My Favorite (to date) take down of Creationism.

[_Maksutov]

You were answered that erosion rates are wildly inconsistent. That is science, Frank.

They can be quite inconsistent, but if they are in the ball park it still works as a decent verify-er, but not the only ones being used.

Are you going to open a beginning science textbook or are you still too proud and/or lazy to learn? This information is all available out there if you actually cared to look. But you don't. That says a lot about you.

So much of it is at our finger tips, but one needs to know how to find it through all the pseudo science out there.

Frank's discussion of erosion rates was so general as to be an obvious red herring.

There *is* a lot of pseudoscience out there, and only some of it is under the category of religion. And this is all the more reason that the scientifically literate need to maintain a presence on the web to challenge it.

[_spotlight]

A creationist might wonder why scientists don't attempt to create a fossil in a years time in a pressure tank or why they don't try to change the salinity of water gradually to see if a fish can survive. The creationist might think that scientists are not really interested in exploring the possibility of a flood as a result. But scientists are aware of such a boatload of data and facts that already falsify a flood that these activities would constitute a waste of the precious resources of time and money.

Franktalk's verification using erosion rates would fall into this category.

[_Maksutov]

A creationist might wonder why scientists don't attempt to create a fossil in a years time in a pressure tank or why they don't try to change the salinity of water gradually to see if a fish can survive. The creationist might think that scientists are not really interested in exploring the possibility of a flood as a result. But scientists are aware of such a boatload of data and facts that already falsify a flood that these activities would constitute a waste of the precious resources of time and money.

Franktalk's verification using erosion rates would fall into this category.

I find it amusing to contemplate the global conspiracy of fraud required to fake the accomplishments of science in the last 400 years.

[_LittleNipper]

A creationist might wonder why scientists don't attempt to create a fossil in a years time in a pressure tank or why they don't try to change the salinity of water gradually to see if a fish can survive. The creationist might think that scientists are not really interested in exploring the possibility of a flood as a result. But scientists are aware of such a boatload of data and facts that already falsify a flood that these activities would constitute a waste of the precious resources of time and money.

Franktalk's verification using erosion rates would fall into this category.

I find it amusing to contemplate the global conspiracy of fraud required to fake the accomplishments of science in the last 400 years.

Have they created biological life? Have they brought a person who has been dead for a day back from the grave? Where is this creature of Frankenstein? Have they created a new species from one presently existing (clue: breeds are not the same thing as species). I certainly do not snub the many inventions and conveniences science has been able to develop. I'm thankful to God that He has endowed man with a creative mind.

[_Franktalk]

....... that these activities would constitute a waste of the precious resources of time and money.

But science does study this.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidmaris/ ... 4b34885ac6

http://thefederalist.com/2014/10/22/was ... our-money/

http://www.newsweek.com/whats-true-cost ... wer-321480

Yes Spotlight we have these way more important projects.

[_Maksutov]

I find it amusing to contemplate the global conspiracy of fraud required to fake the accomplishments of science in the last 400 years.

Have they created biological life? Have they brought a person who has been dead for a day back from the grave? Where is this creature of Frankenstein? Have they created a new species from one presently existing (clue: breeds are not the same thing as species). I certainly do not snub the many inventions and conveniences science has been able to develop. I'm thankful to God that He has endowed man with a creative mind.

Indeed, a mind so creative that it's been able to come up with thousands of different religions and sects of Christianity, all in disagreement with each other. Good move, God.

So you think science is a conspiracy? Or do I have you confused with Frank? If so, sorry indeed.

[_Maksutov]

....... that these activities would constitute a waste of the precious resources of time and money.

But science does study this.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidmaris/ ... 4b34885ac6

http://thefederalist.com/2014/10/22/was ... our-money/

http://www.newsweek.com/whats-true-cost ... wer-321480

Yes Spotlight we have these way more important projects.

I agree with you that some of these are questionable but more for political than scientific reasons.

[_LittleNipper]

Have they created biological life? Have they brought a person who has been dead for a day back from the grave? Where is this creature of Frankenstein? Have they created a new species from one presently existing (clue: breeds are not the same thing as species). I certainly do not snub the many inventions and conveniences science has been able to develop. I'm thankful to God that He has endowed man with a creative mind.

Indeed, a mind so creative that it's been able to come up with thousands of different religions and sects of Christianity, all in disagreement with each other. Good move, God.

So you think science is a conspiracy? Or do I have you confused with Frank? If so, sorry indeed.

All denominations of Christianity are not in total disagreement historically. Most denominations are the result of individuals in a different counties expressing their understanding of the Bible in ways that the native population could understand. There are some minor differences but unless totally apostate/humanistic/pagan they accept these fundamentals:

Salvation comes from God the Father through the Messiah by means of the Holy Spirit.
The Messiah paid the full payment for sin.
Salvation is a gift from God through faith which God bestows.
The Messiah would be born to a virgin.
The Messiah would be both man and God in the flesh.
The Messiah would suffer death and be resurrected.
Those that place their faith in the Messiah will be saved throughout all eternity.
God is one essence realized in a three part Godhead. TRIUNE

Those that believe this historically are Methodists, Presbyterians, Brethren, Pentecostals, Assembly of God, Community Churches, Bible Churches, Moravian, Lutheran, Korean church, Fundamentalists, Anglican, Episcopalian, Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Mennonite, Baptist, Catholic....

In truth, aside from regional development among those listed above the only other reason for multiple denominations is that some became liberal, and parishioners left to reform/refocus that assembly back to its roots/fundamentals. And this I feel is how the Holy Spirit works so that the Bible is forever being refocused upon and faith reevaluated --- keeping wolves among the sheep at bay.

I do NOT believe science is a conspiracy. I do firmly feel that scientific education has been Shanghaied by individuals who intend to secularize all thought and research, and devalue faith and the importance of those who practice it. And there is the conspiracy: Insult, belittle, discourage, and eliminate.

[_The CCC]

In that case they have been spectacular failures. Some 40% of all American scientists are Theists. Including Dr. Francis Collins, Head of the Human Genome Project; Dr. Kenneth Miller, who wrote the book on cell evolution; Dr. Robert T. Bakker, Paleontologist.

[_spotlight]

Hi Frank,
So I give examples of studies that would hypothetically be money ill spent and you give some examples of money being ill spent and your point is since money is being spent in a wasteful manner why not waste some more on your silly idea? Is that your thread of logic this time ?