Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,906 Year: 4,163/9,624 Month: 1,034/974 Week: 361/286 Day: 4/13 Hour: 1/0


EvC Forum ⇒ Science Forums ⇒ Is It Science? ⇒

Is Evolutionist Disparagement of Creationism Justified?

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is Evolutionist Disparagement of Creationism Justified?
kjsimons
Member
Posts: 822
From: Orlando,FL
Joined: 06-17-2003
Member Rating: 5.3

Normal Thread Display
Message 110 of 334 (193137)
03-21-2005 7:36 PM 		Reply to: Message 107 by jar
03-21-2005 7:05 PM

Re: I'm really surprised by your answer.
Jar,
​
I think you forgot to put a smiley or box in the text of your message with "[sarcasm] [/sarcasm]", right?!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by jar, posted 03-21-2005 7:05 PM jar has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by jar, posted 03-21-2005 7:51 PM kjsimons has replied
kjsimons
Member
Posts: 822
From: Orlando,FL
Joined: 06-17-2003
Member Rating: 5.3

Normal Thread Display
Message 121 of 334 (193160)
03-21-2005 9:52 PM 		Reply to: Message 112 by jar
03-21-2005 7:51 PM

Re: I'm really surprised by your answer.
Most definitely! I was pretty sure you were speaking tonque in cheek, but every now and then a person can surprise you by zigging left when you thought they would zig right
This message is a reply to:
 Message 112 by jar, posted 03-21-2005 7:51 PM jar has not replied
kjsimons
Member
Posts: 822
From: Orlando,FL
Joined: 06-17-2003
Member Rating: 5.3

Normal Thread Display
Message 233 of 334 (194049)
03-24-2005 1:02 PM 		Reply to: Message 229 by Faith
03-24-2005 12:33 PM

Re: A fine discussion, but not really on topic
You might notice that nobody is challenging the true sciences such as chemistry.
​
But you are Faith!! The different branches of Science don't stand alone, they are intertwined and support each other. A lot of the evidence in geology and biology (including evolution) is supported by chemistry and physics. When you disavow one branch or section of science you are in effect disavowing all of Science. This annoys those of us who have studied Science because it is such an ignorant position and in many cases it appears not only to be willful but almost gleeful ignorance. I know you've been told this before, but you really need to educate yourself in geology and biology before you declare these sciences invalid.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by Faith, posted 03-24-2005 12:33 PM Faith has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by Faith, posted 03-24-2005 3:05 PM kjsimons has replied
kjsimons
Member
Posts: 822
From: Orlando,FL
Joined: 06-17-2003
Member Rating: 5.3

Normal Thread Display
Message 245 of 334 (194091)
03-24-2005 3:32 PM 		Reply to: Message 241 by Faith
03-24-2005 3:05 PM

Re: A fine discussion, but not really on topic
... I am simply saying that for the dinosaurs the Flood scenario explains the scientific facts immensely better than the evo scenario does.
​
Faith, just repeating the above statement without any supporting data isn't a debate or even an argument and it's definitely not science. Please support some part of what you believe about the flood or formation of the Grand Canyon with actual facts.
​
To quote a line from a Monty Python skit:
​
Oh look, this isn't an argument! ... It's just contradiction!
Link to full argument sketch here: Free Website Building Software | Create a Website - Homestead
This message is a reply to:
 Message 241 by Faith, posted 03-24-2005 3:05 PM Faith has not replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 301 by Arkansas Banana Boy, posted 03-26-2005 3:03 AM kjsimons has not replied
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024