Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Creationist bloggers can be infuriating. If one has infuriated you by persisting in nonsense even when corrected, or refusing to reply to your criiticsm, you may feel driven to recording the fact. If so, you may register your disapproval here and hope a response is forthcoming.

Moderator: Moderators

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Peter Henderson » Sun Dec 09, 2012 12:39 am

I see George Murphy has posted a number of comments on CMI's Facebook page linking to this article Michael.

Wonder how long he'll last ?

I've also given up on the "remove creationist display from the Giant's Causeway" Facebook group as it appears to have been completely taken over by the Atheists. Arguing with them is a total waste of time. Pity it's gone like this.
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4353
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Peter Henderson » Sun Dec 09, 2012 12:14 pm

Picking up on the mayan apocolypse nonsense today:


This news article goes along with Dan Lietha's latest After Eden cartoon (from the AiG website) I posted. Most people will believe anything--BUT the Bible. This just reinforces that there is a real spiritual battle going on--and that men 'loved darkness rather than light.' There are more on the broad way than the narrow way.

I have linked to Dan's cartoon again:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/media/i ... en/the-end
...
Also linked to the news article.

As a Christian, I can say categorically--boldly--the end of the world will occur when God has decreed. And just as surely as God created the world/universe, and just as surely He judged the world with a worlwide Flood, by the SAME WORD, he will judge again-next time by fire. Read 2 Peter 3. As Christians we do not fear this at all--but look forward to it, knowing there will be New Heavens and New Earth in which righteous dwells. Non-Christians do need to fear this though--because when the final judgment comes, then those who have not received the free gift of salvation will be separated from God forever. And by the way--an underground shelter is going to help one bit when God carries out the final judgment!!!

"Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells." (2 Peter 3:13)See more
Mayan apocalypse: panic spreads as December 21 nears - Telegraph
www.telegraph.co.uk
Fears that the end of the world is nigh have spread across the world with only days until the end of the Mayan
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4353
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Peter Henderson » Tue Dec 11, 2012 1:22 pm

More work for Dr. Gary Hurd.

Sarfati lying about science again today. The dino blood and a young Earth simply will not go away:

http://creation.com/dino-dna-bone-cells

Schweitzer’s more recent research makes long ages even harder to believe. Here, she analyzed bone from two dinosaurs, the famous Tyrannosaurus rex (MOR 112510) and a large duck-billed dinosaur called Brachylophosaurus canadensis (MOR 2598).11 Bone is an amazing structure with the ability to re-work in response to stress,12 and uses the finely designed protein osteocalcin,13 which has been found in the best known duck-billed dinosaur, Iguanadon, ‘dated’ to 120 Ma.14 The most plentiful cells in bones are osteocytes. These have a distinctive branching structure that connects to other osteocytes, and have a “vital role” in “immediate responses to changing stresses.”10

Schweitzer’s team again removed the hard bony mineral with the chelating agent EDTA. They found “transparent cell-like microstructures with dentritic [branching, just the shape expected for osteocytes] processes, some containing internal contents,” from both dinos.

They also used antibodies to detect the globular proteins actin and tubulin, used to make filaments and tubes in vertebrates. The proteins from both dinos had similar binding patterns to the same proteins from ostrich and alligator. They are not found in bacteria, so this rules out contamination. In particular, these antibodies did not bind to the type of bacteria that forms biofilms, “thus a biofilm origin for these structures is not supported.”10 Furthermore, they tested for collagen, a fibrous animal protein, and it was found in these bones—but not in surrounding sediments.

Furthermore, because actin, tubulin, and collagen are not unique to bone, they tested for a very distinctive osteocyte protein called PHEX. This stands for Phosphate-regulating endopeptidase, X-linked, which is vital in depositing the hard bone mineral. And indeed, antibodies specific to PHEX detected this unique bone protein.15 Detecting a distinctive bone protein is very strong support for osteocyte identification.

The problem for long ages is as they ask:

Cells are usually completely degraded soon after the death of the organism, so how could ‘bone cells’ and the molecules that comprise them persist in Mesozoic [evolutionary dino-age] bone?10
They try to solve this problem by proposing that bone protects the cells from bacteria that cause degradation. Bone would hinder the cells from swelling that comes before cells self-destruct (autolysis) as well. They also propose that the surfaces of the mineral crystals attract and destroy enzymes that would otherwise speed up degradation. They propose that iron may play a vital role too, both by helping to cross-link and stabilize the proteins, as well as by acting as an anti-oxidant.

Actually, this is all reasonable from a biblical creationist perspective, up to a point. Measured decay rates of some proteins are compatible with an age of about 4,500 years (since the Flood), but not with many millions of years. However, seeing not only proteins but even cell microstructures after 4,500 years is still surprising, considering how easily bacteria can normally attack them. These ideas could help explain survival over thousands of years. But they seem totally implausible for millions of years, since the above preservation proposals could not stop ordinary breakdown by water (hydrolysis) over vast eons.16

Dino DNA
The problem for long-agers is even more acute with their discovery of DNA. Estimates of DNA stability put its upper limit of survival at 125,000 years at 0°C, 17,500 years at 10°C and 2,500 years at 20°C.2 One recent report said:

“There is a general belief that DNA is ‘rock solid’—extremely stable,” says Brandt Eichman, associate professor of biological sciences at Vanderbilt, who directed the project. “Actually DNA is highly reactive.”
On a good day about one million bases in the DNA in a human cell are damaged. These lesions are caused by a combination of normal chemical activity within the cell and exposure to radiation and toxins coming from environmental sources including cigarette smoke, grilled foods and industrial wastes.17
A recent paper on DNA shows that it might be able to last as much as 400 times longer in bone.18 But even there, there is no way that DNA could last the evolutionary time since dino extinction. Their figures of the time till complete disintegration of DNA (“no intact bonds”) is 22,000 years at 25°C, 131,000 years at 15°C, 882,000 years at 5°C; and even if it could somehow be kept continually below freezing point at –5°C, it could survive only 6.83 Ma—only about a tenth of the assumed evolutionary age

It’s hard to improve on one of Mary Schweitzer’s early quotes:

It was exactly like looking at a slice of modern bone. But of course, I couldn’t believe it. I said to the lab technician: “The bones are, after all, 65 million years old. How could blood cells survive that long?”


Someone needs to disect this load of lies and downright misrepresentation of real scientific research.
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4353
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Michael » Tue Dec 11, 2012 1:43 pm

Peter Henderson wrote:More work for Dr. Gary Hurd.

Sarfati lying about science again today. The dino blood and a young Earth simply will not go away:

http://creation.com/dino-dna-bone-cells

Schweitzer’s more recent research makes long ages even harder to believe. Here, she analyzed bone from two dinosaurs, the famous Tyrannosaurus rex (MOR 112510) and a large duck-billed dinosaur called Brachylophosaurus canadensis (MOR 2598).11 Bone is an amazing structure with the ability to re-work in response to stress,12 and uses the finely designed protein osteocalcin,13 which has been found in the best known duck-billed dinosaur, Iguanadon, ‘dated’ to 120 Ma.14 The most plentiful cells in bones are osteocytes. These have a distinctive branching structure that connects to other osteocytes, and have a “vital role” in “immediate responses to changing stresses.”10

Schweitzer’s team again removed the hard bony mineral with the chelating agent EDTA. They found “transparent cell-like microstructures with dentritic [branching, just the shape expected for osteocytes] processes, some containing internal contents,” from both dinos.

They also used antibodies to detect the globular proteins actin and tubulin, used to make filaments and tubes in vertebrates. The proteins from both dinos had similar binding patterns to the same proteins from ostrich and alligator. They are not found in bacteria, so this rules out contamination. In particular, these antibodies did not bind to the type of bacteria that forms biofilms, “thus a biofilm origin for these structures is not supported.”10 Furthermore, they tested for collagen, a fibrous animal protein, and it was found in these bones—but not in surrounding sediments.

Furthermore, because actin, tubulin, and collagen are not unique to bone, they tested for a very distinctive osteocyte protein called PHEX. This stands for Phosphate-regulating endopeptidase, X-linked, which is vital in depositing the hard bone mineral. And indeed, antibodies specific to PHEX detected this unique bone protein.15 Detecting a distinctive bone protein is very strong support for osteocyte identification.

The problem for long ages is as they ask:

Cells are usually completely degraded soon after the death of the organism, so how could ‘bone cells’ and the molecules that comprise them persist in Mesozoic [evolutionary dino-age] bone?10
They try to solve this problem by proposing that bone protects the cells from bacteria that cause degradation. Bone would hinder the cells from swelling that comes before cells self-destruct (autolysis) as well. They also propose that the surfaces of the mineral crystals attract and destroy enzymes that would otherwise speed up degradation. They propose that iron may play a vital role too, both by helping to cross-link and stabilize the proteins, as well as by acting as an anti-oxidant.

Actually, this is all reasonable from a biblical creationist perspective, up to a point. Measured decay rates of some proteins are compatible with an age of about 4,500 years (since the Flood), but not with many millions of years. However, seeing not only proteins but even cell microstructures after 4,500 years is still surprising, considering how easily bacteria can normally attack them. These ideas could help explain survival over thousands of years. But they seem totally implausible for millions of years, since the above preservation proposals could not stop ordinary breakdown by water (hydrolysis) over vast eons.16

Dino DNA
The problem for long-agers is even more acute with their discovery of DNA. Estimates of DNA stability put its upper limit of survival at 125,000 years at 0°C, 17,500 years at 10°C and 2,500 years at 20°C.2 One recent report said:

“There is a general belief that DNA is ‘rock solid’—extremely stable,” says Brandt Eichman, associate professor of biological sciences at Vanderbilt, who directed the project. “Actually DNA is highly reactive.”
On a good day about one million bases in the DNA in a human cell are damaged. These lesions are caused by a combination of normal chemical activity within the cell and exposure to radiation and toxins coming from environmental sources including cigarette smoke, grilled foods and industrial wastes.17
A recent paper on DNA shows that it might be able to last as much as 400 times longer in bone.18 But even there, there is no way that DNA could last the evolutionary time since dino extinction. Their figures of the time till complete disintegration of DNA (“no intact bonds”) is 22,000 years at 25°C, 131,000 years at 15°C, 882,000 years at 5°C; and even if it could somehow be kept continually below freezing point at –5°C, it could survive only 6.83 Ma—only about a tenth of the assumed evolutionary age

It’s hard to improve on one of Mary Schweitzer’s early quotes:

It was exactly like looking at a slice of modern bone. But of course, I couldn’t believe it. I said to the lab technician: “The bones are, after all, 65 million years old. How could blood cells survive that long?”


Someone needs to disect this load of lies and downright misrepresentation of real scientific research.


Would it make any difference to CMI? They will carry on peddling the same lies
Michael
 
Posts: 2786
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 1:30 pm
Location: Lancaster

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby cathy » Tue Dec 11, 2012 3:57 pm

Would it make any difference to CMI? They will carry on peddling the same lies

No it wouldn't. I've long since given up expecting and creationist to show any morals at all.
cathy
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Peter Henderson » Tue Dec 11, 2012 4:02 pm

Would it make any difference to CMI? They will carry on peddling the same lies


Indeed Michael, but it'll impress the likes of ploughboy and his ilk who are so confident that evolution and long ages are having their "supports knocked down one by one".
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4353
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Peter Henderson » Tue Dec 11, 2012 8:16 pm

Despite all the dire predictions, money continues to flow in for the ark encounter:

http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs ... Ken+Ham%29
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4353
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Dec 11, 2012 8:51 pm

Peter Henderson wrote:More work for Dr. Gary Hurd.

Sarfati lying about science again today. The dino blood and a young Earth simply will not go away:

http://creation.com/dino-dna-bone-cells

Schweitzer’s more recent research makes long ages even harder to believe. Here, she analyzed bone from two dinosaurs, the famous Tyrannosaurus rex (MOR 112510) and a large duck-billed dinosaur called Brachylophosaurus canadensis (MOR 2598).11 Bone is an amazing structure with the ability to re-work in response to stress,12 and uses the finely designed protein osteocalcin,13 which has been found in the best known duck-billed dinosaur, Iguanadon, ‘dated’ to 120 Ma.14 The most plentiful cells in bones are osteocytes. These have a distinctive branching structure that connects to other osteocytes, and have a “vital role” in “immediate responses to changing stresses.”10

Schweitzer’s team again removed the hard bony mineral with the chelating agent EDTA. They found “transparent cell-like microstructures with dentritic [branching, just the shape expected for osteocytes] processes, some containing internal contents,” from both dinos.

They also used antibodies to detect the globular proteins actin and tubulin, used to make filaments and tubes in vertebrates. The proteins from both dinos had similar binding patterns to the same proteins from ostrich and alligator. They are not found in bacteria, so this rules out contamination. In particular, these antibodies did not bind to the type of bacteria that forms biofilms, “thus a biofilm origin for these structures is not supported.”10 Furthermore, they tested for collagen, a fibrous animal protein, and it was found in these bones—but not in surrounding sediments.

Furthermore, because actin, tubulin, and collagen are not unique to bone, they tested for a very distinctive osteocyte protein called PHEX. This stands for Phosphate-regulating endopeptidase, X-linked, which is vital in depositing the hard bone mineral. And indeed, antibodies specific to PHEX detected this unique bone protein.15 Detecting a distinctive bone protein is very strong support for osteocyte identification.

The problem for long ages is as they ask:

Cells are usually completely degraded soon after the death of the organism, so how could ‘bone cells’ and the molecules that comprise them persist in Mesozoic [evolutionary dino-age] bone?10
They try to solve this problem by proposing that bone protects the cells from bacteria that cause degradation. Bone would hinder the cells from swelling that comes before cells self-destruct (autolysis) as well. They also propose that the surfaces of the mineral crystals attract and destroy enzymes that would otherwise speed up degradation. They propose that iron may play a vital role too, both by helping to cross-link and stabilize the proteins, as well as by acting as an anti-oxidant.

Actually, this is all reasonable from a biblical creationist perspective, up to a point. Measured decay rates of some proteins are compatible with an age of about 4,500 years (since the Flood), but not with many millions of years. However, seeing not only proteins but even cell microstructures after 4,500 years is still surprising, considering how easily bacteria can normally attack them. These ideas could help explain survival over thousands of years. But they seem totally implausible for millions of years, since the above preservation proposals could not stop ordinary breakdown by water (hydrolysis) over vast eons.16

Dino DNA
The problem for long-agers is even more acute with their discovery of DNA. Estimates of DNA stability put its upper limit of survival at 125,000 years at 0°C, 17,500 years at 10°C and 2,500 years at 20°C.2 One recent report said:

“There is a general belief that DNA is ‘rock solid’—extremely stable,” says Brandt Eichman, associate professor of biological sciences at Vanderbilt, who directed the project. “Actually DNA is highly reactive.”
On a good day about one million bases in the DNA in a human cell are damaged. These lesions are caused by a combination of normal chemical activity within the cell and exposure to radiation and toxins coming from environmental sources including cigarette smoke, grilled foods and industrial wastes.17
A recent paper on DNA shows that it might be able to last as much as 400 times longer in bone.18 But even there, there is no way that DNA could last the evolutionary time since dino extinction. Their figures of the time till complete disintegration of DNA (“no intact bonds”) is 22,000 years at 25°C, 131,000 years at 15°C, 882,000 years at 5°C; and even if it could somehow be kept continually below freezing point at –5°C, it could survive only 6.83 Ma—only about a tenth of the assumed evolutionary age

It’s hard to improve on one of Mary Schweitzer’s early quotes:

It was exactly like looking at a slice of modern bone. But of course, I couldn’t believe it. I said to the lab technician: “The bones are, after all, 65 million years old. How could blood cells survive that long?”


Someone needs to disect this load of lies and downright misrepresentation of real scientific research.



I didn't plough through the whole thing, but I did comment to CMI on part of the article, and also flagged the article at Eye on the ICR (where the blogger recently read the WHOLE 'Bone' paper not just the Abstract). See in the '6,000 year old Earth' thread.

Needless to say CMI have rejected my would-be comment:
"
http://creation.com/dino-dna-bone-cells
“These ideas could help explain survival over thousands of years. But they seem totally implausible for millions of years, since the above preservation proposals could not stop ordinary breakdown by water (hydrolysis) over vast eons.”
Why is Dr Sarfati invoking hydrolysis in the case of fossils that were buried underground? And do his other readers find this plausible and – if so – why?"

Anyone would think they had something to hide.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Roger Stanyard » Tue Dec 11, 2012 10:17 pm

Peter Henderson wrote:Despite all the dire predictions, money continues to flow in for the ark encounter:

http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs ... Ken+Ham%29


Yer, but there is a huge funding gap. Scam needs US$135 million of so for the project and to put it mildly, US$10m ain't enough. It represents about US$3 million a year or less in donations. I doubt that past agreements with commercial financiers and local authorities for the bulk of the finance now stand and he can hardly mortgage future profits from his current crapola museum as attendances are falling; it's probably barely breaking even. Worse still Answers in Genesis itself is losing money.

At the current rate of progress it will take over 40 years to get the funding together for the project and the rate at which Scam is turning people off from religion, probably a lot longer than that. Someone just posted a BBC report of another "Ark" project in the USA which, after 40 years, remains little more than a far from complete pile of rusting metal

Despite Scam's claims, the Ark Encounter project looks to be stone dead.
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Dec 12, 2012 12:31 am

Just think, if we had the Ark Encounter somewhere in middle England there would have been many more science-denier Christians showing up in the latest census results.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Dec 12, 2012 4:02 am

This not very funny satirical article at the 'DailyBleach.com' website shows I gather an image from one of Ken Ham's old books depicting events in the garden of Eden, though Mr Ham is not mentioned anywhere in the article, and the text above the image - referring to atheists and homosexuals - was NOT written by him:
http://dailybleach.com/why-are-liberals ... -lemonade/
Note that Deinonychus appears to be feeding on lemons. The text within the article states: "The lemonade-making dino in the drawing at right is a personal favorite of mine!"

The above link however seems to have sparked this - a posting, apparently starting off a new discussion, by somebody named HarveyDarkey at 'Democratic Underground' which wrongly implies, either maliciously/mockingly or from sheer ignorance, that the text in question WAS in Ham's book (not just the lemonade bit which is not a million miles from what the Ham cartoon picture suggests): http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021956820

Understandably, Mr Ham is not amused and is talking of contacting his attorneys.

But he seems to be blaming the WRONG people - Democratic Underground instead of DailyBleach.com and HarveyDarkey (whose posted image clearly showed DailyBleach.com as the source of the image with its 'doctored' text - but for whatever reason, perhaps mere carelessness, the actual photo posted by Ken Ham on Facebook omits the bottom of the original photo where the words DailyBleach.com appeared). He seems to want to imply that the falsification of text in his book (intended as humour) was perpetrated by Democratic Underground themselves rather than a visitor to the website.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Roger Stanyard » Wed Dec 12, 2012 9:37 am

a_haworthroberts wrote:Just think, if we had the Ark Encounter somewhere in middle England there would have been many more science-denier Christians showing up in the latest census results.


Perhaps but hard line fundamentalist represent about 11% of the population of the USA and I doubt whether the percentage for the UK is even as high as 1%. Heck they can't even support the tiny Genesis Expo in Portsmouth. You under=estimate just how socially backward much of the USA is. The UK is 50 years ahead of that element of the USA, if not the USA in general. US creationism is basically a rural or small town viewpoint; the UK is one of the most urbanised countries in the world.
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Dec 12, 2012 11:16 am

Roger Stanyard wrote:
a_haworthroberts wrote:Just think, if we had the Ark Encounter somewhere in middle England there would have been many more science-denier Christians showing up in the latest census results.


Perhaps but hard line fundamentalist represent about 11% of the population of the USA and I doubt whether the percentage for the UK is even as high as 1%. Heck they can't even support the tiny Genesis Expo in Portsmouth. You under=estimate just how socially backward much of the USA is. The UK is 50 years ahead of that element of the USA, if not the USA in general. US creationism is basically a rural or small town viewpoint; the UK is one of the most urbanised countries in the world.


Yes, my comment was partly tongue-in-cheek - but anticipating the possibility that someone like Ken Ham might make such a claim if they comment about our 2011 census.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 9075
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby Roger Stanyard » Wed Dec 12, 2012 7:49 pm

a_haworthroberts wrote:
Roger Stanyard wrote:
a_haworthroberts wrote:Just think, if we had the Ark Encounter somewhere in middle England there would have been many more science-denier Christians showing up in the latest census results.


Perhaps but hard line fundamentalist represent about 11% of the population of the USA and I doubt whether the percentage for the UK is even as high as 1%. Heck they can't even support the tiny Genesis Expo in Portsmouth. You under=estimate just how socially backward much of the USA is. The UK is 50 years ahead of that element of the USA, if not the USA in general. US creationism is basically a rural or small town viewpoint; the UK is one of the most urbanised countries in the world.


Yes, my comment was partly tongue-in-cheek - but anticipating the possibility that someone like Ken Ham might make such a claim if they comment about our 2011 census.


IIRC Andy "Fingers" McIntosh said some years ago that he was keen on the idea of a big creationist "museum" near Birmingham. Given that he is still a speaker for Answers in Genesis, I suspect that he was hoping that Ken Ham would fund it.
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Rabble rouser Ken Ham and his biased Facebook fans

Postby cathy » Wed Dec 12, 2012 8:07 pm

IIRC Andy "Fingers" McIntosh said some years ago that he was keen on the idea of a big creationist "museum" near Birmingham. Given that he is still a speaker for Answers in Genesis, I suspect that he was hoping that Ken Ham would fund it.

I DON'T THINK SO!!!! We don't want any of that crappy nonsense round here thank you very much. Nor any creationist loons. Let them stay in Edinburgh where hopefully the cold keeps them in for over half the year.
cathy
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

PreviousNext

Return to Conversations with Creationists

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron