Notices
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: evidence for creation and intelligent design

  1. #1 evidence for creation and intelligent design 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    2
    http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/

    The 7th Edition of In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood by Dr. Walt Brown is available to order here. It can also be read or printed out free at this web site; just use the links to the left to navigate through the outline of the entire book.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Jack, are you just randomly posting advertising, or do you wish to debate any of these whimsical claims?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Sophomore Phlogistician's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    156
    With a post count of just 2, I'm fairly certain this user does not want to debate, and the account was set up purely to spam.

    I took a look at the book online. I found factual errors within minutes. It's the usual pseudoscientific spewings of someone desperate to prove a faith position.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    I am sure you are correct. My question was largely rhetorical.
    Did you look at the video on the hydroplate theory? I can imagine those uneducated in the sciences being impressed by Dr. Brown's apparently no-nonsense approach. Personally I found it difficult to avoid vomiting while viewing it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5 re:resources 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    2
    oh well
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    j
    j is offline
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    431
    Has anyone suggested that we boycott Creationist threads? I know how strong the impulse to share and inform is, especially with those who really seem interested in resolving the [non-existant] conflict between science and religion, but I begin to believe that Creationist Wolves are posting as Questioning Lambs just to hone their debating skills, so as to better poison the minds of others.

    It always starts with an innocuous statement or question about God, and ends with something like a blanket refuting of all fossil evidence. I just don't believe these are honest searches for information and clarification. Do they even look at dates on those quotes the Creationist Webpages use?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by j
    I begin to believe that Creationist Wolves are posting as Questioning Lambs just to hone their debating skills, so as to better poison the minds of others.
    Possibly. But I have seen little evidence that any of them possess debating skills, and even less that they have honed them.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    j
    j is offline
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    431
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    Possibly. But I have seen little evidence that any of them possess debating skills, and even less that they have honed them.
    I guess I am just a Conspiracy Theorist at heart.

    And I went back to talk to starnamer ...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by j
    I guess I am just a Conspiracy Theorist at heart.
    Conspiracy theory! Bah, humbug. It's all just a giant plot to distract us from what's really important. :wink:
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Professor wallaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,521
    what is this really important important thing we are being distracted from?
    Just curious, i'd like to know so i can get my priorities in order.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    I don't know: I've been driven to distraction. (Its nice when you have your own driver.)

    Returning to the original topic of the thread, a book 'revealing' why evolutionists have it all wrong. This really is worth at least a browse. The flawed logic, distorted facts and just plain goofy thinking would be amusing if there were not people out there who believe it.

    One point that caught my attention was the claim that living bacteria had been found in meteorites. Now as a strong advocate of pan spermia as an explanation for life on Earth I was intrigued by this possibility. I was also puzzled as to how I could have missed reference to it in the scores of papers and abstracts I have read concerning meteorites and organic material.

    Dr. Walt Brown quotes a single source, an Italian researcher Giuseppe Geraci who pulished his work in “Microbes in Rocks and Meteorites,” Rendiconti Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Vol. 12, No. 9, 2001, p. 51.
    The remarkable claim of this paper is that microbes have been found in samples of igneous, metamorphic and sedimentary rocks as old as 3.4 billion years that have proved viable when exposed to a suitable nutrient solution. i.e. they are alive. The study also included two meteorites.
    For me the telling point is that these microbes are said to be 'indistinguishable from today's forms'. That rather suggests they are today's forms. In a word: contamination.
    To bolster that argument consider that the meteorites from which the samples were taken fell in 1882 and 1919 in Transylvania and the Sudan respectively. There was approximately a century between their fall, transport across half a continent, and subsequent incarceration in a dusty cabinet before they were sampled for the presence of bacteria. It's not exactly a clean room approach.
    Yet it is this single paper, in an obscure Italian journal, that Dr. Brown chooses as one of the pieces of evidence to support his peculiar claims. I do hope some of his other thoughts have more substance, but I rather doubt it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    j
    j is offline
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    431
    I would think that in four years some one would have tried to reproduce the experiment; there haven't even been reports of failure to do so?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    j
    j is offline
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    431
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    Quote Originally Posted by j
    I guess I am just a Conspiracy Theorist at heart.
    Conspiracy theory! Bah, humbug. It's all just a giant plot to distract us from what's really important. :wink:
    I just stole that as a tag.

    i think; let me check ... yeah, it works
    Why do they want us to believe Conspiracy Theories?
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •