Evolution shouldn't be taught in schools if creationism isn't allowed
 

Evolution shouldn't be taught in schools if creationism isn't allowed

Ken Schalfley, Midland Daily News
06/04/2006

There have been several recent letters to the editor concerning the teaching of evolution and creationism in the public school curriculum. Proponents of evolution say it is based upon scientific evidence and creationism is not, therefore, creationism should not be taught. I would ask those who favor only evolution to consider the following questions derived from the Discovery Institute in Seattle concerning recognized icons of evolution.

Why do textbooks claim that the 1953 Miller-Urey experiment shows how life's building blocks may have formed on Earth, when conditions on the early Earth were probably nothing like those used in the experiment, and the origin of life remains a mystery?

Why don't textbooks discuss the Cambrian explosion, in which all major animal groups appear together in the fossil record fully formed instead of branching from a common ancestor, thus contradicting the evolutionary tree of life?

Why do textbooks use drawings of similarities in vertebrate embryos as evidence for common ancestry, even though biologists have known for over a century that vertebrate embryos are not most similar in their early stages, and that the drawings are faked?

Why do textbooks portray the archaeopteryx as the missing link between dinosaurs and modern birds even though modern birds are probably not descended from it, and its supposed ancestors do not appear until millions of years after it?

Why do textbooks use pictures of peppered moths camouflaged on tree trunks as evidence for natural selection, when biologists have known since the 1980s that the moths don't normally rest on tree trunks, and that all the pictures have been staged?

Why do the textbooks claim that beak changes in Galapagos finches during a severe drought can explain the origin of species by natural selection, even though the changes were reversed after the drought ended and no net evolution occurred?

Why do textbooks use fruit flies with an extra pair of wings as evidence the DNA mutations can supply raw materials for evolution even though the extra wings have no muscles and these disabled mutants cannot survive outside the laboratory?

Why are artists' drawings of apelike humans used to justify claims that we are just animals --when fossil experts cannot even agree on who our supposed ancestors were or what they looked like?

Perhaps the most important question to be asked is why are students told that Darwin's theory of evolution is a scientific fact, even though many of its claims are based upon misrepresentations of the facts?

I have always been under the impression that Darwin's theory of evolution is just that -- a theory. Darwin himself, in his work, Origin of Species, said, "For I am well aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in the volume on which facts cannot be adduced, often apparently leading to conclusions directly opposite to those at which I arrived."

Reflecting on his work near the end of his life, Darwin stated, "I was a young man with unformed ideas. I threw out queries, suggestions, wondering all the time over everything; and to my astonishment the ideas took like wildfire. People made a religion of them." I find it interesting that Darwin compares his work as a religion to those who reveled his work. Based upon what he said, if other concepts such as creationism should not be allowed in the public schools, neither should the theory of evolution.

Is Darwin's theory of evolution worthy of discussion and investigation? Of course. Should it be given scientific law status? More conclusive evidence needs to come forth before that can ever happen, which appears unlikely, since some of the critical "evidence" for evolution has had to be altered. For more indepth information, get a copy of "Icons of Evolution: Science or Myth?," authored by Jonathan Wells.

Since education is to be a quest for learning, it is proper to investigate any queries to creation. Our Forefathers would approve, why can't we?

http://www.ourmidland.com/site/news....d=472539&rfi=6

Are you actually diehard Christian, or just being a dumb internet-character?

The Galapagos Islands: Approximately 600 miles away from any other land, meaning they are completely surrounded by water for around 600 miles.

Diving Iguanas that dive and can stay underwater for around 45 minutes are the only type of iguanas that can swim, found ONLY in the Galapagos islands. There is no other type of iguanas anywhere in the world that can do this.

So why don't the iguanas found in African jungles swim, huh? Explain THAT, Jesus boy. Animals evolve according to their habitat. Thats why animals around the world that live in their habitat can survive in them. You don't see penguins living in the desert.

Either you ARE a diehard Christian, or the alternative as put forwrad by Grav. So how would you feel if your government was Hindu, and in the schools they forced everyone to learn the Hindu beliefs about creationism?

Evolution is based on scientific fact, and is currently the accepted 'version of events' for life on earth. Creationism is an idea.

Science is the medium between everyone - Christians, Muslims, Hindu's, Jedi's, whatever religion. Their beliefs on how everything came about are different, but Science stays the same.

As it is, I believe your government to be made up of the world's greatest idiots. Not only do they try to use religion as an answer to things like the war in Iraq ("God came to me in a vision and told me, George, you have to invade Iraq"), but they then try and force it on EVERYONE in your country.

If someone wants to learn creationism, then they should go to a Christian school that will have nothing to do with anythig that the Bible says is wrong. Normal schools cater for a lot of faiths, and so cannot teach everyone ONE religions views and expect them to take that as the truth. Sure, maybe if they taught all the views of the major religions, but not just Christianity.

If that was happening here in England, there'd be murder. Especially up here.

---

Btw, we've already got a Resident Jesus... Black Jesus, in fact.

Thats not evolution...they are still iguanas. All kinds of animals are designed to adapt, not change into other kinds. A dog is a beagle is a wolf...its still a kind of animal..it will never change into an iguana., no matter who many make believe millions of years you throw on it, or what environment it lives in.

Evolution is not based on scientific fact.

It was a THEORY proposed by a wife beating racist failed preacher 150 years ago and used by the controling elite to shape your young fragile mind ever since.

Science does not stay the same. Gods word does. Science can not prove evolution. Actually, it proves DESIGN and creation. Do your homework and try to use what God gave you in your head. Either everything is random and chaotic, and all you see just so happend to be perfect as we speak through random unguided mutations!...or EXTREMELY precisly designed...everything in the world obviously points to the later. Do some research on who Charlie Darwin was and what he really said. He says in "Orgins" that a whale evolved from a bear that jumped into the water to get fish over millions of years!

Schools are controlled now by a small group who want the human race in bondage. If you are taught that the world is an accident, then you think YOU are an accident..hence Columbine High School.:(

Does the world around you look chaotic?

If you know REAL PROVABLE science, then you know about design and creation.

here are some films to watch, if you really want to learn the truth...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...miracle+planet
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...miracle+planet
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...lligent+design

In fact, it IS evolution.

In scientific terms, evolution is when a species changes - not into a completely different species, but within itself -- adaptation is a big part of evolution. It IS evolution.

The first organisms adapted to their environments - and evolved. Some lived in water, other lived on land, some went mad and decided to fly. Eventually, that one original single-celled organism evolved into every living creature we see today.

No it isnt. You cant have best of both worlds. Even though you HAVe to...

Lets take Dog Variability. When bred for certain traits, dogs become different and distinctive. This is a common example of microevolution—changes in size, shape, and color—or minor genetic alterations. It is not macroevolution: an upward, beneficial increase in complexity, as evolutionists claim happened millions of times between bacteria and man. Macroevolution has never been observed in any breeding experiment.

Before considering how life began, we must first understand the term “organic evolution.” Organic evolution, as theorized, is a naturally occurring, beneficial change that produces increasing and inheritable complexity. Increased complexity would be shown if the offspring of one form of life had a different and improved set of vital organs. This is sometimes called the molecules-to-man theory—or macroevolution

Microevolution, on the other hand, does not involve increasing complexity. It involves changes only in size, shape, color, or minor genetic alterations caused by a few mutations. Macroevolution requires thousands of “just right” mutations. Microevolution can be thought of as “horizontal (or even downward)” change, whereas macroevolution, if it were ever observed, would involve an “upward,” beneficial change in complexity. Notice that microevolution plus time will not produce macroevolution. [micro + time ≠ macro]

Creationists and evolutionists agree that microevolution occurs. Minor change has been observed since history began. But notice how often evolutionists give evidence for microevolution to support macroevolution. It is macroevolution—which requires new abilities, increasing complexity, that results from new genetic information—that is at the center of the creation-evolution controversy.

Because science should always base conclusions on what is seen and reproducible, what is observed? We see variations in lizards, four of which are shown at the bottom. We also see birds, represented at the top. In-between forms (or intermediates), which should be vast in number if macroevolution occurred, are never seen as fossils or living species. A careful observer can usually see unbelievable discontinuities in these claimed upward changes.

Ever since Darwin, evolutionists have made excuses for why the world and our fossil museums are not overflowing with hundreds of thousands of intermediates! None are found!

Organic Evolution Has Never Been Observed.

The Law of Biogenesis

Spontaneous generation (the emergence of life from nonliving matter) has never been observed. All observations have shown that life comes only from life. This has been observed so consistently it is called the law of biogenesis. The theory of evolution conflicts with this scientific law when claiming that life came from nonliving matter through natural processes.a

Evolutionary scientists reluctantly accept the law of biogenesis.b However, some say that future studies may show how life could come from lifeless matter, despite the virtually impossible odds. Others say that their theory of evolution doesn’t begin until the first life somehow arose. Still others say the first life was created, then evolution occurred. All evolutionists recognize that, based on scientific observations, life only comes from life.

Mendel’s laws of genetics and their modern-day refinements explain almost all physical variations observed in living things. Mendel discovered that genes (units of heredity) are merely reshuffled from one generation to another. Different combinations are formed, not different genes. The different combinations produce many variations within each kind of life, as in the dog family. A logical consequence of Mendel’s laws is that there are LIMITS to such variation. Breeding experimentsb and common observationsc also confirm these boundaries.

Natural Selection

An offspring of a plant or animal has characteristics that vary, often in subtle ways, from its “parents.” Because of the environment, genetics, and chance circumstances, some of these offspring will reproduce more than others. So a species with certain characteristics will tend, on average, to have more “children.” In this sense, nature “selects” genetic characteristics suited to an environment—and, more importantly, eliminates unsuitable genetic variations. Therefore, an organism’s gene pool is constantly decreasing. This is called natural selection.

Notice, natural selection cannot produce new genes; it only selects among preexisting characteristics. As the word “selection” implies, variations are reduced, not increased.

The variations Darwin observed among finches on different Galapagos islands is another example of natural selection producing micro- (not macro-) evolution. While natural selection sometimes explains the survival of the fittest, it does not explain the origin of the fittest. Today, some people think that because natural selection occurs, evolution must be correct. THIS IS THE HOAX! Actually, natural selection PREVENTS major evolutionary changes!

Mutations are the only known means by which new genetic material becomes available for evolution. Rarely, if ever, is a mutation beneficial to an organism in its natural environment. Almost ALL observable mutations are harmful; some are meaningless; many are lethal! No known mutation has ever produced a form of life having greater complexity and viability than its ancestors!!!

There is no direct evidence that any major group of animals or plants arose from any other major group.a Species are observed only going out of existence (extinctions), never coming into existence.

Codes, Programs, and Information

In our experience, codes are produced only by intelligence, not by natural processes or chance. A code is a set of rules for converting information from one useful form to another. Examples include Morse code and braille. Code makers must simultaneously understand at least two ways of representing information and then establish the rules for converting from one to the other and back again.

The genetic material that controls the physical processes of life is coded information. Also coded are complex and completely different functions: the transmission, translation, correction, and duplication systems, without which the genetic material would be useless, and life would cease.a It seems most reasonable that the genetic code, the accompanying transmission, translation, correction, and duplication systems were produced simultaneously in each living organism by an extremely high intelligence.

Likewise, no natural process has ever been observed to produce a program. A program is a planned sequence of steps to accomplish some goal. Computer programs are common examples. Because programs require foresight, they are not produced by chance or natural processes. The information stored in the genetic material of all life is a complex program. Therefore, it appears that an unfathomable intelligence created these genetic programs.

Life contains matter, energy, and informationd. All isolated systems, including living organisms, have specific, but perishable, amounts of information. No isolated system has ever been shown to increase its information content significantly.e Nor do natural processes increase information; they destroy it. Only outside intelligence can significantly increase the information content of an otherwise isolated system. All scientific observations are consistent with this generalization, which has three corollaries:

* Macroevolution cannot occur.
* Outside intelligence was involved in the creation of the universe and all forms of life.
* Life could not result from a “big bang.”

http://www.creationscience.com/onlin...ciences18.html

Quick question; Do you even have a valid thought of your own, or is everything you say C&P from someone else?

As for the topic, it is my personal belief that there should be an optional class for those who do believe in creationism.

There are plenty of philosophy/religion classes. However, individual classes for said religion would have to be made for EVERY religion and hence the reason why it's dumb to make individual classes. Even some person that worships a blade of glass could demand a class be taught in his/her religion's honor.

Of course there's been macroevolution!!

So from a single-celled organism that can do sweet F.A then split itself down the middle, to billions upon billions upon billions of different species, classifications of animals, everything, is all microevolution?

You can't observe evolution unless you do an experiment over hundreds of years. It isn't possible. You'll see gene mutations, for sure, but not proper evolution. It occurs over a long time span. If you could observe it happening, then why don't we see certain species changing and adapting to their continuously changing environments? Sure, it wouldn't be Macroevolution, but it would certaintly be Microevolution.

-----

Just building on Jessifer's point - there is no point pasting pages and pages of pure science from a blatantly creationist site to prove a point. You take the facts and add to them your own words - make them your own argument. Don't try and argue someone elses.

Sure, I'm not the greatest at that, but at least I don't copy and paste directly from sites.

Lenny is intelligent. ~JESUS~ is a pawn.

No...its MACro

and it cant happen. They were made as there own kind in the beggining, which is why there are NO intermediate transitional forms and why "lower" complexity kinds are found mixed in with higher complexity kinds in the different layers of the earth.

The "geological column" does not exist anywhere but in your textbooks and imagination.

I agree...which is why its not SCIENCE. In fact it breaks the entire scientific method. You know, OBSERVABLE AND PROVABLE facts based on theories.

It is a religion based on ignorance and faith with ever changing definitions based on convenience that worships time.

Again, this is not changing one kind to a completely different based on WHATEVER factor you want to throw at it. It is micro, or a reshuffling of information in gene structure for survival.

A new species changing from one to another has never been observed. Jeez, what a great time to be alive, everything we observe just so happens to have fully functional non-transitional members! Why stop now!


First of all, what environment is continuously changing? Secondly, if it did (for debate sake), it would never over a trillion years turn into a completely different kind! The information in the DNA would not allow it! Information runs the show! Darwin said that future would prove his theory correct when new discoveries of transitional forms were found. THEY HAVENT BEEN FOUND!

Open your eyes people. Do some research.

Science is facts that can be proven and observed. If you dont have an answer, then dont teach it as fact! Thats all I am saying.

If you want to teach biology then teach biology, but dont go into orgins when you don't know for a fact what the orgin is and then call it "science"! ..and if you are going to pick theories to teach, well then pick them all, not just one that is actually proven wrong.

Lets look at what the people have to say....

Tuesday, Jun. 6, 2006 Posted: 9:26:33AM EST

WASHINGTON — Almost half of Americans believe that human beings did not evolve, but were created by God in their present form within the last 10,000 years or so, results from a new Gallup Poll revealed.

In a May 8-11 survey of American beliefs on evolution, 46 percent of respondents agreed with the statement: God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so.

In comparison, only 13 percent chose the answer: “Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in this process."

Welcome to Zonalon 2.0.

I think lenny has many good points and so dose ~jesus~. I also think that some of the stuff that they both say as well are worng and dont match up or work, but as I said that they do bring across good points. Thats what I think, and I dont fell like typeing alot like every one else right now to get what I think across.

You know what I do fell like typeing more so here I go. Evolution offers no real purpose for life, it results in an absence of meaning, and therefore an absence of moral absolutes. This is clearly in conflict with the Bible. Evolution results in a philosophy of nihilism (the denial of any basis for truth), which ultimately ends in despair. The Bible claims to have the Truth, which gives ultimate hope. (John 14:6, Colossians 1:27) The Bible not only fits the evidence of scientific investigation, it provides an answer for why the world was created. Evolution does neither.

It doesn't matter if what is observable by humans does not match up with fiction writen by humans.

Now that I have some time to type. You say OMG YOU JUST DEFINED EVERY RELIGION IN EXISTANCE! EXCEPT FOR THE SCIENTIFIC EVOLUTIONARY THEROY! Good job on contridicting yourself.
Christianity is based souly off of a book. A single book and it's believers. Keyword believers. You see this religion like most has no facts, no tangible evidence, no form or shape, it has multiple definitions depending on what church you go to or whom you talk to. It lives on because you BELIEVE in it. Just like the toddlers that my girlfriend teaches at her work BELIEVE in a Santa Claus my friend. You see how utterly absured that sounds? A god!? A GOD!? A SUPREME OMNICIENT BEING! Your kidding yourself. It's stupid. It's following. Your not any smarter than all of Charlie Mansons followers. Hey guess what, they BELIEVED he was a Jesus incarnate. Hear that, so that must mean its http://supportthetruth.com right? Charlie Manson = Jesus = Santa Claus = Lochness Monster.
Go fuck yourself.
Tuesday, Jun. 6, 2006 Posted: 9:26:33AM EST

WASHINGTON — Almost half of Americans believe that human beings did not evolve, but were created by God in their present form within the last 10,000 years or so, results from a new Gallup Poll revealed.

In a May 8-11 survey of American beliefs on evolution, 46 percent of respondents agreed with the statement: God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so.

In comparison, only 13 percent chose the answer: “Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in this process."

Yea and over half of Americans read fucking People magazine and actually care what the fuck Angelina Jolies baby looks like. Americans for the most part. Hell HUMANS for the most part are run by a herd instinct you fool. You tell them "Hey, if you don't eat carbs, you'll look sexy and people will like you." So for a half a year they ALL stop eating carbs.

There is NO reasoning with you people. You simply close off your minds to everything other than your dimwitted FAITH! Dear god, your complaining that evolution has no FACTS! Which it does. YOU HAVE NOOO FACTS! NONE! Look at fucking scientology. It has just as much substancial evidence as your christianity does!

Oh and Derek. Sorry buddy, but this is simply out of line. We are animals, we have no purpose other than survival and procreation. Do dogs have a purpose other than survival? Do they have morals? Do chickens have morals? No, therefore they are meaningless?

Right.... and the bible has stood the test of time. Do some research, they found Noahs ark exactly where they said it would be. They found the remains of Sodom and Gommorah and the Tower of Bable and thousands of sites, remains of ancient cities and tombs just where the bible stated they would be. They even found the egyption chariots at the bottom of the red sea! Every person place and thing is varified to be accurate so far...the Bible says his word would survive the test of time.

Check out the book of Job. It is the Oldest book in the bible. God ask Job over 50 questions, many that explain things science has just verified in the last 50 years! things about the wind, sun, electricity, and nature of animals.

Back in those days, prophets of God were few and far between. If one thing you said was found false the penalty was death.

The Bible is the inspired word of God. 66 books written over 3,500 years by 44 authors. 100% accurate. no other book makes such claimes. Except the Koran which is a cruel hoax coppied from the biblw (poorley I might add, and not accurate) allmost 2,000 years after the first books of the bible were written and 600 years after Christ, by a pedephile that has continuiously changed. In fact, there are nearly 30,000 verified original manuscripts which we get our bible from. No other great ancient works that exist today from the past can even come close to making that claim. Homer, socretes..or any others. our entire society is based on the laws and rules of the bible for a reason!

Lets say hypothetically, there IS a creator and he made us in his image like the bible says, and we are observably complex and advanced in ways of knowledge compared to other life forms we see and observe. Lets just say he wants to get a message to his children. How would he do it so it would be the most benifical to that objective? Lets just say that, as the case may be, this message is VERY COMPLEX and is a needed set of guidlines for his children to live and function. The message would need to be sent over a period of time, piece by piece to overcome hostile jamming.

If this is for debates sake true, well then how amazingly fortunate are we to have this available in this day and age!

Stop fucking saying that! You don't yourself. The majority of your posts have been copied and pasted from some Christian site.

Smoothly put.

If you want to go on about the age of religions, then I'm sorry to say that Christianity has absolutely nothing on Hinduism.

One is 2,000 years old, the other can be traced back around 1.7million years.

http://www.gitamrta.org/religion.htm
http://www.gitamrta.org/bridge.htm

Oh look, I can prove that legends are true. I must be a Holy Book!

-----

Sure, "Do some research".

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a001.html

-----

Ooooh! You got something right. Sodom and Gomorrah HAVE been discovered. But was it The Lord who burnt them?

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a007.html

Nah.

I have also proved that I can link to Christian sites. Do I get a medal?

-----

The Bible doesn't only contradict itself in various cases, but half the supposed acts that happen cannot possibly happen.

Let's take Noah's ark, for example.

First things first - the guy was 600 y/o! Maybe the air was that little bit less polluted back then, but the human body cannot live for 600 years.

So, he took a pair, or seven, of every species on the planet onto a giant ark when it rained for 40 days and 40 nights and flooded 'the entire world'.

Second point - there is not enough water on the world flood it, nor for it to rain contiuously for 40 days and 40 nights.

Third - EVERY species? Superman wasn't involved here, was he?

That'd have to be a massive construction, just for the animals, but then we come on to the other points:

1. The animals must eat
2. What about all the waste

Where did all the food for the animals come from? Or did they not eat for weeks?

And then there's the animal waste problem. Billions of animals, on one tiny ark, all crapping. Noah would need an army to deal with that waste, he, his 3 sons and their wives could not deal with it alone. So with all that waste, there'd be a lot of disease, which would lead to a lot of death.

So, let's say be some heavenly miracle, he did manage to make it to Mount Ararat. And the waters subside, all this magical water disappearing back to where it came from, and the animals all come off the ark. In the middle of Turkey. On a bloody great mountain.

- How do they get off the mountain?
- How do they make it back to their home countries - float on debris?
- And if they do make the exodus home, why is there not a line of offspring following them?
- Surely after this flood, ALL animals would originate in Turkey, so the records must show a lot of animal speices in Turkey at this day, or at least a lot of bones from animals who did live there.

The stories are flawed. Sure, there's a few good morals, and some things are a great laugh, but they are NOT Historical.

The Bible is a metaphor. One is supposed to read it and learn the lessons, not believe every word.

Mm, remember watching a show about how when surveying the mountain where the ark supposedly was they caught site of a large object that could have been a boat. However, on a subsequent sweep they couldn't find it again or some shit because the snows shifted. That would be awesome if they found it though ...that'd probably be about the most important archeological discovery to man. I really doubt it's there but hey, if it was that'd be cool too, right? :P

Million years huh? 1.7 to be exact? lol

Again im not talking about religion.

..and actually Hinduism is idol worship brought to india by the assyrians around 500 years before christ and 1500 years after the first books of the bible.

The assyrians conqured ancient Israel in this time too. As the bible says and predicts.

Hundreds of years later, they redefined it and put a caste system to put the people in bondage. Which has worked to this day.

Yes. Its not like he manifested in the flesh and casted fireballs! lol

It was before the world wide flood. The earths atmosphere was completely different as the bible says.

NO. Every KIND. "KIND". Not every animal..God told hoim to bring the animal by there kind. A kind is nopt a species. for example. A wolf would be a "kind" of animal. He didnt have to get technical and bring those different sizes and shapes that make up further species if you want to call them.

Legends of a world wide flood with survivors of one man and his family exist in nearly every ancient civilization all over the world, China, Hawaii, Mexican
Aztecs, exc...Look it up.

check this out...
http://www.arkdiscovery.com/noah's_ark.htm
http://www.wyattmuseum.com/noahs-ark.htm
http://www.wyattmuseum.com/images/wpe109.jpg

Up to that point there was no rain, the grounds mists waterd the earth. It says that the fountains of the deep broke open, which in turn made it rain for 40 days and nights. Do you know what the fountains of the deep are?

Again, before the flood, the world was completely different.

watch this movie...
http://www.thetaxpayerschannel.org/g...on/fonte23.mov

See above and try actually READING the bible.

No. Just the BASIC KINDS of animals as the bible says.

It was, the bible says that it was allmost 500 feet long and 50 feet high. which is exactly what they found...


what if you brought babies and or eggs?

what about it?

oh they ate allright, Im assuming. and Noah had 60 years to plan this...and yes Im sure they didnt gorge themselves.

billions? where are you getting this information?

again eggs and babies dont make that much waste and it was a MASSIVE floating barge.

Back then people lived alot longer then now, imagine how intelligent he must have been. Im sure he would figure it out.

no. Because there was not disease back then that we know of. ...also, its only for 2 months.

It took a couple weeks, made lakes and different bodies of water.

it wasnt ON the mountain, it was at the base.

home countries?

Im not following you... Line of offspring?

I dont understand the point you are trying to make.

Try reading EVERY WORD first before commenting.

And YOU try reading MY words before commenting. Look at the sites I've posted and read what they have to say. God know's I've put myself through the crap you've posted.

And please! Use the brain 'God gave you' and actually think about my points.

-----

The waste.
Hmmm, would you really want it there piling up? How would it be shovelled away, by 7 people. All those animals.

Billions of animals.
There are more species of insects in 10 square metres of soil, then humans in the world. Then there's loads of different animals. You want different "kinds" of animals? Count them all up, including the insects (birds, insects, mammals, reptiles) and you've got billions. The fish don't enter into it - they'll have been fine in the water.

The Disease
Of course there's disease! Oh, look, it's 2000 years ago. They can't have had disease, how stupid to think they did. How silly of me.

And "it's only 2 months"?! In two months, the great plague wiped out half of London. In "two months" the Black Death killed a sizeable chunk of Europe. In "two months" a host of fatal diseases could spread through the ark like wildfire and kill everything in it. With all the animals packed together, in awful conditions, with this waste 7 people can't so anything with up to their knees, a single virus (which multiplies millions of times inside one body) can infect every single animal.

Home Countries and Offspring
If the animals hadn't gone off to their native countries, then they would all be in Turkey still, no?

Animals also reproduce a lot quicker than humans. They'd be reproducing all the way home, so you'd see some kind of traceable line of animals out of Turkey.

It was only the basic kinds of LAND animals.

Insects breath through there skin, water does not kill them. they were not on the ark. as the bible says it was land animals.

No actually its ony a few hundred thousand and they can all be named in about 2 hours.

The fish don't enter into it - they'll have been fine in the water.

I agree.

not silly, you just dont know any better.

but it didnt. Obviously. Nice theory though. Hang on to that.

They had to start somwhere...lol..see below
watch the video I posted.

Evolutionists even acknowledge that men and animals could once freely cross the Bering Strait, which separates Asia and the Americas.

The existence of some deep-water stretches along the route to Australia is still consistent with this explanation. Evolutionist geologists themselves believe there have been major tectonic upheavals, accompanied by substantial rising and falling of sea floors.

The Bible suggests a pattern of post-Flood dispersal of animals and humans that accounts for fossil distribution of apes and humans, for example. In post-Flood deposits in Africa, ape fossils are found below human fossils. Evolutionists claim that this arose because humans evolved from the apes, but there is another explanation. Animals, including apes, would have begun spreading out over the earth straight after the flood, whereas the Bible indicates that people refused to do this (Genesis 9:1, 11:1-9). Human dispersal did not start until Babel, some hundreds of years after the Flood. Such a delay would have meant that some ape fossils would be found consistently below human fossils, since people would have arrived in Africa after the apes.

We may never know the exact answer to every one of such questions, but certainly one can see that the problems are far less formidable than they may at first appear. Coupled with all the biblical, geological, and anthropological evidence for Noah's Flood, one is justified in regarding the Genesis account of the animals dispersing from a central point as perfectly reasonable. Not only that, but the biblical model provides an excellent framework for the scientific study of these questions.

You have two hours. Name them all. Also, even if all the animals were babes, they would still take up more room than a boat that's only 500ft long and 50ft high...

no thanks. but others have.

no, because it was not Every single species. only the Basic Kinds of land animals.

"Scientists who study animal life are called zoologosts. They have recorded 20,000 species of fish, 6,000 species of reptiles, 9,000 birds, 1,000 amphibians, and 15,000 species of mammals."
http://www.worldstory.net/en/species.html

notice it says SPECIES. SPECIES are not kinds.

Break those numbers down considerably...you have your answers.

Maybe I should start making my sarcastic comments more noticable...

Actually it was an ark. A boat is made for traveling, an ark is made for floating.:grin:

Tch. Dictionary.com says this, and the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary says this.

A boat is an ark is a boat is an ark. Lovely linkage for you.

And, excuse me as I break out my own Bible, (Yes, I do own one. Twas my mothers.) it says in Genesis 7:2 that God told Noah to take seven pairs of every "clean" animal ("the male and his female", as it says), and one pair of every "unclean" animal. In Gen 7:3 it says "Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female". SO, Noah did not take one pair of every "kind" of animal, instead there were many more than you claim.

And finally...in Gen 7:8 it says: Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth.

What about dinosaurs? If god created the earth and flung two humans down on it soon after what about all the billions of years before there was man?

Where did your deity come from also? If we had to of come from somewhere, if the earth had to of been created at one point, where did the supreme being come from. He couldn't have just existed since the beginning of forever.

Teaching creationism in school is the first step to starting a new series of crusades. Mark my words, it is a bad idea.

Are they allowed to teach made up stuff? I always thought only shit that has been proven and only mention shit that is just theory

Evolution is the way we were made....

The word ark in the original greek is tebah: it could means something pitch coated, a certain material, a life preserver, or a certain shape.

and nice verses, but hold on there ..go back to chapter 6...

6:19 And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every SORT shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.

6:20 Of fowls after their KIND, and of cattle after their KIND, of every creeping thing of the earth after his KIND, TWO of every SORT shall come unto thee, to keep them alive.

6:21 And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them.

6:22 Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did he.

Then in chapter 7...God further devides the KINDS from chapter 6 into clean and unclean...not really hard to understand.

7:1 And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation.

7:2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens *, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.

7:3 Of fowls also of the air by sevens *, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth.

7:8 Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth,

7:9 There went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah.

*sevens and twos in the hebrew literaly means three pairs plus one extra. This is prefered over seven pairs which would total 14 in number. The extra animal was used for a sacrifice after the flood in Genesis 8:20.

Again as i said before, it all makes sense if you just read around.:D

So, then you say there is evolution eh?

billions? That is another topic...

dinosaurs were created and dwelled and lived with man. They all over the bible but not obviously called dinosaurs.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/2.asp
http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/dinos.shtml
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...vind+dinosaurs

Many questions will be answered if we focus on one question, “When did they live?” Two quite different answers are usually given. Evolutionists say dinosaurs lived, died, and became extinct at least 60 million years before man evolved. Others believe God created all living things during the creation week, so man and dinosaurs lived at the same time. If we look at the evidence, sorting out these two very different answers should be easy.

Did dinosaurs become extinct at least 60 million years before man evolved? Almost all textbooks that address the subject say they did. Movies and television vividly portray this. One hears it even at Disney World and other amusement parks. Some will say that every educated person believes this. We frequently hear stories that begin with impressive-sounding phrases such as, “Two hundred million years ago, as dinosaurs ruled the earth, ...” But none of this is evidence; some of it is an appeal to authority. (Evidence must be observable and verifiable.)

Did man and dinosaurs live at the same time? Scientists in the former Soviet Union have reported a layer of rock containing more than 2,000 dinosaur footprints alongside tracks “resembling human footprints.” Obviously, both types of footprints were made in mud or sand that later hardened into rock. If some are human footprints, then man and dinosaurs lived at the same time. Similar discoveries have been made in Arizona. Were it not for the theory of evolution, few would doubt that these were human footprints.

Soft dinosaur tissue has now been recovered from several dinosaurs: three tyrannosaurs (T rex) and one hadrosaur. It is ridiculous to believe that soft tissue can be preserved for more than 60,000,000 years, but it could be preserved for 5,000 years.

The Book of Job is one of the oldest books ever written. In it, God tells of His greatness as Creator and describes an animal, called Behemoth, as follows:

Behold now, Behemoth, which I made as well as you; He eats grass like an ox. Behold now, his strength in his loins, And his power in the muscles of his belly. He bends his tail like a cedar; The sinews of his thighs are knit together. His bones are tubes of bronze; His limbs are like bars of iron.

Behemoth had a “tail like a cedar.” Any animal with a tail as huge and strong as a cedar tree is probably a dinosaur. Also, Job 40:19–24 says this giant, difficult-to-capture animal was not alarmed by a raging river. If the writer of Job knew of a dinosaur, then the evolution position is wrong, and man saw dinosaurs.

The fact that drawings and ancient pottery with dinosaurs on them are further proof that man dwelt with dinosaurs, having that they never saw a fossil or a textbook!

The next chapter of Job describes another huge, fierce animal, a sea monster named Leviathan.3 It was not a whale or crocodile, because the Hebrew language had other words to describe such animals. Leviathan may be a plesiosaur (PLEE see uh sore), a large seagoing reptile that evolutionists say became extinct 60 million years before man evolved.

For the past three centuries, reports have come from the Congo in western Africa that dinosaurs exist in remote swamps. Eyewitness stories are often from educated people who can quickly describe dinosaurs. Two expeditions to the Congo, led by biologist Dr. Roy Mackal of the University of Chicago, never saw dinosaurs, but interviewed many of these witnesses and concluded that their reports were about dinosaurs and were apparently true.5 If any of these accounts are correct, man and dinosaurs were contemporaries.

Consider the many dragon legends. Most ancient cultures have stories or artwork of dragons that strongly resemble dinosaurs. The World Book Encyclopedia states that:

The dragons of legend are strangely like actual creatures that have lived in the past. They are much like the great reptiles [dinosaurs] which inhabited the earth long before man is supposed to have appeared on earth. Dragons were generally evil and destructive. Every country had them in its mythology.

The simplest and most obvious explanation for so many common descriptions of dragons from around the world is that man once knew the dinosaurs.

What caused the extinction of dinosaurs? Primarily, the flood. Because dinosaur bones are found among other fossils, dinosaurs must have been living when the flood began. Dozens of other dinosaur extinction theories exist, but all have recognized problems. Most of the food chain was buried in the flood. Therefore, many large dinosaurs that survived the flood probably had difficulty feeding themselves and became extinct. also, after the flood for hundreds of years they were probably hunted off because of survival purposes.

Were dinosaurs on the Ark? Yes. God told Noah to put representatives of every kind of land animal on the Ark. (Some dinosaurs were semiaquatic and could have survived outside the Ark.) But why put adult dinosaurs on the Ark? Young dinosaurs would take up less room, eat less, and be easier to manage. The purpose for having animals on board was so they could reproduce after the flood and repopulate the earth. Young dinosaurs would have more potential for reproduction than old dinosaurs.

Certain bones in dinosaur bodies show annual growth rings, as trees do. Dinosaurs, early in life and late in life, grew at very slow rates. During mid-life, they went through huge growth spurts. Therefore, during the year dinosaurs were on the Ark, juveniles probably weighed less than 60 pounds. (A 2-year-old T rex weighed 66 pounds. The largest T rex known, lived to be 28 years. Dinosaurs did not become large because they lived long lives.


God the creator is outside of time considering time itself is irrelevant
and is dependent completely on gravity and mass.

In Genesis, God created all that is in this physical dimension, including time because of the above. That which has no mass, has no time. Like information or a memory, it doesnt age and is not subject to gravity or death or whatever else you can touch in this physical realm. God is outside of time. That which has no mass, has no time.

God created both.

I hate hearing all this RUBISH about 1.7million year ago or 56million years ago mumbo jumbo.The ONLY and I repeat ONLY knowladge about how truely aged this world may be is the studied records.I like asking professors where they got that goofy idea by stating, '' Do you have physical proof besides something you thought up and wrote down after going 30 hrs. without sleep.Did you actually go back in time and see the world 2 million years ago?"GIVE ME A BREAK!The oldest history book known to man that has been known to be 100% accurate in ALL areas of science is the BIBLE.If you don't believe this, go, study all the BIBLE and its science, go and see for yourself if it is accurate.Evolution is a mere stupid condradictory way of escape from the Truth.So is the Big Bang Theory.None of them are solid.Creation is as solid as it get's.Proven time and time again it has prevailed.However,if you whant to take my word for it, fine!If not,go study it for yourself.There's a book of one man who tried such a thing.the book is Case for Christ.If that isn't enough, I would encourage ANY and EVERYONE to watch Dr.Carl Baugh videos.He has been up against some of the top dog scientist of major colledges and completely pwned them and their foolish evolution big bangist ways.If you do not beleive me here, SEE IT FOR YOURSELF BY ACTUALLY TAKING YOUR PRESCIOUSE TIME OUT OF YOUr DAY AND WATCHING THE VIDEOS.Here is a PERFECT site with FREE video watching!
http://www.drdino.com/downloads.php
Thanks for your time.

exactly bitch plz send the fuckng info to email accxt kkk I hate you fucking faggot ass blink fucking mouse suck cat peniz b4 i kill

Okay...The Bible cannot be considered truth or even historically accurate. So that means that J.K Rowling's books are truth? And since when is the Bible the oldest known "TRUE" form of history? As for how accurate they are, and then saying scientists used SCIENCE to backdate them to the time that is spoken in the Bible? Did you know that I could write a book today about Santa Claus and 5,000 years from now, someone could read it...then find it in some form of media (magazine, newspaper, VHS tape, DVD, or other form of entertainment) and assume that it is real? I have to agree with Lenny, because all of your arguments backfire when you say that the BIBLE is truth, because SCIENCE PROVES IT.....think about that...then slap yourself a couple times....then I might think about listening to your comments.

If evolution never happened, then how do you explain stem cells being used to make another ear, or nose, or even toe? Another thing. Your explanation about Micro and Macro evolution is just a large steaming pile of evolved manure. Microevolution obviously leads to macro evolution. If you evolve something a million times in minute ways, like supposedly in the Bible, then eventually there would be macroevolution, or a large change. OMG like between monkeys and man. We only assume that we evolved from them because they almost look like harrier versions of us and we dug up their bones...the fact that their DNA is a 98% match has nothing to do with it. And in case you haven't seen National Geographic, if a man goes to live in a region where there is no civilization, look what happens to him. OMG HE GROWS HAIR ON HIS BODY!!! HE LOOKS LIKE A MONKEY!!! The Bible has more holes that swiss cheese, science has proven itself time and time again.