And yes, that is Che in the background... I found him too.
Posted on 06/17/2007 6:54:37 PM PDT by Rodney King
Why I believe in Creation Posted: December 17, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern
I was stunned the other day when I asked evolution-believing listeners to my nationally syndicated radio show to call in and tell me why they believed.
"Just give me one reason why you accept the theory," I said. "Just give me the strongest argument. You don't have to give me mountains of evidence. Just tell me why I should accept it."
Not one evolutionist called in.
Meanwhile, the phone banks lit up with dozens of evolution skeptics.
Go figure. For more than 40 years, evolution has been taught as fact in government schools to generations of children, yet there is still widespread skepticism, if not cynicism, about the theory across the country.
But, because of political correctness and the fear of ostracism, most people are afraid to admit what they believe about our origins. That's why I wrote my last column – "I believe in Creation."
The reaction to it has been unprecedented. While I expected mostly negative fallout, most letters have been quite positive.
So, I decided to take this issue a step further. Since the evolutionists don't want to tell me why they believe in their theory, I figured I would explain why I believe in mine.
The primary reason I believe, of course, is because the Bible tells me so. That's good enough for me, because I haven't found the Bible to be wrong about anything else.
But what about the worldly evidence?
The evolutionists insist the dinosaurs lived millions and millions of years ago and became extinct long before man walked the planet.
I don't believe that for a minute. I don't believe there is a shred of scientific evidence to suggest it. I am 100 percent certain man and dinosaurs walked the earth at the same time. In fact, I'm not at all sure dinosaurs are even extinct!
Think of all the world's legends about dragons. Look at those images. What were those folks seeing? They were clearly seeing dinosaurs. You can see them etched in cave drawings. You can see them in ancient literature. You can see them described in the Bible. You can see them in virtually every culture in every corner of the world.
Did the human race have a collective common nightmare? Or did these people actually see dragons? I believe they saw dragons – what we now call dinosaurs.
Furthermore, many of the dinosaur fossils discovered in various parts of the world were found right along human footprints and remains. How did that happen?
And what about the not-so-unusual sightings of contemporary sea monsters? Some of them have actually been captured.
There are also countless contemporary sightings of what appear to be pterodactyls in Asia and Africa.
You know what I think? I think we've been sold a bill of goods about the dinosaurs. I don't believe they died off millions and millions of years ago. In fact, I'm not at all convinced they've died off completely.
Evolutionists have put the cart before the horse. They start out with a theory, then ignore all the facts that contradict the theory. Any observation that might call into question their assumptions is discounted, ridiculed and covered up. That's not science.
How could all the thousands of historical records of dragons and behemoths throughout mankind's time on earth be ignored? Let's admit it. At least some of these observations and records indicate dinosaurs were walking the earth fairly recently – if not still walking it today.
If I'm right about that – which I am – then the whole evolutionary house of cards comes tumbling down.
This is the evidence about which the evolutionists dare not speak.
The link worked for me
A most excellent question...I have known of this civil war picture for a very long time...I expect most people have already seen this pic, and knew the story behind it, and why it was a hoax...I thought ES was talking about some other picture as he was quite adamant that these were definitely WW11 Australian soldiers...so I was led to believe by ES, that this was a different picture, and wished to see that picture, with documentation, for myself...I wonder if I ever will see that happen...
The link just fine, as all other posters, and lurkers can find out, just by trying it..it worked for me as well...I think ES is trying to say, that the article is a hoax...LOL....
Wholly crap, instead of admitting you may be wrong you claim all about you is hoax.
Even if dozens of dinosaurs and pterosaurs were found alive today it would not affect the ToE in any way. What is important is the order in which new species begin, not end. Overlap is extremely common.
The language of the bible does not, in fact, demand such an assumption.
Sadly, the only thing more stupid than many fundamentalists are the skeptics who assume they are always right when they approach the bible.
If you want to argue against the veracity of the bible, then go for it. Better men than you (or me!) have tried. However, please try to know what the hell you are talking about when you start. It helps reduce the unnecessary palaver.
The death of my father seven years ago propelled me to a crossroads, and I have been emerging myself deeper into my faith since then. I try to read the Bible daily now. In fact, I not only see it as a sign of respect to him that made me, but I actually enjoy it, and find the read, especially the Gospels, truly interesting.
The complexity of the interaction of Christ with the apostles, the pharisees, and especially [and for won't of a better phrase] them that are not of this world, is truly profound. There are so many subtleties there that many people just miss, and to me, demonstrate that this stuff just isn't made up. But that's my opinion.
I know of the scholarly works of which you referenced in your last post, although casually, and you might be surprised to know that I agree with you, although I like to use term pinhead :-)
The opinions I put forth, are strictly mine, and mine alone, and as I said to another poster, I am not against certain interpretations of Genesis, in principle, that deviate from the literal, but I have yet to find one that, to me, has merit.
If God created us through evolution, then so be it, but I simply do not see it in the text. In fact, I think it gives us every indication of the opposite, and if for me that means that I must choose, then so be it also.
The bible never makes such a claim.
2. All Human Languages we have today formed when men built a tower to Heaven.
Ditto.
3. Humans in the past lived hundreds and some almost a thousand years. Human lifespans have never been as long as they are now and no remains have ever been found of a human who lived much longer than 120 years.
The second does not follow from the first.
I don't really know which is the more profound: Your ignorance of what the bible actually says and teaches (points one and two), or your ability to butcher logic so that you can manage the most dunderheaded universal pronouncements from such a small data set. Your confidence in your ability to extract universals from such small bits of evidence is so grand that I am surprised you don't pronounce that primitive man was two dimensional, because that is what they look like on some cave drawings.
The bible never makes such a claim.
2. All Human Languages we have today formed when men built a tower to Heaven.
Ditto.
3. Humans in the past lived hundreds and some almost a thousand years. Human lifespans have never been as long as they are now and no remains have ever been found of a human who lived much longer than 120 years.
The second does not follow from the first.
I don't really know which is the more profound: Your ignorance of what the bible actually says and teaches (points one and two), or your ability to butcher logic so that you can manage the most dunderheaded universal pronouncements from such a small data set. Your confidence in your ability to extract universals from such small bits of evidence is so grand that I am surprised you don't pronounce that primitive man was two dimensional, because that is what they look like on some cave drawings.
Yeah, and the jonestown flood REALLY teaches that the entire earth (not just the area in PA) was covered by water 16 feet deep. THINK, please. It makes the conversations much more pleasant.
Indeed, what you say is so true...even if today, any dinosaurs or species once thought to be extinct were found alive, that would have no effect on ToE....we know that every so often, some living creature is found alive, that was thought to be extinct...and so just exactly how would that do anything to ToE...the answer is, it would not do one thing...if you understand that something is extinct, because it has not been seen for x number of years or decades, whatever, it winds up being called extinct..
But I am sure, that calling something extinct does not for sure, 100% completely sure, that it is extinct..what is means is that it is believed to be extinct...because the only way to declare something 100% extinct is to have every inch of the land(talking about land animals here), being inspected by one or another human at the same time...at that point, when no one at that time sees a particular living being, and we know every single inch of earth is being inspected at the same time, then we could say for a surety, that 100% something is extinct..
Why do people think that when something is called extinct, and then they find out they are not actually 100% completely extinct, that somehow does damage to ToE?...that is illogical at best...unless of course, one does not understand the ToE to begin with...
Do you really know of a picture of WW11 Australian soldiers standing over a pterodactyle?...or were you completely mistaken and had the Civil war shot in your mind?...because American Civil War Solders, and Australian WW11 soldiers are two completely different groups of men, and I would like to have the facts straight..
Is there such a picture as you claim, or did you just make a mistake?...or there two separate and distinct pictures, or is there just one?...
Many of us wish to see this picture that you claim exists...please provide the proof of such a picture...
You responded with something about an "invisible dam" at the seashore, and from that I inferred that you meant that the ocean was the border of "the land." Again, ANY local flood, that of Johnstown (thanks for not being a spelling cop!) would fit the description of "the land" if the Hebrew phrase really means what I say it means (and it does, at times).
I myself have an open hand on this one. I have never read Lyell's Principles, nor actually the first geolological text, though I have read a few nyeah nyeahs back and forth from the ICR people and their critics. I am most decidedly NOT a young earth advocate, and am a happy agnostic on whether the deluge was a universal one. All I am saying is that the biblical account does not demand a universal flood.
Well, it would if it were a prediction of the theory...not that I'm saying that it is mind you.
I have noticed though, that many of the articles posted here on this forum, concerning evolution, use the term "expectations."
[ha eretz does NOT necessarily mean the entire earth. there are many biblical scholars who at least hold open the option that the flood was not the entire WORLD but the entire LAND
The language of the bible does not, in fact, demand such an assumption.]
Then riddle me htis, if it was just a ‘land’ that flooded, why the need to save the animals to preserve them? Surely their same KIND surviving in other parts of the world that were not flooded would have been sufficient to preserve the KINDS. As well, why the Ark? Why not ride horses out of the area and say the heck with getting wet? Noah obviously had plenty of time to leave the area entirely- why go through the bother of building a boat of immense proportions with crude tools working with massive timbers, day in day out for a very long time?
Someoen mentioend that the Grand Canyon couldn’t have been carved by flood waters rapidly and that is in fact not true, great massive canyons have been carved very rapidly, sometimes in matterso f days as localized floods and volcanic eruptions of mud ripped down htrough solid rock leaving 500 foot trenches in their pathway.
no evidneces for worldwide flood? Sure htere are, but either eyes recognizes the evidneces or biaeses comes up with some convoluted Hypothesis with no proofs to explain away the obvious.
The ptero picture that you posted a link to is not the one that I saw. There is an element of it that makes me think that it was inspired by the other one, but I see no way of determining that.
b_sharp, your gullible anticipation leads you to accept obvious frauds, and the link that you supplied showed a photo that was not even similar to the tracks that I have followed along the stream. Its not even the same color of rock; a really poor fraud, but I know how gullible and anxious you are, so your trust is no surprise. The prints that were sectioned are at the museum, and can be seen to be quite representative of human prints made in mirey clays. Why don’t you just go look so you wont be made a fool by your buddies?
Do you people ever do any work? Or do you spend the day playing here?
Of course not. Darwin Central, the conspiracy that cares, has scoured the earth and the internet, erasing and destroying every copy of your photograph, except for the one in your head.
You will NEVER find it.
Mwahahahaha.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.