What is needed for creationists to connect evidence to valid conclusions

Let's say that you are standing in front of me making observations; you say the following true things:"You are wearing a blue shirt, black pants; you have brown hair and brown eyes.It's cold outside and you do not have a jacket to wear."I say "Fascinating! Your observations are dead-on!"You then offer to give me a warm coat that you designed yourself using state of the art technology; it will keep me comfortable when I go outside.I say "Thank you! This is awesome!"You then say. "Now that I have made some brilliant observations and given you a nice gift, will you bow and worship me and forget all other of the other things that you've observed yourself (such as those things that Buz brought up)?"Is the creationist to ignore the things you cannot prove (such as thought) and bow down and worship science becuase they have made some brilliant observations and given nice gifts such as medicine and television?Edited by TheDarin, : Quote was not showing up

You know what I meant - don't avoid the question by being pesky.

nwr: I was responding to Percy's comment. I did not meant to stereotype all EVO's.On the Eyelid thing...no good responses have shown up; just snide remarks - no one seems to be coming forth to correct this "badly confused version of evolution." that I have.Percy valid questions unanswered by responding to Buz with things like "Seems like a good question, but the anthropic principle is very difficult to discuss." And the rest of the world thinks "I think Percy wins that one because he used the word "anthropic" in his answer."So I do not see anyone providing a believable EVO position; at least not one without snide anti-God remarks and hocus pocus like "...the anthropic principle is very difficult to discuss."

Percy,Science cannot prove how old the earth is - yes, your arguments and dating methods are compelling, and I know that to a scientist the failure of the creationist to concede that your dating methods are accurate is utterly frustrating.It is on this point that I know the EVOs and Creationist collide violently, and I am not going to satisfy the argument today so I won't even make an attempt to do so.All I can say is this - I am not willing to trade my soul in for a test tube. Science simply does not have a truth-batting record worth betting eternity on.I told my four year old that I could pay someone to take a letter from Florida to California for 44 cents. She said that I was crazy. That only a stupid person would believe that!Her brain cannot compute how the post-office works, the HR department within the post office that hires people, the technology of the sorting machines etc...the process is unfathomable to her. Her perspective, math, and method of making drawing her conclusion tells her I am crazy for thinking a guy would take a letter across America for only a few cents.Science cannot fathom the processes that God used to create the earth... so it says to those that believe He did, that they are crazy. That its perspective, math, and methods are rock solid, complete, and beyond refute.

Percy,Where many folks in here will say that the creationists have this distorted view of EVO - creationists too believe you have a distorted view of us...For the record, most of the Christians I know buy speciazation and mutation and natural selection. There is however, great debate within Christianity as far as the literal 6-days is concerned. There is no debate or question however that God created.The attitude we have for the EVO group is that you are almost always against the ID - you are against us. You oppose that ID should be taught alongside of EVO. Therefore we see you clearly as anti-God. The EVO group frustrates Christians and ID folks becuase you are not just FOR EVO, you are AGAINST even the notion of IDEVO is a religion taught in our schools - it preaches that religion has no place in reality. I say this becuase, again, EVO is not just for EVO, EVO groups OPPOSE ID.EVO is in the ID box. But ID is not even permitted to be near the EVO box.I think I've seen what I was expecting to see in here, and I'm too busy to debate further - it's just tiring and sad for me, not sport as it is for most of those in here.Proverbs 2.

I like the way you communicate. Thanks. I like the running metaphor.The thing is though. EVO, like it or not, is in the business of expertise on the issue or origins of man. It's like a pro-athlete looking into the camera and saying "I am not your hero - so don't look to me as one." When in fact, like it or not, he is a hero and a role model to MANY. In the same way, while you say you are only in this argument to discuss running(EVO), you are also the very group that holds the keys (very vocally I might add) to the opposing argument to ID.EVO has taken on not only the case for "running:, but you have settled quite nicely into the role of subject matter experts on the topic of "where the race began" and "who/what pulled the trigger."Secondly, science has not proven EVO as it relates to origins of man or monkey to man. Yet you flaunt your monkey to man charts as if they are science. Monkey to man is as much theory as ID; and you have no problem allowing the monkeys and big bangs into the textbooks. Edited by TheDarin, : No reason given.Edited by TheDarin, : No reason given.Edited by TheDarin, : No reason given.

EVO's are telling students deliberate lies about science and scientists. They are being taught a strawman version of ID, so that ID can be ridiculed. The Darwin cult seems to have found how to use this indoctrination as a form of mind control, to dissuade people from thinking for themselves and examining the origins of man for themselves. I consider what they are doing to be dishonest, and clearly immoral. What they are doing is not the science as it relates to the origin of man is preaching theory as fact.

When NWR in message 63 made a similar statement I didn't see you calling for him to back up his/her statement.Just as Christians pray that God will do a broadcast from Heaven and prove that he exists with some heaven-wowing demonstration.You too hope and pray to your mutations that you will one day demonstrate to the world that a man evolved from ape.God created man from the dust of the earth - so I understand that is why we have so much in common with, say, yeast.Evolution Happens. But Ape to Man did not.I'm done in here....The fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom.Out.

Would you care to connect those dots for me? This I'm waiting to see, for no one has been able to do this before... wait one second and let me get the video camera... OK I'm ready.... let's see the ape to man dots. Actually, dots won't do. Let's see the scientific test...it's all about the science after all. Test away...camera is rolling.After you show me a sample of ape EVOLVING INTO a man, I'll show you a sample of design and creation - or I could go first if you wish.Edited by TheDarin, : No reason given.

What bothers me is this. You LEAP out of ID simply becuase you see a RELATIONSHIP? NOT from a test indicating it's a sure thing. No one has proven ape evolving into man. It is a Theory.Design and Creation are happening all around us - it's happening now all around us, just as mutations are.The dots I'm connecting are...Mutations do not have the track record that design and creation have when it comes to results that even remotely look like a human or an ape.

Why is it that the EVO charts in the textbooks indicate an ape evolving into a man. One path. Not one into two?And High hopes for what? You can see clearly that I am not denying that evolution happens. You must have had high hopes that I would go atheist on you. I answered that question on page 6; my previous response.I cling to the watchmaker argument - and as far as God being the ultimate boeing 747 - the argument is null, because we have not been given the means to process the thought of something from nothing...so while god is the ultimate Boeing 747, where God came from is not even within my ability to compute...or yours.But I can show you example after example after example of design and creation, and you cannot show me one mutation that results in something remotely resembling the look and intelligence of the human brain. It's convenient of those who have deceived you that it takes a million or so years to run a test on their theory.I hope you see that my issue is with those EVOs that deny ID - you are blind. I'm not asking you to buy the Jesus thing, well, I would ask you to...but that's another thread...I am troubled by those that see more ID in a paper napkin than DNA.

One of many examples of design and creation...A paper napkin on the simple side and a wristwatch. There are two examples of things that an intelligent being designed and created.I'll set my alarm clock for one million years from now to see your results.Shame On Me???? Geesh you got me on that one....boy. Dang! Dang! You got me good. Shame on you...wow...what a zinger...why didn't I think of saying that.Find some other posts to respond to...I'm not worthy of your time. Shame Shame Shame on me.

You call saying "Shame on you" respect? Shame on you for your intellectual dishonesty Rahvin.I am not attacking speciazation and you know it.And my examples have everything to do with ID.You asked for examples of ID. Those are just a couple.Did not an intelligent being design them?Put up or shut up. Show me you examples of a mutation making something for itself - but wait...if it made something for itself, wouldn't that be ID? Man, I don't know what example I could even ask for from you... NOW I'm back on topic eh?

There are two objects on the table. You have been trained to see them and say "dos" (that's spanish for 2) and I have been trained to see that count as "two."We argue and argue over what they should be called...you say dos, I say two...back and fourth...back and fourth.So I suggest this...Let's take the words away...Let's both look at what is on the table.Now...there is no disagreement. We see the same thing.

I do not need to learn more about your sect atheism any more than I need to learn about leprechauns.And I simply don't have time or the desire to spend my life learning about evolution. that's your passion it is not mine, and I should not be ridiculed because if I choose not to study it in-depth.I stand in here not to poke holes in evolution. I do not have the information to do that. What I was in here to do, and I have never pretended to be here for anything other than exploring your position.I've accomplished that. Mission accomplished.FYI - the most important take-away from this was how the EVO got those single path ape to man images to appear all over "high schools" and zoo murals. I wonder what the intention of the EVO was there...of course it was not to meddle with the Christian worldview...and now the EVO folks in here are saying that is not even a fair representation of the ape to man argument...but at least we planted the doubt in the heads of high schooler and those kids that see the images on the zoo walls....(I keep saying goodbye...but it so hard for me to leave...I'm trying...I'm trying very hard).