Pope Francis: Big Bang and evolution are real.

[Thong Maniac]

Yes. And you will continue to 'stick to it' until you take the trouble to discover for yourself what you are missing.

Yep, as will you. Keep going self righteous troll

[Thong Maniac]

ahahahahah authoritative sources lololo. Fuckers are selling shit on their website, real professional and scientific. I wonder why they are doing that? probably because no one with a brain believes in their fantasy and they couldn't pass peer review if their life depended on it.

you and kent hovind would be good friends.

Exactly, that was his source. He also just told me to look at some guy as saratofi or soemthing, his wiki page says hes a young earth creationist. Totally unbiased and peer reviewed im sure lol

[Ron Harrigan]

Creationism starts with the assertion that god is real and he did create the universe.  From that initial assertion they search only for evidence that supports that assertion. No effort is made to disprove their assertion.

Science will may well begin with a hypothesis but the merit of the hypothesis is dependent on corroborating evidence and contrary evidence. A hypothesis is always are or should be tentative and are assertions.   Science actively tries to disprove an assertion.

I would argue that the social sciences don't employ as rigid methodologies as the hard sciences.   Take what is produced by the social sciences with a grain of salt.

The good news when it comes to the fact of creation is that there isn't any contrary evidence. None. Meanwhile, in marked contrast to creation, belief in evolution is supported by no evidence, and it’s incompatible with virtually everything we have learned through genetics, biology, ecology, paleontology and Earth science. I recommend this ground-breaking, exhaustive resource.

http://creation.com/evolutions-achilles-heels

[Ron Harrigan]

Exactly, that was his source. He also just told me to look at some guy as saratofi or soemthing, his wiki page says hes a young earth creationist. Totally unbiased and peer reviewed im sure lol

You don't get it, do you? Go pick up a book. Find out what science is, and (most important) the basis for creationism. Evolutionists all duck and weave the same way. I'm not playing that game. If you prefer to remain in denial, that's your call. [I don't need to prove anything. I'm an expert. You know what an expert is, right?]

[Necrosis]

The good news when it comes to the fact of creation is that there isn't any contrary evidence. None. Meanwhile, in marked contrast to creation, belief in evolution is supported by no evidence, and it’s incompatible with virtually everything we have learned through genetics, biology, ecology, paleontology and Earth science. I recommend this ground-breaking, exhaustive resource.

http://creation.com/evolutions-achilles-heels

logic is contrary to god unfortunately, it's a failed hypothesis for the lazy who can't make sense of the world. if this world is intelligently created then I am smarter then god. For example, why do we eat and breath through the same hole? dolphins don't. This fact (brilliant engineering) means people will choke to death trying to eat, it's stupid. Which fits the premise more, that an all powerful god did this for some mysterious reason or evolution is imperfect hence the fuck ups.

are you an expert in creationism? lol. I love the link also, scientists hate him, find out the evolutionists one weakness.

[Thong Maniac]

You don't get it, do you? Go pick up a book. Find out what science is, and (most important) the basis for creationism. Evolutionists all duck and weave the same way. I'm not playing that game. If you prefer to remain in denial, that's your call. [I don't need to prove anything. I'm an expert. You know what an expert is, right?]

Creation.com, rofl!  Still awaiting your peer reviewed, non biased sources

[Ron Harrigan]

logic is contrary to god unfortunately, it's a failed hypothesis for the lazy who can't make sense of the world. if this world is intelligently created then I am smarter then god. For example, why do we eat and breath through the same hole? dolphins don't. This fact (brilliant engineering) means people will choke to death trying to eat, it's stupid. Which fits the premise more, that an all powerful god did this for some mysterious reason or evolution is imperfect hence the fuck ups.

are you an expert in creationism? lol. I love the link also, scientists hate him, find out the evolutionists one weakness.

So much confusion. So little time. The place to begin is with the source provided in the preceding posts or any of a number of excellent books on creationism. It isn't productive to offer opinion when you know so little. And no, logic has no conflict with truth.

[Thong Maniac]

logic is contrary to god unfortunately, it's a failed hypothesis for the lazy who can't make sense of the world. if this world is intelligently created then I am smarter then god. For example, why do we eat and breath through the same hole? dolphins don't. This fact (brilliant engineering) means people will choke to death trying to eat, it's stupid. Which fits the premise more, that an all powerful god did this for some mysterious reason or evolution is imperfect hence the fuck ups.

are you an expert in creationism? lol. I love the link also, scientists hate him, find out the evolutionists one weakness.

This ron fellow is like one of those nuts living in the hills, saying god told him to stock pile ammo and guns to fight the devil and await for jesus to return. You ever see Kevin Smith's Red State movie?

[Donny]

The UFO phenomenon is real. Disclosure will happen in our life times. The Churches know where the "angels" came from. Catholic and Prodistant.

[Ron Harrigan]

Creation.com, rofl!  Still awaiting your peer reviewed, non biased sources

No one is playing the 'scientist' card. I am merely encouraging you, and a great many others, to take the trouble to find out what science is. It is hard to imagine that creation denialists continue to fight a rearguard action at this site as if there were anything to debate. There isn't. No really, there isn't.

[Thong Maniac]

No one is playing the 'scientist' card. I am merely encouraging you, and a great many others, to take the trouble to find out what science is. It is hard to imagine that creation denialists continue to fight a rearguard action at this site as if there were anything to debate. There isn't. No really, there isn't.

I studied "science" for my degree, i already told you that. I guess creation.com is all the info i needed.

[Necrosis]

So much confusion. So little time. The place to begin is with the source provided in the preceding posts or any of a number of excellent books on creationism. It isn't productive to offer opinion when you know so little. And no, logic has no conflict with truth.

you seem unable to articulate your point, generally that indicates you have no idea, your trolling is boring. Say something interesting at least.

[Ron Harrigan]

you seem unable to articulate your point, generally that indicates you have no idea, your trolling is boring. Say something interesting at least.

Yes. We know that you are confused. It is utterly inconceivable, to you, that the fact of creation could be veridic. So you grasp at every straw to justify the imaginary world that you have constructed with strawmen akin to the one offered here. Yes. The scientific frontiers have to do with the arcane details of how creation occurred (and yet occurs), not with whether it occurred. It is hard to imagine that you can so consistently miss that distinction. Nothing in anything we understand about science is compatible with any form of evolutionary hypothesis. You appear not to grasp that either.

[Thong Maniac]

I dont think ive ever interacted with someone who has no college degree or traditional high school for that matter, yet with such a level of arrogance , and self righteousness about them and their ideas. Its pretty amazing. Also someone who still doesn't understand that a site called creation.com is not neutral and unbiased.

[Ron Harrigan]

I studied "science" for my degree, i already told you that. I guess creation.com is all the info i needed.

Sorry, Thong Maniac: You're nothing of the sort. A person with any of the qualifications you claim wouldn't make the kinds of assertions you make in the disparaging language that you adopt. So please. Pick up a book and discover for yourself what you are missing. Ignorance can be fixed. Wilful ignorance – and lying and projecting and plagiarising – are just sad.

[Thong Maniac]

I would love to hear this free thinker and over all master of sciences opinion on gay people. Im sure that will be a mega-lol eye opening conversation as well

[Ron Harrigan]

Also someone who still doesn't understand that a site called creation.com is not neutral and unbiased.

And we're back to our friend Lewontin. Huge surprise. It is rather clear where the bias lies, and whose sources are biased.

"We take the side of science in spite of the
patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite
of its failure to fulfil many of its extravagant promises
of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of
the scientific community for unsubstantiated justso
stories, because we have a prior commitment,
a commitment to materialism. It is not that the
methods and institutions of science somehow compel us
to accept a material explanation of the
phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we
are forced by our a priori adherence to material
causes to create an apparatus of investigation and
a set of concepts that produce material explanations,
no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter
how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover,
that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow
a Divine Foot in the door."
Richard Lewontin, Evolutionist

[Thong Maniac]

Sorry, Thong Maniac: You're nothing of the sort. A person with any of the qualifications you claim wouldn't make the kinds of assertions you make in the disparaging language that you adopt. So please. Pick up a book and discover for yourself what you are missing. Ignorance can be fixed. Wilful ignorance – and lying and projecting and plagiarising – are just sad.

Lol

[Thong Maniac]

And we're back to our friend Lewontin. Huge surprise. It is rather clear where the bias lies, and whose sources are biased.

"We take the side of science in spite of the
patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite
of its failure to fulfil many of its extravagant promises
of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of
the scientific community for unsubstantiated justso
stories, because we have a prior commitment,
a commitment to materialism. It is not that the
methods and institutions of science somehow compel us
to accept a material explanation of the
phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we
are forced by our a priori adherence to material
causes to create an apparatus of investigation and
a set of concepts that produce material explanations,
no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter
how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover,
that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow
a Divine Foot in the door."
Richard Lewontin, Evolutionist

Again, show me where i used any link or quote in this lil tiff. Of course an evolutionary scientist who writes is biased on the side of evolution. Are you dense? I make no claims to say that guy isnt biased. Again, your argument fails when you cite the bible or creation.com. Show me peer reviewed research from a neutral lab, collaborative, study, etc. thanks...you wont though

[Ron Harrigan]

Lol

That is practically an admission of weeping hereabouts. Facts are dreadfully inconvenient, aren't they?

[Ron Harrigan]

Again, show me where i used any link or quote in this lil tiff. Of course an evolutionary scientist who writes is biased on the side of evolution. Are you dense? I make no claims to say that guy isnt biased. Again, your argument fails when you cite the bible or creation.com. Show me peer reviewed research from a neutral lab, collaborative, study, etc. thanks...you wont though

I am just baffled that you continue with the line that creationist sources entail bias as your atheistic sources do. First, they don't. That is merely another false assertion. Second, and more important, details of genetics, anatomy, physiology, embryology, biogeography and fossil records over millennia make no sense as expressions of an evolutionary progression. Please pick up a book and catch up with where the science is. Right now, you're stuck in the 19th century.

[Thong Maniac]

Yep, atheist sources are biased, while creation ones are not? Hmm, conversation over I guess. Mental midget bro; sorry. Thats amazing you said that in a public forum. Good luck with getting people to take you seriously now.

[Necrosis]

Yes. We know that you are confused. It is utterly inconceivable, to you, that the fact of creation could be veridic. So you grasp at every straw to justify the imaginary world that you have constructed with strawmen akin to the one offered here. Yes. The scientific frontiers have to do with the arcane details of how creation occurred (and yet occurs), not with whether it occurred. It is hard to imagine that you can so consistently miss that distinction. Nothing in anything we understand about science is compatible with any form of evolutionary hypothesis. You appear not to grasp that either.

everything we understand about science is compatible with evolution, to have the position you do which is completely counter you must be retarded or trolling.

[Necrosis]

I am just baffled that you continue with the line that creationist sources entail bias as your atheistic sources do. First, they don't. That is merely another false assertion. Second, and more important, details of genetics, anatomy, physiology, embryology, biogeography and fossil records over millennia make no sense as expressions of an evolutionary progression. Please pick up a book and catch up with where the science is. Right now, you're stuck in the 19th century.

atheistic sources, lol.

[Thong Maniac]

atheistic sources, lol.

Lol he thinks a creation based source is unbiased, while an atheism based source is biased, lol.
He also thinks muscletech ads are totally neutral