Politics > Politics-USA > Re: "Creation Science" as Fundamental Terrorism [was:Evolution disclaimer: it's about time]
| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Jd" |
| Date: |
23 Nov 2004 06:35:00 PM |
| Object: |
Re: "Creation Science" as Fundamental Terrorism [was:Evolution disclaimer: it's about time] |
Here are a few scientists who were Creationists which you might also
want to berate while you're on a berating binge....
Francis Bacon (1561-1626): scientific method of research.
Robert Boyle (1627-1691): chemistry, gas dynamics.
Michael Faraday (1791-1867): electric generator, electro-magnetics,
field theory.
Sir John A. Fleming (1849-1945): electronics, thermic valve.
James Joule (1818-1889): reversible thermodynamics.
Lord William Kelvin (1824-1907): absolute temperature scale,
energetics, thermodynamics, transatlantic cable.
Johannes Kepler (1571-1630): celestial mechanics, ephemeris tables,
physical astronomy.
Carolus Linnaeus (1707-1778): classification system, systematic
biology.
James C. Maxwell (1831-1879): electrical dynamics, statistical
thermodynamics.
Gregor Mendel (1822-1884): genetics.
Samuel F.B. Morse (1791-1872): telegraph.
Isaac Newton (1642-1727): calculus, dynamics, law of gravity,
reflecting telescopes.
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662): hydrostatics, barometer.
Louise Pasteur (1822-1895): bacteriology, biogenesis law,
pasteurization, vaccination, and immunization.
Gray Shockley wrote:
[Beginning of message exchange below line]
"''Jeff Day''" started off "erroneously," of course:
The USSC did not say that.
Wrong; that's exactly what the Supremes said. The case is Epperson v.
Arkansas and it's from 1968. Arkansas lost. The case is at:
<http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=393&invol=97>
They said you couldn't "force" teachers to
teach creationism (at least evolutionists say that's what the USSC
said).
Nope, the Supremes said evolution can not be taught in public schools as
science because it is, specifically, a religious belief that has nothing
whatsoever to do with rational thought and - from what I get out of the
Supreme Court decision - only a regional group of savages who have barely
been able to be toilet-trained and whose intellect is closer to verbal vomit
than anything else, believe this silliness and that seems to be because these
savages - often referred to as "pinks" - are too stupid to understand
anything more complicated than rocks.
And here's a list of former "proofs" of impossible to prove evoluted
humans which you might also want to berate... (plus 2 of the latest
arivals of evolutionary astoundment)
Ramapithecus was widely recognized as a direct ancestor of humans. It
is now established that he was merely an extinct type of orangutan.
Piltdown man was hyped as the missing link in publications for over 40
years. He was a fraud based on a human skull cap and an orangutan's
jaw.
Nebraska man was a fraud based on a single tooth of a rare type of
pig.
Java man was based on sketchy evidence of a femur, skull cap and three
teeth found within a wide area over a one year period. It turns out
the bones were found in an area of human remains, and now the femur is
considered human and the skull cap from a large ape.
Neandertal man was traditionally depicted as a stooped ape-man. It is
now accepted that the alleged posture was due to disease and that
Neandertal is just a variation of the human kind.
Homo Erectus has been found to have lived side by side with humans,
and did not go extict 200,000 years ago which means he could not be a
"link" either.
Lucy - "The evidence . . makes it overwhelmingly likely that Lucy was
no more than a variety of pigmy chimpanzee, and walked the same way
(awkwardly upright on occasions, but mostly quadrupedal). The
‘evidence’ for the alleged transformation from ape to man is extremely
unconvincing."—A.W. Mehlert, news note, Creation Research Society
Quarterly, December 1985, p. 145
Zinjanthropus boisei - "Nutcracker Man" it had a jaw much larger than
the skull. The skull was very apelike; but some tools were nearby, so
*Leakey decided that it had to be half-human.
1) Toumai- A Recent Find:
In July 2002, anthropologists announced the discovery of a skull in
Chad with "an unusual mixture of primitive and humanlike features."
The find was dubbed "Toumai" (the name give to children in Chad born
close to the dry season) and was immediately hailed as "the earliest
member of the human family found so far." By October 2002, a number of
scientists went on record to criticize the premature claim --
declaring that the discovery is merely the fossil of an ape.
2) And the most recent…EBU - a pigmy species named "Homo
floresiensis":
The remains of a tiny and hitherto unknown species of human that lived
as recently as 13,000 years ago have been discovered... The skull and
bones of one adult female, and fragments from up to six other
specimens, were found in the Liang Bua limestone caves on Flores
Island, which lies at the eastern tip of Java.
The female skeleton, known as LB1 - or by the nickname "Ebu" - has
been assigned to a new species within the genus Homo - Homo
floresiensis. Examination of the remains shows members of the species
stood just 1 metre tall and had a brain no bigger than a grapefruit.
A handful of stone tools from the same period were also found in the
caves, along with the bones and teeth of several dwarf stegodons, an
ancestor of the modern elephant. Other animal remains, including rats,
bats and fish, show signs that they were cooked around the time H.
floresiensis inhabited in the caves.
....What caused the demise of H. floresiensis is unknown. It is
possible that they were out-competed for food and other resources by
H. sapiens or that they were wiped out by a volcanic eruption about
12,000 years ago.
http://2012.antville.org/topics/Archaeology
With respect to the USSC descision of 1987 - they agreed that
Creationists are under no more of a test to proven themselves than are
the evolutionists who also depend on "faith".
"We have no basis on the record to conclude that creation science need
be anything other than a collection of scientific data supporting the
theory that life abruptly appeared on earth . . Creation science, its
proponents insist, no more must explain whence life came than
evolution must explain whence came the inanimate materials from which
it says life evolved." - U.S. Supreme Court, Edwards vs. Aguillard,
U.S. 482 (1987), p. 549.
Go get another drink and crawl back under the rock you came out from
you baby killin' inquisitor.
Or... your other choice is to grant me my rights of free speech and
just don't worry about things so much until the next four years are
up.
Jd
"Is not my word like as a fire? saith the Lord; and like a hammer that
breaketh the rock in pieces?" (Jeremiah 23:29)
.
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: "Creation Science" as Fundamental Terrorism [was:Evolution disclaimer: it's about time] |
23 Nov 2004 07:39:25 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 00:35:00 GMT, Jd <Jd.fireball@att.net> wrote:
Here are a few scientists who were Creationists which you might also
want to berate while you're on a berating binge....
Why do you lie?
While they might have been Christian, they were NOT creationists.
They had been raised as bible believers but had the integrity to
revise their beliefs in the light of evidence.
Why are so many creationists so outright and in-your-face dishonest?
[snip this moron's dishonesty]
Jd
"Is not my word like as a fire? saith the Lord; and like a hammer that
breaketh the rock in pieces?" (Jeremiah 23:29)
Why do you imagine we give a ***** for what some ***** called
Jeremiah says?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jd" |
|
| Title: Re: "Creation Science" as Fundamental Terrorism [was:Evolution disclaimer: it's about time] |
23 Nov 2004 08:53:16 PM |
|
|
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
Why do you imagine we give a ***** for what some ***** called
Jeremiah says?
Because as dumbfucks, you all reply with an emotioanl franticism that
everyone who reads these posts can see.
You cannot rationalize within your brains how someone like me who you
have found to not fit within your preconceived mold of what Christian
should be, can come in here and kick your asses at will.
That's because you are on the wrong side.
You are on the side of the losers.
You are on the same side of those who've been decieved by the devil.
I cannot change your mind. Nor do I desire to do so.
I can only tell you the truth.
It's then between you and Almighty God.
I happen to know the Judge of the entire human race.
When you meet Him, you cannot say "but I never heard".
Jd
"And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it
is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead."
(Acts 10:42)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jd" |
|
| Title: Re: "Creation Science" as Fundamental Terrorism [was:Evolution disclaimer: it's about time] |
23 Nov 2004 09:58:23 PM |
|
|
Tharagor wrote:
Interestingly enough, only two people on this list were alive in the
twentieth cetury, and one died in 1907, the other in 1945 and six
people on the list died before the theory existed. I wonder what your
point is.
Cheers -
Tharagor
Hey buttsuck from a far away land.........
Prophets of God walked the earth within 7 generataions of the fall of
Adam and Eve.
Genesis 5:22-23 "And Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah
three hundred years, and begat sons and daughters: and all the days of
Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years"
Jude 1:14-15 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of
these, saying, "Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his
saints, To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are
ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly
committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have
spoken against him."
Point being that folks believed in God before the ToE belive it or
not.
And believe it or not..... the sins of Adam and Eve did not prevent
God from installing prophets on the scene before Christianity of the
ToE had evolved.
Now go wipe your mouth and your ***** which have both been producing the
same excrement.
Jd
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
