Debating scriptures with non-believers

Many Christians do not believe that Scripture supports the Young Earth Creationist position. This moderated forum is for good natured scholarly debate.

Moderator: Moderators

Re: Debating scriptures with non-believers

Postby Roger Stanyard » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:05 pm

MrDunday wrote:
Roger Stanyard wrote:
Michael wrote:The eleventh commandment is;

Thou shalt not feed trolls


McDunday is unaware of the ninth commandment Michael.

Roger, why is it with ones that support the scientists, as soon as they are confronted with reason and evidence they want to kill the messenger??


What reason and evidence from you?

If you came up with something that was even remotely intelligent and which we haven't heard a gadzillion times from other creationists you might get some sympathy.
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: Debating scriptures with non-believers

Postby MrDunday » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:06 pm

Roger wrote:
Rubbish. The "scientists" who are fellows of the Discovery Institute have been looking at evidence of creationism for years. Their problem is what they have presented simply does not stack up. They can't identify which features show evidence of design and the maths behind their claims doesn't work.

The scientific world and mathematicians have listened to the likes of Dembski and Behe and found them to be seriously unconvincing.

But, then, you don't know anything about science so you can't follow the "debate".

So whats the science you want to use to show that they are wrong?
You see the scientists are doing the same thing to them as you have tried here to me. They call them stupid and idiots. But with them they can do something about it. They call them bad scientists and make jobs hard to get. That is the only way the scientists can keep this fraud going.
MrDunday
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:27 pm

Re: Debating scriptures with non-believers

Postby Brian Jordan » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:07 pm

MrDunday wrote:I'm wondering are there any open minded people here, to discuss this. Or is this a closed shop?
We're open minded enough to let you join the forum despite your reputation as a Young Earth Creationist travelling before you. You will have already seen that there are people prepared to discuss with you. My only reservation is that we might have to institute page charges, judging by the rate you're posting creationist tripe.
"PPSIMMONS is an amorphous mass of stupid" - Rationalwiki
User avatar
Brian Jordan
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 4200
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Debating scriptures with non-believers

Postby MrDunday » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:09 pm

Roger wrote
What reason and evidence from you?

If you came up with something that was even remotely intelligent and which we haven't heard a gadzillion times from other creationists you might get some sympathy.

Refute what I said with the science. I'm asking you to answer with what you have.
MrDunday
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:27 pm

Re: Debating scriptures with non-believers

Postby MrDunday » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:15 pm

Brian Jordan wrote:
MrDunday wrote:I'm wondering are there any open minded people here, to discuss this. Or is this a closed shop?
We're open minded enough to let you join the forum despite your reputation as a Young Earth Creationist travelling before you. You will have already seen that there are people prepared to discuss with you. My only reservation is that we might have to institute page charges, judging by the rate you're posting creationist tripe.

Hi Brian. If you read my posts, you would have seen that I do not support the idea of a young earth.
I know it's hard to go back and read all that stuff. But I believe the science and creation are the same thing. And the earth could be very old 'in our meaning'. I could not tell you how old, but I have no confidence in the scientists methods of dating either. In one of earlier post I showed where they came up with dates that were millions of years old, when the samples were 200 years or younger.
Last edited by MrDunday on Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
MrDunday
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:27 pm

Re: Debating scriptures with non-believers

Postby Roger Stanyard » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:38 pm

MrDunday wrote:
Roger wrote
What reason and evidence from you?

If you came up with something that was even remotely intelligent and which we haven't heard a gadzillion times from other creationists you might get some sympathy.

Refute what I said with the science. I'm asking you to answer with what you have.


Bugger off. I've started refuting your idiotic knowledge of science and you completely ignored it and went for bait and switch. You about as bent as creationists get.
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: Debating scriptures with non-believers

Postby Roger Stanyard » Fri Mar 16, 2012 6:41 pm

MrDunday wrote:
Brian Jordan wrote:
MrDunday wrote:I'm wondering are there any open minded people here, to discuss this. Or is this a closed shop?
We're open minded enough to let you join the forum despite your reputation as a Young Earth Creationist travelling before you. You will have already seen that there are people prepared to discuss with you. My only reservation is that we might have to institute page charges, judging by the rate you're posting creationist tripe.

Hi Brain. If you read my posts, you would have seen that I do not support the idea of a young earth.
I know it's hard to go back and read all that stuff. But I believe the science and creation are the same thing. And the earth could be very old 'in our meaning'. I could not tell you how old, but I have no confidence in the scientists methods of dating either. In one of earlier post I showed where they came up with dates that were millions of years old, when the samples were 200 years or younger.


Yer, and everyone here has seen this creationist crap before and have long experience of shredding it. So why are you bringing it up? Do you really think you are going to convince anyone? Or are you so obsessed with your own private opinions that you actually think you know what you are talking about?
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: Debating scriptures with non-believers

Postby Brian Jordan » Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:02 pm

MrDunday wrote:Hi Brian. If you read my posts, you would have seen that I do not support the idea of a young earth.
I know it's hard to go back and read all that stuff. But I believe the science and creation are the same thing. And the earth could be very old 'in our meaning'. I could not tell you how old, but I have no confidence in the scientists methods of dating either. In one of earlier post I showed where they came up with dates that were millions of years old, when the samples were 200 years or younger.
So, you're just a plain old evolution denier, are you? One who also disbelieves scientific dating? Sorry I misread the runes.
"PPSIMMONS is an amorphous mass of stupid" - Rationalwiki
User avatar
Brian Jordan
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 4200
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Debating scriptures with non-believers

Postby Brian Jordan » Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:16 pm

Feeding time over, folks. I think we need to let this thread die the death.
Mea culpa.
"PPSIMMONS is an amorphous mass of stupid" - Rationalwiki
User avatar
Brian Jordan
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 4200
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Debating scriptures with non-believers

Postby Dr_GS_Hurd » Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:31 am

Are you so desperate for a real creationist to debate that you are compelled to reply to this twit?

There are plenty of opportunities in the discussion pages of news papers. Plus, there are real creationists!
User avatar
Dr_GS_Hurd
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 9:45 pm
Location: Dana Point, California

Re: Debating scriptures with non-believers

Postby MrDunday » Sat Mar 17, 2012 3:04 pm

Dr_GS_Hurd wrote:Are you so desperate for a real creationist to debate that you are compelled to reply to this twit?

There are plenty of opportunities in the discussion pages of news papers. Plus, there are real creationists!


HI DR Hurd.
I have heard there are real scientists also. But the mainstream followers try to destroy their careers.
I have stated that creation and science are the same thing. If you actually go by the science that is known, there is no conflict.
So what are real creationists?
MrDunday
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:27 pm

Re: Debating scriptures with non-believers

Postby cathy » Sun Mar 18, 2012 10:20 am

have heard there are real scientists also. But the mainstream followers try to destroy their careers.
No they don't Mr Dunday/Dwayne. Creation science/ID does not allow for good science as it does not allow an open minded approach. So creation/ID 'scientists' cannot do good science.

They destroy their own careers by placing a genesis straightjacket on all their thinking. They're like a sprinter trying to get into the Olympics but refusing to run unless his/her legs are tied together - then moaning that their olympic careers have been destroyed by those who ran off fast and left them floundering on the ground the minute the starting pistol went off.

They can try and do good science but they inevitably fail and come up with utter crap. If they ever do impress with some ID idea or other science will take notice, but it is fairly unforgiving of garbage - like most careers. I'd love to match you in art for example but can't draw. But I don't accuse you of destroying my art career because nobody would want to buy my stick men.

Outside of the related disciplines, where they can allow themselves the luxury of open minds, logic and reason unhampered by their genesis straight jackets (eg engineering) some have good careers.
cathy
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Re: Debating scriptures with non-believers

Postby MrDunday » Mon Mar 19, 2012 3:27 am

cathy wrote:
have heard there are real scientists also. But the mainstream followers try to destroy their careers.
No they don't Mr Dunday/Dwayne. Creation science/ID does not allow for good science as it does not allow an open minded approach. So creation/ID 'scientists' cannot do good science.

They destroy their own careers by placing a genesis straightjacket on all their thinking. They're like a sprinter trying to get into the Olympics but refusing to run unless his/her legs are tied together - then moaning that their olympic careers have been destroyed by those who ran off fast and left them floundering on the ground the minute the starting pistol went off.

They can try and do good science but they inevitably fail and come up with utter crap. If they ever do impress with some ID idea or other science will take notice, but it is fairly unforgiving of garbage - like most careers. I'd love to match you in art for example but can't draw. But I don't accuse you of destroying my art career because nobody would want to buy my stick men.

Outside of the related disciplines, where they can allow themselves the luxury of open minds, logic and reason unhampered by their genesis straight jackets (eg engineering) some have good careers.

Hi Cathy
Yes some can carry on, OK. But what this tells you is that the science is being interpreted both ways. For creation and against. How can that be science? Isn't science the fact, the bottom line? Or is this all about interpretations?
MrDunday
 
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:27 pm

Re: Debating scriptures with non-believers

Postby cathy » Mon Mar 19, 2012 8:36 am

But what this tells you is that the science is being interpreted both ways. For creation and against. How can that be science? Isn't science the fact, the bottom line? Or is this all about interpretations?

No Mr Dunday science is not being interpreted both ways. What evidence we have points to evolution and big bang, it is impossible to logically and sensibly interpret it any other way.

Creationists pretend to do so by lying, resorting to illogical contortions and by totally ignoring the bigger picture. In a court case many strands of evidence are considered. Same with science. Look at it this way, in court a lawyer might see a chance to try to pick holes with one piece but it is the evidence as a whole that is used to piece together what happened. And if the evidence as a whole points only one way than it is likely the most logical explanation for that one piece is the one that agrees with the rest of the evidence. And even if that one piece of evidence does turn out to be wrong, that does not make it evidence for something else nor does it effect all the other evidence.

Creationism does just that all the time. And it does not even successfully pick holes in the odd pieces of evidence it tries to misrepresent. Nor does it ever successfully turn them to evidence for Genesis.

And the more evidence there is the more likely it is that one piece is in agreement. And the more we improve our ways of understanding and looking for evidence the more likely it is to be right. And the evidence for evolution is overwhelming now. It will take a hell of a lot to change it. But if the evidence ever points away it will adapt to incorporate new understanding.

Nothing you have picked up on from the creationist websites (and nothing you have said about evolution or abiogenesis or transition fossils or life from life etc is new to anyone here - we've got a regular creationist who has already said it all but has totally and tragically switched off his mind to anything) is factually honest because none of them consider the bigger picture and none of them put forward the whole of the evidence.

In fact they don't even put forward the whole picture when they talk about the bible. Two of the biggest creationist propaganda sites have tried to reconcile the two contradictory creation Stories in Genesis and both have done so by actually leaving out the contradictory lines!!! I could not believe what I was reading when I saw it!!!You know the bible - should that not alert you to their tactics?

And if you look hard for positive evidence for Genesis and you won't find it on any creationist or ID site. The only thing they can do is cleverly misrepresent real science, play the paranoia game pretending they are expelled for philosophical/religious reasons when in fact the stuff they produce is rubbish and con people like yourself.

So please don't think science interprets the evidence in favour of both cos it doesn't. Creation science is not real science, they aren't logical or realistic or honest interpretations. They are inane gobblydegook and that is why science doesn't give them houseroom and they choose not to present stuff to real scientists for peer review.

As for a creator, science does not and can not test for that. If you believe in God science looks at the nature of his creation if you don't it looks at the nature of origins. The science is the same for both atheist and believing real scientists.

If you honestly believe than you don't and shouldn't need to prove his existence. And if, as you claim, he is eternal created the world and therefore exists before and outside of creation than you can't. Energy is a feature of this universe as is time and everything else. You can't judge what something outside of this universe is by what is here. Any more than you could find out about Shakespeare by studying Macbeth.

And in parroting creationist garbage, which you have with the abiogenesis, not trusting dating methods and no transitional fossils stuff, all you do is prove to me that there is no god. Creationist nonsense makes atheists of anyone capable of thinking.

I'm not going to post anymore responses to you cos I guess if you've been near creationist sites they will have slowly brainwashed you and it will be a pointless waste of my time and yours. But creationism is a morally bankrupt cult. There are thousands of good christians who would not touch it with a barge pole. They are far more worthy of listening to.
cathy
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Re: Debating scriptures with non-believers

Postby Roger Stanyard » Mon Mar 19, 2012 9:31 am

MrDunday wrote:
Roger wrote:
Rubbish. The "scientists" who are fellows of the Discovery Institute have been looking at evidence of creationism for years. Their problem is what they have presented simply does not stack up. They can't identify which features show evidence of design and the maths behind their claims doesn't work.

The scientific world and mathematicians have listened to the likes of Dembski and Behe and found them to be seriously unconvincing.

But, then, you don't know anything about science so you can't follow the "debate".

So whats the science you want to use to show that they are wrong?
You see the scientists are doing the same thing to them as you have tried here to me. They call them stupid and idiots. But with them they can do something about it. They call them bad scientists and make jobs hard to get. That is the only way the scientists can keep this fraud going.


The "scientists" I know who are paid by the Discovery Institute seem to have no problems at all in finding jobs. How many of the "fellows" don't have jobs?

Stuart Burgess is a tenured professor at a quality British University.
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Scripture Debate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron