Skip to comments.The Five Failed Predictions of Creationism
Posted on 04/01/2003 8:12:41 AM PST by PatrickHenry
click here to read article
But what do they have to fear, really? Michael Moore and his Oscar night tantrums? Ralph Nader? Tom Daschle? Susan Sarandon? Soccer moms with ... Darwin fish? Horrible traitors all.
Shock and awe ... conservatism ---
schlock and bluster ... liberalism // ideology (( evolution )) !
Neat screenname, by the way.
Thanks. It's kind of ironic that I usually don't post much to crevo threads. Some posters in these threads just degenerate into petty name-calling and insults. That gets boring after awhile. I must admit some of y'all get really creative with the insults.
The liberal anti-gunners will never give up.
As long as they control the mass media, as long as the NEA maintains its ... Bolshevik monopoly * * --- on public education, and as long as we support churches, actors and other organizations who try to subvert our God-given, governmentally guarenteed rights, we will lose by gradual attrition.
We must take strong action on the propaganda front to sieze the initiative from these anti-Constitutionalist, left-wing wacko revisionists.
41 posted on 04/04/2003 11:34 AM PST by ZULU
The catholic hirearchy and the ussc sanctions ...
rubberstamps this gestapo science ---
... * * ... junta !
Main Entry: jun·ta
Pronunciation: 'hun-t&, 'j&n-, 'h&n-
Etymology: Spanish, from feminine of junto joined, from Latin junctus, past participle of jungere to join -- more at YOKE
1 : a council or committee for political or governmental purposes; especially : a group of persons controlling a government especially after a revolutionary seizure of power
2 : JUNTO
It is ... evolution !
evolution, as I have said many times is ANTI-SCIENCE.
The central point of science is the discovery of causes and effects and materialist evolution denies it. It proposes random events as the engine of the transformation of species.
This is totally unscientific, it is an attack on science which in order to expand human knowledge and human health and living standards needs to find the causes and effects of how our Universe functions.
Randomness answers nothing and leads to no discoveries.
In fact it opposes scientific inquiry and is a philosophical know-nothingism.
That is why evolution has been popular with the masses and virtually ignored by scientists.
It is ... pseudo-science --- for morons.
With a few words such as 'survival of the fittest' and 'natural selection' it seeks to make idiots think they are knowledgeable.
We see the idiocy of evolution and evolutionists daily on these threads. That is why they all repeat the same stock phrases, throw a few links (because they cannot even understand the concepts being discussed), but never give any facts showing their theory to be what they claim it is - the center of science. If it was, they should have no problem doing so. It is not, that's why they cannot.
The theory of evolution is just that - a theory.
It may be a theory, but it is not a scientifically supported theory which is what evolutionists claim it to be. Anybody can have a theory about anything. It is whether a theory is valid that is the point. So you have not given any evidence for your side. All you have done is indulge in rhetoric, but you have not shown that evolution is science or have in any way refuted my statement that evolution cannot in fact be science because of its central proposition that 'evolution just happens'.
Such is not science.
539 posted on 03/13/2003 8:59 PM PST by gore3000
Is it just my imagination, or are the "Five Failed Predictions of Creationism" simply too much for the creationoids?
Uhmm, you put the thread in the smokey backroom and only ping fellow evolutionists, what did you expect!
1. There should be no transitional species.
There are not any. What transitional species is there between reptiles and mammals? What evidence is there for it? As often pointed out it is in the greatest changes that there should be the most evidence. For this the greatest change in the supposed evolutionary tree of life there is absolutely no evidence.
2. There are most certainly no pre-human species.
The origin of humans - homo sapiens - has never been determined in any credible way. The closest species to homo sapiens in chronology - Neanderthals - has been proven not to have been a possible ancestor of man.
BTW - the statement is one of the rhetorical nonsenses used by evolutionists. Bacteria are pre-human.
3. There should be no evidence, whether in fossils or DNA, showing the chronological evolution of life.
There is not. There are numerous fossils and numerous gaps in the fossil record. Species appear fully formed in numerous places with absolutely no ancestry. The Cambrian explosion is a complete refutation of evolution and led Gould and other evolutionists to break with Darwinian evolution.
4. There must surely be at least one species, and probably several, having no genetic similarities with any other life on earth.
There is no such requirement in creationism. In fact, that all life is based on DNA is abundant proof that abiogenesis (life from non-life) is impossible. Thus the materialistic basis of evolutionism is totally discredited since it leaves as the only possible source of life the intervention of a Creator.
5. The fossil record must show all kinds of species (such as dinosaurs and humans) living together at the same time.
Nonsense. Another total non-prediction of creationism. Evolution proposes constant changes in environment and constant mutations as the source of the transformation of species. That many species have remained unchanged for hundreds of millions of years without change shows the evolutionist predictions to be false.
What happened? You were asking for refutations to your post, now you have them. What's the matter, you cannot defend your position with anyone who is not one of your sycophants?
Might as well, neither you nor your friends can respond to my posting. You guys can only talk to yourselves. It is not the first challenge you have failed to accept nor the last. Once taken out of your 'placemarker' mode, you have not much to say at all.