of Inigo Montoya and your use of the word "evolution":

 

"I do not think it means what you think it means."

 

So, define 'evolution'. In your own words.

Not in mine, but in the words of the teachers in 99.9% of the public schools in America.

 

Try to understand, it's not about the theory itself, it's about what is taught in the schools, and when it's taught to the children.

 

Sure. Here's an abridged list:

• Uranium-lead
  
• Samarium-neodymium
  
• Potassium-argon
  
• Rubidium-strontium
  
• Uranium-thorium
  
• Fission track
  
• Chlorine-36
  
• Argon-argon
  
• Iodine-xenon
  
• Lead-lead

 

And so on.

And how often do they actually use those? I personally know of the methods, but have yet to see anyone use them for fossil dating.

 

Ah, I see. So, any flood is Biblical.

Are you trying to miss the meaning of what I post?

[J.C.]

Ah, I see. So, any flood is Biblical.

Are you trying to miss the meaning of what I post?

 

Yeah... that sounded weird to me too, I don't see hoy can one get from what you said to the any flood is biblical thing...

[Doom Shepherd]

I still have yet to see any transitioning fossils from anything, to anything else... I've looked quite hard to find a decent one, but they are all faked from what I've seen.

 

You are either not being entirely truthful, or willfully ignorant. Name TWO transitional fossils that are fakes.

[danielsangeo]

In the immortal words of Inigo Montoya and your use of the word "evolution":

 

"I do not think it means what you think it means."

 

So, define 'evolution'. In your own words.

Not in mine, but in the words of the teachers in 99.9% of the public schools in America.

 

If you don't even know what "evolution" is, how do you know what "99.9% of public schools in America" teach?

 

Try to understand, it's not about the theory itself, it's about what is taught in the schools, and when it's taught to the children.

 

Then perhaps you need to know what you're talking about.

 

Sure. Here's an abridged list:

• Uranium-lead
  
• Samarium-neodymium
  
• Potassium-argon
  
• Rubidium-strontium
  
• Uranium-thorium
  
• Fission track
  
• Chlorine-36
  
• Argon-argon
  
• Iodine-xenon
  
• Lead-lead

 

And so on.

And how often do they actually use those? I personally know of the methods, but have yet to see anyone use them for fossil dating.

 

This is actually an irrelevant point, but they use all of them all the time. It's irrelevant because dating is not at issue with whether things actually do evolve or not.

 

Ah, I see. So, any flood is Biblical.

Are you trying to miss the meaning of what I post?

 

The "biblical flood" that many refer to is a flood that COVERED THE ENTIRE PLANET....all the way up past the tops of the tallest mountains. If you're simply referring to regional floods, then those happen all the time and are quite natural. Also, floods of any kind are irrelevant to whether evolution happens or not.

 

So, let's set aside dating methods and floods and just talk about evolution.

 

If you want to see a transitional organism, just look in the mirror.

[Bjossi]

Guys, just in case you haven't noticed by now BTG is either being ignorant on intent to troll you or he is really that incredibly dense, either way you're wasting your time trying to reason with him.

[xxxxxxxxx]

Guys, just in case you haven't noticed by now BTG is either being ignorant on intent to troll you or he is really that incredibly dense, either way you're wasting your time trying to reason with him.

I thought the troll was being pretty obvious...

[danielsangeo]

Well, there is this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law

[Michael Archer]

Also while I may piss some people off saying this, the evolution v. creationism thing is kind of black and white to me. Evolution is science. Creationism is not. You can observe evolution in action just from killing cockroaches. With regards to man, we only have a zillion fossils showing a pretty clear transition from ape to human. I think the only real point of "debate" is the actual origin of life on Earth. We haven't proven exactly how that's started yet. But then you can't actually "prove" ANYTHING with science, you can only DISPROVE things. I saw a bumper sticker I liked before that said "Evolution is just a theory. Just like gravity"

 

Ross is god; all hail the mighty Ross.

 

Heh, just kidding. You're right, but your omnipotence in this forum doesn't make you right; the fact that you use facts makes you right.

 

In fact, you guys seem to be handling Bullseye's ad hominum attacks, scarecrow arguments and lack of understanding of evolution pretty well; I'll leave this to you guys.

[thekidwhodraws]

Three words for you guys.

Flying Spaghetti Monster

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster

[xxxxxxxxx]

Three words for you guys.

Flying Spaghetti Monster

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster

Yeah, a guy got warned already for that.

[Axeldeath]

Three words for you guys.

Flying Spaghetti Monster

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster

 

No comment.

[GoodOddsAgainst]

I don't really care what people believe, but I will believe that we evaporated out of thin air or are sons and daughters of apes when they can prove that our whole universe started as a tiny ball.

[danielsangeo]

I don't really care what people believe, but I will believe that we evaporated out of thin air or are sons and daughters of apes when they can prove that our whole universe started as a tiny ball.

 

Actually, since human beings are classified as apes (great apes, specifically, or members of the Primates order), then you are a son or daughter of an ape.

[BTGBullseye]

Actually, since human beings are classified as apes (great apes, specifically, or members of the Primates order), then you are a son or daughter of an ape.

Latin for "wise man" or "knowing man", not "great ape".

[danielsangeo]

We are still classified as great apes. Great apes are hominidae with four extent genera: chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans and.....humans.

[BTGBullseye]

We are still classified as great apes. Great apes are hominidae with four extent genera: chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans and.....humans.

And we are only classified that way by evolutionists.

[danielsangeo]

Wait, what?

[BTGBullseye]

Wait, what?

 

Ok...

 

 

And we are only classified that way by evolutionists.

 

And: Used to connect words of the same part of speech, clauses, or sentences that are to be taken jointly.

We: Used to refer to the speaker together with other people regarded in the same category.

Are: Present indicative plural and 2nd person singular of be.

Only: And no one or nothing more besides; solely or exclusively.

Classified: Arranged in classes or categories.

That: Introducing a subordinate clause expressing a statement or hypothesis.

Way: A method, style, or manner of doing something.

By: Identifying the agent performing an action.

Evolutionists: A person who believes in the theories of evolution and natural selection.