Survivalist Forum banner

1 - 20 of 166 Posts

·
Forum Administrator
Joined
·
16,782 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Evilution, also known as evolution is one of the greatest lies of all times. Here are some tips for those that which to debate against the ignorant.

1. Before we get started, realize that there is no winner.

2. There is no real need to debate either side if mutual respect exist between the parties.

3.
The real problem in the debate between evilution and creation, is that some people of both parties can not respect someone elses opinion that differs from theirs.

4. Respect each other beliefs and leave it at that.

5. If one party resorts to name calling, they have already lost.

6. There is no use in getting angry over this debate as there is no debate.

7. The estimated age of dinosaur bones is wrong. It is impossible for bones 100 million years old to smell like they are fresh.

Schweitzer’s Dangerous Discovery
That’s the title of an article in Discover magazine1 about Dr Mary Schweitzer’s discoveries of fresh dinosaur tissue (which we’ve earlier reported on — Dinosaur bone blood cells found, Creation 16(1):9, 1993; Sensational dinosaur blood report! 19(4):42; 1997; Dino soft tissue find, 27(4):7, 2005).
“This discovery gives immensely powerful support to the proposition that dinosaur fossils are not millions of years old at all, but were mostly fossilized under catastrophic conditions a few thousand years ago at most.”’
http://discovermagazine.com/2006/apr/dinosaur-dna

Two years ago, Schweitzer gazed through a microscope in her laboratory at North Carolina State University and saw lifelike tissue that had no business inhabiting a fossilized dinosaur skeleton: fibrous matrix, stretchy like a wet scab on human skin; what appeared to be supple bone cells, their three-dimensional shapes intact; and translucent blood vessels that looked as if they could have come straight from an ostrich at the zoo.
8. The book of genesis and the lie of evilution tell the same path.
A. Creatures in the water
B. Birds
C. Land Animals
D. Mankind

Both sides are following the same time line.

9. How long is a "day" in the book of Genisis? How knows?

10. Evilutionist like to use the Antibiotic resistant bacteria as proof of evilution. Its called resistance - the same thing our white blood cells do for us. So every time a human gets sick and develops resistance to a bacteria or virus, that person has "evolved" into a whole new species? Sorry, that is not how it happens.

So every time a child gets an immunization shot and develops resistance to a bacteria or virus, that child has evolved into a new species. That is soo cool - not.

That means that when my grand parents got their flu shot, they turned into mutants, that is so cool!!! No, its BS.

11. Grid Computing - Massive grids of computers have been looking for cures to cancer and small pox. Some of these grids have total computing time of over 250 million years. Even though computer systems world wide have been looking for a cure for cancer, or a cure for a virus - they have found nothing. According to science, it took less time for evilution to occur then the total grid computing time.

So in the last 250 million years we have seen the rise of mankind by simple chance. But in that same amount of time, but in computing time, we could not find a cure for something?

Foot notes: The "Schweitzer’s Dangerous Discovery" articles are a very good read. After those articles were published, so called "scientist" ignored the scientific data that was presented to them. This data blows a very big hole in the whole dinosaur dating system. Its impossible for bones to be 50 - 100 million years old and still smell like they are dead.

The important thing for both sides to keep in mind is to respect each other. There is no winner in these kinds of debates - so keep it friendly and keep it respectful.

If both parties respected each other a little more, this world would be a better place to live.
 

·
28 Days Later
Joined
·
1,647 Posts
The soft tissue was a result of the demineralization and hydration process they used on the inner bone, it wasn't 'soft tissue' until they used the above methods with a solution of diluted acid, as

Normally, during fossilization, hard materials are replaced with minerals and soft tissue is destroyed by bacteria that enter the bone. However, under certain circumstances, the inner part of the bone can be preserved. This can occur in instances where the remains are rapidly buried and entombed in protective sediments. It can occur where the outer bone is somehow sealed, preventing penetration and decomposition. It can also occur where the remains are located in an environment that fosters preservation-places that are dry, cold and oxygen free, or where the sediment contains certain chemicals.13,14

In the case of the T. rex tissue, Schweitzer explains the preservation is the likely result of several of these factors:

as for the preservation, a few quotes from Schweitzer:

In the case of the T. rex tissue, Schweitzer explains the preservation is the likely result of several of these factors:

The unusual preservation of the originally organic matrix may be due in part to the dense mineralization of dinosaur bone, because a certain portion of the organic matrix with extant bone is intracrystalline and therefore extremely resistant to degradation. These factors, combined with yet undetermined geochemical and environmental factors, presumably also contribute to the preservation of soft-tissue vessels.15

In speaking with Schweitzer, Rich Deem reports that she indicated the bones have a distinct odor that is characteristic of embalming fluids. Therefore, it possible the bones landed in some type of chemical "stew" that preserved the soft tissue inside the bone from decomposition.16

Regarding the issue of whether biomolecules can survive for millions of years, it is very difficult to predict molecular stability because it is very dependent upon the conditions. In this case, it was an incomplete fossilization process-water did not gain access to the interior of the bone and water promotes the breakdown of biomolecules. The bone was extremely dense in terms of its mineral matrix, which would also protect the molecules and structures in the very interior of the bone.17 And, as stated previously, it seems to have been located in a rich chemical environment.

It is also important to note the molecules in question are very long, chain-like molecules called polymers. As a polymer is adsorbed to a surface, like the mineral material inside the T. rex bone, it increases the long-term stability of the molecules because, when a bond is broken, it can reform since the ends of the chain can't diffuse away from one another. Under the proper conditions, this can provide remarkable long-term stability.18

Blood vessels are also extremely durable. They are made up of endothelial cells that form a channel. This is surrounded by an elastin matrix, then basement membrane, then muscle fibers and finally a collagen matrix. These materials are very resistant to breakdown and have to undergo extensive degradation to totally breakdown. This can explain how some these vessels may have survived. They are probably not the original blood vessels but remnants of some of the blood vessel materials that retain some elasticity and resiliency.19

In explaining the discovery, Dr. Matthews Collins, who studies ancient biomolecules at York University in the United Kingdom states:

This may not be fossilization as we know it, of large macrostructures, but fossilization at a molecular level. My suspicion is this process has led to … a very tough, resistant, very lipid-rich material-a polymer that would be very difficult to break down and characterize, but which has preserved the structure.



honestly the first tip was the best tip in this whole thing lol, I just leave it at beliefs, though i'll admit i've been an ass to a creationist on occasion.
 

·
Savage intellectual
Joined
·
1,866 Posts
Dammit Q, you beat me to it.

Schweitzer herself has denied the young Earth creationist interpretation of her work. In the May 2006 issue of Smithsonian:

Meanwhile, Schweitzer’s research has been hijacked by “young earth” creationists, who insist that dinosaur soft tissue couldn’t possibly survive millions of years. They claim her discoveries support their belief, based on their interpretation of Genesis, that the earth is only a few thousand years old. Of course, it’s not unusual for a paleontologist to differ with creationists. But when creationists misrepresent Schweitzer’s data, she takes it personally: she describes herself as “a complete and total Christian.” On a shelf in her office is a plaque bearing an Old Testament verse: “For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the Lord, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.”
So, on to the checklist:
1. Before we get started, realize that there is no winner.
Ok, I agree.

2. There is no real need to debate either side if mutual respect exist between the parties.
I disagree. There may be real need to debate the subject if it's relevant to some other topic, such as the attempt to get intelligent design passed off as science in a public school.

3. The real problem in the debate between evilution and creation, is that some people of both parties can not respect someone elses opinion that differs from theirs.
I disagree. The issue, as I see it, is one of definition of terms: "proof", "evidence", "species" and such are terms that must be defined clearly before debate. Also most evolutionists would not care if a creationist held such an opinion in private, or in church. It's when the obvioulsy religious opinion of creationism and/or intelligent design is forced into a science class.

4. Respect each other beliefs and leave it at that.
On this, I agree, if such respect is mutual.

5. If one party resorts to name calling, they have already lost.
I agree again. One must be careful though - I may call an *idea* ridiculous, boneheaded, etc. without referring tot he person holding it as ridiculous, boneheaded, etc.

6. There is no use in getting angry over this debate as there is no debate.
Once again, agreed.

7. The estimated age of dinosaur bones is wrong. It is impossible for bones 100 million years old to smell like they are fresh.
I covered Schweitzer above. There are mechanisms where the contents of the fossil might smell badly.

But one could easily argue that a 6000 year old fossil would not smell badly, if Schweitzer herself hadn't explained how it works.

8. The book of genesis and the lie of evilution tell the same path.
A. Creatures in the water
B. Birds
C. Land Animals
D. Mankind

Both sides are following the same time line.
Not true. Evolution teaches that Sea creatures came first, then land creatures, then birds and finally humans. The evolutionary order (historically) was A->C->B->D

9. How long is a "day" in the book of Genisis? How knows?
If you're going to argue that, then you've left the Young Earth creationist camp. In that case, then the bones Schweitzer was working on *could* be 68 million years old if you're going to accept the idea tht a "day" could be millions of years.

Be careful here, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

10. Evilutionist like to use the Antibiotic resistant bacteria as proof of evilution. Its called resistance - the same thing our white blood cells do for us. So every time a human gets sick and develops resistance to a bacteria or virus, that person has "evolved" into a whole new species? Sorry, that is not how it happens.

So every time a child gets an immunization shot and develops resistance to a bacteria or virus, that child has evolved into a new species. That is soo cool - not.

That means that when my grand parents got their flu shot, they turned into mutants, that is so cool!!! No, its BS.
You're right, that's not how it happens.

The evolutionary process is shown how the bacteria develops resistance, NOT how the human does. The antibiotic does not change the person at all. It only applies selection pressure to the bacteria.

Now there are some resistances in humans that have been passed down through evolutionary processes, e.g. the gene that produces sickle-cell anemia also provides limited resistance to malaria. This is an example of evolutionary adaptation in Sub-Saharan Africans.

11. Grid Computing - Massive grids of computers have been looking for cures to cancer and small pox. Some of these grids have total computing time of over 250 million years. Even though computer systems world wide have been looking for a cure for cancer, or a cure for a virus - they have found nothing. According to science, it took less time for evilution to occur then the total grid computing time.
I remember my biophysics course, and we did a lot of work regarding protein folding which used grid computing to investigate the way hemoglobin is folded. There were millions of ways to fold the protein, but only one way that it actually worked. The problem is that evolution works by kludge, where random mutations often work together in novel ways that could not be foreseen.
In modern computing terminology, a kludge (or often a "Hack") is a 'solution' to a problem, doing a task, or fixing a system (whether hardware or software) that is inefficient, inelegant, or even unfathomable, but which nevertheless (more or less) works.
The other problem here is that trying to brute-force your way into understanding the conditions that develop cancer or a virus is often not how nature built them, so the brute-force method is not only inefficient, but often leads to wrong conclusions, since there's no filtering mechanism that "decides" which possible outcome is "right" or "wrong". The filtering mechanism in nature is nature herself - the pressure to succeed or fail under changing environmental pressures. In a brute-force algorithm, there is no selection pressure filter, so the algorithm may produce many, many "wrong" answers.

A better method may be the genetic algorithm method. This is a recursive algorithm with a known outcome, and the algorithm goes through an optimization filter process to "test" the worthiness of the solution. Admittedly, this is cheating, but in a network with limited resources, it most closely matches how nature seems to do it.

And might I also remind you Kev, that the grid computing method may be trying millions of equivalent "years" of evolution on one organism, but that's not how nature does it. Think of your grid computation as being a one dimensional line of development. Nature is multi-dimensional, in that not only are there millions of years of evolution at work, but there are billions of samples, times millions of years, also interacting with billions of other players across millions of years. Remember, evolution doesn't take place in vacuum - the pressure of viruses on hosts, hosts on viruses, changing environments, passing viruses from host to host, evolutionary developments in hosts, etc.

Nature is truly multi-dimensional, and your grid computation, while being long in time, is still one-dimensional.
 

·
28 Days Later
Joined
·
1,647 Posts
I may have said it before you but you sealed the deal laser.

and yeh I'll admit to it, its the one subject I tend to be a bit of a **** about.

When I was talking a philosophy course the subject of evolution came up, and one student kept disrupting the class and disagreeing with the professor so the professor said to bring in the evidence within the next week and he'd make a class of it. Needless to say the guy brought in about five pages of internet printed stuff quoting 'scientists' that evolution wasn't real, my philosophy teacher brought a whole suitcase of books and for the entire class quoted example after example, I laughed at the guy, i'll admit it, I just find it really hard to not believe in some form of evolution, and the fact that Creationist 'scientists' feel they're being ignored because their findings aren't published in scientific journals, the problem with that is most of their stuff isn't scientific theory, nor can it go anything beyond a hypotheses(though i dont see how a creationist can observe the earth being made) let alone a theory and let alone a scientific fact.

the thing I have with creationism is when it comes down to that one chain to link it all, the 'god' figure comes in and thats when it goes into something that cant be proven thus science and religion will never really mingle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,031 Posts
The thing is I enjoy a bit of good nature sarcasm - problem is when your trying to be funny/sarcastic it just doesn't come across to the person reading it like it was in your head when you were typing it - so I just try to play nice unless someone else likes to keep being sarcastic, but not too serious.

Q, it amazes me that guys like you can see this side of the coin:

I (though i dont see how a creationist can observe the earth being made) let alone a theory and let alone a scientific fact.
but you fail to understand how nothing in evolution can be observed.

Please tell me how you can "observe" a 68 million old fossil aging 68 million years in the lab?

Please tell me how you can "observe" a dinosaur evolving into a bird in the lab?

EVOLUTION from common descent is all based on circumstantional evidence alone...

What is the "scientific method''?
The scientific method is the best way yet discovered for winnowing the truth from lies and delusion. The simple version looks something like this:


1. Observe some aspect of the universe.
2. Invent a tentative description, called a hypothesis, that is consistent with what you have observed.
3. Use the hypothesis to make predictions.
4. Test those predictions by experiments and modify the hypothesis in the light of your results.
5. Repeat steps 3 and 4 until there are no discrepancies between theory and experiment and/or observation.

When consistency is obtained the hypothesis becomes a theory and provides a coherent set of propositions which explain a class of phenomena. A theory is then a framework within which observations are explained and predictions are made.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,031 Posts
my philosophy teacher brought a whole suitcase of books and for the entire class quoted example after example, I laughed at the guy, i'll admit it,
The missing links are nothing more that created kinds that didn't survive after the flood that buried their bones. (Whether it was the big one or a smaller more recent regional flood )

Those examples of "missing links" make me wonder what ideas the evolutionists would have dreamed up for the platypus (if it was extinct & we only had fossils to speculate about)

The Duckbilled Platypus:

fur like mammal

toothless bill like a duck

eggs of a reptile

warm blooded like mammal

sonar in bill like a paddlefish

nurse young with milk like mammal

webbed feet like bird, but the webbing retracts & nails (like a mammal) come forward when walking on land

tail like beaver

produces a unique poison unlike any other creature on earth
Can you say DESIGNER?
 

·
Forum Administrator
Joined
·
16,782 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Can we stop with this "Evilution" business? It's like you're trying to make out that the people who disagree with you are "evil", which kinda goes against your point about name calling.. it also makes it look like you can't use a spell checker. :p
The haters of GOD are evil. Their hearts are filled with anger, hatred and bitterness for no reason. To hate someone / something for no reason is the sign of a sick mind.

I use firefox, it has a built in spell checker and correction tool. Everything that is misspelled is underlined in red. Firefox is just to dumb to realize that "Evilution" is spelled correctly.
 

·
Hunter/Farmer
Joined
·
1,947 Posts
He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind:)
 

·
Savage intellectual
Joined
·
1,866 Posts
The missing links are nothing more that created kinds that didn't survive after the flood that buried their bones. (Whether it was the big one or a smaller more recent regional flood )
I beg to differ. One of the best examples of a transitional fossil that appears precisely where it should in the rock column, and fits precisely where it should in the evolutionary chain is Tiktaalik.
The discovery was published in the April 6, 2006 issue of Nature [1] and quickly recognized as a classic example of a transitional form. Jennifer A. Clack, a Cambridge University expert on tetrapod evolution, said of Tiktaalik, "It's one of those things you can point to and say, 'I told you this would exist,' and there it is." According to a New Scientist article,

"After five years of digging on Ellesmere Island, in the far north of Nunavut, they hit pay dirt: a collection of several fish so beautifully preserved that their skeletons were still intact. As Shubin's team studied the species they saw to their excitement that it was exactly the missing intermediate they were looking for. 'We found something that really split the difference right down the middle,' says Daeschler."
But this idea that the fossil is a fish that died in a flood? Fish don't die in floods, they're FISH! But here you go Micah, begging the question to try and use creationism to "prove" creationism.

Micah said:
EVOLUTION from common descent is all based on circumstantional evidence alone..
Then what is a better explanation for common nucleic acid acids in all living things? If God had made each species distinct, then why make them out of so much of the same stuff?

Wikipedia "Evolution" said:
More recently, evidence for common descent has come from the study of biochemical similarities between organisms. For example, all living cells use the same nucleic acids and amino acids.[153] The development of molecular genetics has revealed the record of evolution left in organisms' genomes: dating when species diverged through the molecular clock produced by mutations.[154] For example, these DNA sequence comparisons have revealed the close genetic similarity between humans and chimpanzees and shed light on when the common ancestor of these species existed
Another is the striking genetic similarity between morphologically similar species, like the genetic similarity between humans and the other great apes. If God made each species distinctly, then why are SO many genetic features held in common between them?

Admittedly, evolutionary theory is far from perfect, but it is a result of overwhelming evidence from various fields. The same "circumstantial" argument could be applied to quantum mechanics, to germ theory of disease, to the argument that the Earth orbits the Sun.

Have you observed the Sun-Earth system from outside the system itself, Micah? If you haven't, then you must admit the evidence for it is circumstantial, and the Sun *could* orbit the Earth as the Bible states....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
249 Posts
The haters of GOD are evil. Their hearts are filled with anger, hatred and bitterness for no reason. To hate someone / something for no reason is the sign of a sick mind.
I don't hate anyone, and it would be kinda weird for me to "hate" God seeing as I don't believe he exists. :)

I use firefox, it has a built in spell checker and correction tool. Everything that is misspelled is underlined in red. Firefox is just to dumb to realize that "Evilution" is spelled correctly.
You probably told Firefox to add that word to its dictionary (right-click menu) at some point, cheater. :p
 

·
Wild Wild... East
Joined
·
3,013 Posts
I think in the world there are not only white and black. There are also a lot of grey nuances.
Any theory who try to explain appearance of life on earth have gaps. And i will not refer here only at creationism or evolution theory (these 2 are the main theories, but others exist also). And i am sure no one of one or others partisans will change his mind after reading this thread.

And, Kev, "the heaters of God", as you say, can be considered all Renaissance peoples, who give humanity a lot of martyrs who die only to take humanity out of Dark Age (first name is Giordano Bruno with his "E pur si move"). I doubt they hate God, they only try to explain the world using something different than "believe and don't investigate".
Now, i will put a question. Who hate God? That people who going to church each week but don't help his neighbor, or that people who was at church only when he was baptized, but help any man who need help?
And, yes, you cheat Firefox. Mine recognize "evilution" as a spelling mistake :D

Bogdan
 

·
Looking ahead
Joined
·
2,178 Posts
The haters of GOD are evil. Their hearts are filled with anger, hatred and bitterness for no reason. To hate someone / something for no reason is the sign of a sick mind.

I use firefox, it has a built in spell checker and correction tool. Everything that is misspelled is underlined in red. Firefox is just to dumb to realize that "Evilution" is spelled correctly.

Kev, hating god is not synonymous with entertaining the ideal of the evolution theory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The_Question

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
10. Evilutionist like to use the Antibiotic resistant bacteria as proof of evilution. Its called resistance - the same thing our white blood cells do for us. So every time a human gets sick and develops resistance to a bacteria or virus, that person has "evolved" into a whole new species? Sorry, that is not how it happens.

So every time a child gets an immunization shot and develops resistance to a bacteria or virus, that child has evolved into a new species. That is soo cool - not.

That means that when my grand parents got their flu shot, they turned into mutants, that is so cool!!! No, its BS.
Those are all acquired traits. Things that are not actually part of your DNA and wont be passed on to your offspring. It's the same thing as saying that working out everyday and getting strong will cause any kids that you have to be naturally strong.

Just like you get an immunization shot for Malaria wont make any kids born after receiving the shot immune to Malaria.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
80 Posts
The thing is, when I build a fence, I use a hammer, I dont just push the nail into the board. Why can't people think that God uses a "hammer" like evolution? I dont "hate God", but I can't say for certain that he didn't use evolution. I mean, hes gotta be bored sittin' around before there was people to watch, havent you played sim city or the sims? its entertaining to watch things take their course after you set up an expirement. I guess that is the way i look at it, like God is setting up a big expirement in free will to see what we do, why else would we have free will?
 
1 - 20 of 166 Posts
Top