TeleMad Posted June 10, 2004 Report Posted June 10, 2004 The test of any theory is whether or not it provides answers to basic questions. Some well-meaning but misguided people think evolution is a reasonable theory to explain man’s questions about the universe. <misguided, religious propaganda>Evolution is not a good theory—it is just a pagan religion masquerading as science.</miguided, religious propaganda> The following questions were distributed to the 750-plus people who attended my debate at Winona State University in Winona, Minnesota, on January 9, 1993. (The videotaped debate is #6, $9.95.) Questions added since the debate remarked with an asterisk (*). And I can answer most of those questions! However, I have my boys now that schools out and we are going on vacation for a week. I'll try to remember to come back to this thread next weekend (06/19/2004). CD27, if I forget, just remind me. By the way, quoting tons of "scientific" material you probably don't understand (and worse yet, is flawed) on all kinds of various topics does not qualify as putting forth an argument. Pick the ONE most decisive point that you think disproves evolution and proves YEC and then present your evidence. And be prepared to defend that position.
CD27 Posted June 10, 2004 Author Report Posted June 10, 2004 they ALL disprove evolution, with very good proof. and don't ask me any questions about what these say, if you have questions please email them to Dr. Hovind at drdino.com, he could answer his own work much better than i could. i'm still reading through most of this. but this is all of the evidence that i could find on the subject so far, i may do some more research and try to find more. but i belive this should be convining enough....unless of course true evidence is a "lie" as well, as freethinker would put it.
CD27 Posted June 10, 2004 Author Report Posted June 10, 2004 i am waiting to see how freethiker reacts to this evidence, be sure to read it ALL before makeing any comments.
Tim_Lou Posted June 10, 2004 Report Posted June 10, 2004 wow, thats a lot!(im sry that i didnt real the WHOLE thing before posting this, but! i bet no one would really spend this much time to read the whole thing...) This is the evolutionary formula for making life: Dirt + water + time = living creatures. false, as far as things i learnt in biology:NH3+water+H2 --> organic molecules.... (under condition such as lightning, heat....)they are able to bond with one another in a concentraded solution of amino acid. forming random RNA.also, these RNA are able to reproduce without the help of others. some phosphorus-lipids compound come together with RNA and forming whats called pre-cell. (certainly your post has some nice points so far as i read...but its too big!)(again, i apologize for posting comments without reading the whole thing...)
Tim_Lou Posted June 10, 2004 Report Posted June 10, 2004 i think that life isnt spontaneous. (hate to use this word "spontaneous") what i mean is thatbuilding ups of living molecules decrease in entropy (since big molecules are more order)and increase in enthalpy (since life requires energy and these reaction have to be endothermic) so, according to the free energy equation:delta G= always positive! since delta H=+ and delta S=- which make a double negative... so, life is very unfavorable in a natural way.(am i wrong? ok, maybe the reaction isnt endothermic???)
Freethinker Posted June 10, 2004 Report Posted June 10, 2004 Originally posted by: CD27Anything being posted here for now is not from me, but from a very qualified creation science evangalist named Dr. Kent Hovind. please read an go over his work. all of this work can be found directly from the web site www.drdino.com OK, first of all, YOU had specifically stated that we should drop religion from the discussions. Yet the "proofs" you supply (I scanned through them) often contain specifically Christian dogmatic ideology. What I posted on the other thread specifically regarding your stopping religious discussion request along with effort to further discuss Evolution as the best available Theory to explain the diversity of life on earth based on factual evidence available would ahve to include a fully workable theory that provides as good of an answer with equal predictablity that did not violate Ockham's Razor. What you have here is a massive amount of (mainly garbage) things that do not DISPROVE Evolution, but are issues some, especialt Hovid, bring up AGAINST Evolution. NOTHING in here gives a workable alternative. Let's say that EVERYTHING about Evolution get's disproved other than a handful of facts. If there is nothing that is a BETTER supported Theory, then Evolution is STILL "the most accurate Theory that explains the diversity of life on earth based on available factual data." So where is the alternative that works scientifically that replaces Evolution?
Recommended Posts