Proof of ID the World is Looking For

I don't believe the fight between ID and evolution should be over who is right or wrong. The fight should be over proving that the current scientific method being used should not have set rules as it does. It limits science to a set agenda that states something that follows these set rules has to be true.

An example of this is an old one. Using the set rules of aerodynamics a bee can't fly because due to its mass and lack of wing span the calculation won't allow it to fly. Also using the set rules of aerodynamics a concrete plane can't fly. BTW both of those have been proven wrong and the rules have had to be changed slightly because of it. The bee one was proven wrong due to how the bee’s wings actually work. The concrete plane was proven wrong by the TV show Myth busters by showing that if you mix the concrete solution you can make the concrete light enough to fly.

The fight shouldn't be over who is right or wrong it should be a fight for proving the set rules wrong. You can't explain everything if there is one set rules that must be followed, you need to be able to think outside that box to find the truth.

To use Albert Einstein quote for a moment "Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.” with a set of rules that must be followed we limit are imagination thus we limit all there ever will be to know and understand.

Oh yeah and on a side note I have noticed some atheist complain about being all grouped together. You guys do the same with IDer's and creationist. There are some creationist's who do not agree with the IDer's theory. I am agnostic and have no problems with either side of the debate well will one exception those evolutionist that say it is proven. But that's only because it's still a theory not a law and it makes them sound ignorant.

Watch this, you will not regret it. This is the answer for me. Everything finally makes sense.

Originally posted by Gigantopithecus


Watch this, you will not regret it. This is the answer for me. Everything finally makes sense.

AH HA HA HA HA HA HA THAT GUY IS HILARIOUS!!! He has been pwned so many times by creationists he makes a video warning others not to debate them !! ha ha ha ha ha ROFLMFAO_COPTER!

I was wondering is he was gonna start crying! ha ha the first part he has to read a script for petes sake but what does he say that he needs a script for ! You sure this video wasn't made by a Creationist posing as a sour grapes pathetic loser Darwinist to make fun of his "DarWhining" ways !

OMG! I almost lost my pepsi through my nose watching that dweeb

What a putts!

- Con



[edit on 8-7-2008 by Conspiriology]

Originally posted by OWoutcast

I don't believe the fight between ID and evolution should be over who is right or wrong. The fight should be over proving that the current scientific method being used should not have set rules as it does. It limits science to a set agenda that states something that follows these set rules has to be true.

First, I'd like to say very good post and you have exposed a very real problem, a rumor or myth of sorts I see more Atheists using all the time and I agree it is time to kick that silly misunderstanding about the so called scientific method to the sewer where it came from.

It really doesn't have set rules, in fact the Scientific Method is somewhat of an urban legend in the Atheist Science community.

Albert Einstein argued that conflicts between science and religion "have all sprung from fatal errors." However "even though the realms of religion and science in themselves are clearly marked off from each other" there are "strong reciprocal relationships and dependencies"... "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind ...a legitimate conflict between science and religion cannot exist." However he makes it clear that he does not believe in a personal God, and suggests that "neither the rule of human nor Divine Will exists as an independent cause of natural events. To be sure, the doctrine of a personal God interfering with natural events could never be refuted...by science, for [it] can always take refuge in those domains in which scientific knowledge has not yet been able to set foot."

en.wikipedia.org...

Now see the problem isn't so much with Scientists as it is with Atheists all thinking they are Scientist or as they like to pat themselves on the head, the "Science Community"

Like the Video above, they can't hang with creationists.

Here are some additional links that you can read to affirm your suspicions regarding the materialist fables about the myth called the Scientific Method and why it is obsolete, antiquated, archaic and utterly useless in many cases. Hell if Darwinists actually applied the damn thing to macro evolution, it would have been a dead theory long ago. They only claim it does but we know how that works and there is no way possible to test it.

www.detectingdesign.com...


www.detectingdesign.com...

As we have seen so many times before and continues to be taught to our kids, the ever lying illusion of evolution

Currently you can read "stuff" like this in our public schools text books and they are all LIES!

Darwin’s finches These do not support evolution in the way the text book says they do From bacteria to humans. They are an example of natural selection but that does not generate any new genetic information needed for macro evolution to work.

Save it Horza, I ain't buying your slippery semantics after seeing them destroyed and exploited for the gimmicks they are by JPHISH.

The giraffe’s neck no fossil evidence and no plausible mechanism

Natural selection only goes the wrong way for evolution. It only sorts and removes genetic information that’s already there

(to this day Dawkins is "stumped" )

Peppered moths Even if the experiments were not intentional hoax's perpetrated to prove evolution,, they would only demonstrate natural selection, and that is not evolution.

Again, speciation is not evolution new biological species form without any new genetic information. Speciation won’t turn bacteria to man. Props goes out to JPHISH for explaining this better than anyone I have ever known here on ATS. Part of the reason he is a better teacher, is that he uses a language that is pure and without obfuscated semantics intentionally used by the wordsmiths of Atheist's.

Miller-Urey experiment Despicable! Repugnant act of fraud! Plane and simple ! They used the wrong atmosphere, produced the wrong chemicals, and did not produce anything even closely resembling life yet students are told that life got started via natural processes and the truth is,, they haven't the foggiest idea, NONE, NOTTA , No way No How yet they have the unmitigated audacity to mock creationists saying "Godidit". I have kind of like the new phrase and think Christians should embrace the "Godidit" idea as we did the Big Bang when that was used to make fun of us and we adopted it as a term of endearment .

There are no examples of transitional forms for which one could make a airtight case. Those they do have are all disputable at best. They say they have a mountain of evidence but they have no mountain they have no truck load no ton of no nothing of the sort. SHOW ME and we'll see as most of them so far I have found were fakes and / or very suspicious but nothing to write home about.

Embryos, This has long been abandoned as evidence for evolution. Haeckel’s drawings are blatantly fraudulent, just another scam we have had put forth as manufactured evidence in a desperate attempt to keep Darwinian evolution from being falsified ( does the BS ever end?)

Well apparently not

Lucy Human eyes, hands and feet drawn onto an ape do make it look half ape and half human.

Australopithecine turns out to be another southern ape

Homo Habilis A jumble of human and ape fossils, now widely regarded as a hoax

Homo erectus ,, pffft it's us, plane and simple

Neanderthal like the geico cave men but now regarded as just like us.

Cro magnon the one that would drag woman by the hair to a cave somewhere with a club. Turns out,, he is just a man

Mungo man just a man

Hoax after Hoax after Hoax after Hoax after Hoax after Hoax after Hoax Hoax after Hoax after Hoax after Hoax after Hoax after Hoax after Hoax


Lie after Lie after Lie after Lie after Lie after Lie after Lie after Lie after Lie Lie after Lie after Lie after Lie after Lie after Lie after Lie after Lie after Lie


No one knows how life could possibly have arisen by naturalistic processes, but the students are not told that

Stone Age’ people fully human
1. Microscopic analysis of the ‘Venus Figurines’, small hand-sized statues of women, said to be from ‘Stone Age’ cultures of central Europe, has revealed impressions left behind on the clay from very finely woven fabric.

It seems that the clay statues were not naked (as portrayed in archaeology textbooks) but were actually adorned with intricately designed clothing.

The advanced sophisticated weaving technology possessed by these ‘Stone Age’ peoples has stunned archaeologists.

EXN.CA, , 9 February 2000.
Scientific American Discovering Archaeology, February 9, 2000.

2. Japanese archaeologists have discovered evidence of elaborate housing and sophisticated tools having been used by human ancestors labeled Homo erectus, reputed to have lived 400,000 years ago.

Anthropologists are staggered to find that early humans were far more technologically sophisticated than they had earlier believed.

For these peoples to have crossed the Sea of Japan from mainland Asia would have required a high degree of communication skill and organization, as well as sophisticated tools to make seaworthy craft.

What about all those living fossils?

Well Lets see what excuses for this Darwinists have

Bats?
Still BATS!

MAN


Still bipedal after thousands and thousands of years but not only that!
We have never seen anything like this when they say look in the mirror and see the transitional form.


Nope, if evolution were true, you'd be seeing that.

Alligators = Gators

Sharks = sharks

Turtles = yep you guessed it and on and on and one the truth is out there all around you. You carry the seed of your kind.

what kind?

HUMAN KIND.

It is time to quit buying into the idea that this group who think they are the lobby for logic when as we see the logic is the language of liars.

What about putting our creationism in schools? Well the wedge was an idea that on the face of it all looks like they felt the need to do that but I got a better Idea one that is taking off with success.

First read how Atheists have cleverly stolen our rightful place in Science using the rumored communist based ACLU
www.jeremiahproject.com...

Did you know that if evolution offends your religion than the same laws apply to that which do to our Christianity?

Complain that evolution OFFENDS your Religion at every opportunity. The connection to it and the religion of Atheism is already being examined and law suits are started to kick that BUNK Pseudo Science OUT of our schools and quit brain washing our kids to talk like we came from McGilla Gorilla!

It is Time to take our Christianity and shove it down there necks like they say we have done so they will know the difference and leave them choking on the dust of their own atheistic regrets they didn't leave well enough alone.
The madness that is Darwinian Evolution the tool of materialists, which gave rise to Nazi's eugenics and the connection to Darwinism's influence on the U.S.'s own eugenics program was well under way and made a U.S supreme court ruling making it legal. . Germany adopted it after teaching evolution in there schools and we all know what happened there. Where ever Science becomes the state religion of Darwinism,, untold MILLIONS DIE and it makes the crusades look like a boy scout jamboree when the state of government is Atheist.

Stalin! Mao! Pol Pot! Hitler! the Kamir rouge, and spare me the silly belt buckle bunk with the word "god is with us" on Nazi uniforms as there reason they weren't atheists. Until you stop using our coins that say in God We Trust, you haven't got a leg to stand on atheist.

What is it that makes this whole machine run? hehe look at the boards and it should tell you . Ill give you a subtle clue





- Con


[edit on 8-7-2008 by Conspiriology]

Oh well.

I'm quite certain now, con, that you are just on a wind-up.

Originally posted by melatonin
Oh well.

I'm quite certain now, con, that you are just on a wind-up.

Naah,, actually I was told I am always coming off that way, I won't use the words they did. So I took what they sent me about Evolution and evil Christianity, and I thought mmmm Maybe they need to see what it's like when I talk about Darwinism but as an Atheist does christianity.

- Con

Originally posted by Conspiriology
AH HA HA HA HA HA HA THAT GUY IS HILARIOUS!!! He has been pwned so many times by creationists he makes a video warning others not to debate them !! ha ha ha ha ha ROFLMFAO_COPTER!

I was wondering is he was gonna start crying! ha ha the first part he has to read a script for petes sake but what does he say that he needs a script for ! You sure this video wasn't made by a Creationist posing as a sour grapes pathetic loser Darwinist to make fun of his "DarWhining" ways !

OMG! I almost lost my pepsi through my nose watching that dweeb

What a putts!

- Con

[edit on 8-7-2008 by Conspiriology]

Great!! Since you are tickled pink, here is some more of this guy. Always a pleasure to make a person happy.

Originally posted by Gigantopithecus

Great!! Since you are tickled pink, here is some more of this guy. Always a pleasure to make a person happy. \

Awe C'mon man,, this guy isn't a pimple on Dr. Lennox intellectual butt.

He picks on lil kirk cameron and that sugary ray comfort. HA HA HA

They mean well but this only shows me the guy will only pick on Christians whose harshest word is "bad no goodnick"

ha ha the guys still cracks me up tho, I'd debate em

He isn't that good

- Con

Originally posted by Conspiriology

Originally posted by OWoutcast

What is it that makes this whole machine run? hehe look at the boards and it should tell you . Ill give you a subtle clue





- Con


[edit on 8-7-2008 by Conspiriology]

I'm gonna have to "borrow" that one....

reply to post by Gigantopithecus


This doofus is only arguing against a limited minority of Christians.

The Bible makes no claim of the age of the earth. Genesis says "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" The Hebrew reshet is translated "in the beginning" it is an indefinite period of time not a point in time. It could have been 15 billion years or 3 seconds.

The week occurs after the beginning. The heavens and earth are already made. The week describes creating a place for man to live from what was made "in the beginning". No time is given...

Still yet there are some pretty credible evidences that a flood that can cause the appearance of age. Seeing how scientist cling to outdated theories like the steady state cosmology and Darwinism it is easy to believe they might be making some geological errors as well. I haven't had time to study that much.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's clear that non-creationists are trying to destroy the credibility of ATS. Creation is the scientific mainstream. Most all reasonable scientists believe in a creation event called the Big Bang. Albert Einsteins relativity demands that the universe has a beginning. To not believe in creation is to deny the consensus of science.

If you are not a creationist you are a wacky fringe psuedoscientist.

[edit on 7/9/2008 by Bigwhammy]

reply to post by Gigantopithecus


Stop ing ATS dude. Read the terms and conditions. It's the same as littering. I mean its really boring and old. Do you have anything to contribute ? or just



[edit on 9-7-2008 by Yosimitie Sam]

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
reply to post by Gigantopithecus

 

This doofus is only arguing against a limited minority of Christians.

The Bible makes no claim of the age of the earth. Genesis says "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" The Hebrew reshet is translated "in the beginning" it is an indefinite period of time not a point in time. It could have been 15 billion years or 3 seconds.

The week occurs after the beginning. The heavens and earth are already made. The week describes creating a place for man to live from what was made "in the beginning". No time is given...

Still yet there are some pretty credible evidences that a flood that can cause the appearance of age. Seeing how scientist cling to outdated theories like the steady state cosmology and Darwinism it is easy to believe they might be making some geological errors as well. I haven't had time to study that much.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's clear that non-creationists are trying to destroy the credibility of ATS. Creation is the scientific mainstream. Most all reasonable scientists believe in a creation event called the Big Bang. Albert Einsteins relativity demands that the universe has a beginning. To not believe in creation is to deny the consensus of science.

If you are not a creationist you are a wacky fringe psuedoscientist.

[edit on 7/9/2008 by Bigwhammy]

Like you said, the guy is a doofus, so no threat to you.

I googled "biblical age of earth" and "age of earth according to bible". I am sorry to inform you that majority bible believers have faith and believe the Earth is between 6000 to 12000 years old. This is also commonly reported and accepted by bible believers and non believers alike. Your contention it could have been 15 billion years or 3 seconds shows you are not in support majority of bible believers.

You should calm down. We should seek to win by stating objective facts and submitting persuasive argument with evidence and research to backup our claims, and not by resorting to unfounded personal, religious and political statements or making insinuations damaging to the integrity of the opponent. Perhaps this thread entitled Debate the Post and NOT the Poster will help. Credits goes to AshleyD who gave me, a newbie, some pointers to debate fairly and with evidence. I hope the said thread will help you too.

As for your misuse and misquote of mainstream science, Big Bang theory, the good name of Albert Einsteins to advance your agenda, go ahead. You have a right to do so, especially in ATS where tolerance, respect, pro choices and pro views are encouraged. My response is only this video with Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron:





[edit on 9-7-2008 by Gigantopithecus]

Originally posted by Conspiriology

Awe C'mon man,, this guy isn't a pimple on Dr. Lennox intellectual butt.

He picks on lil kirk cameron and that sugary ray comfort. HA HA HA

They mean well but this only shows me the guy will only pick on Christians whose harshest word is "bad no goodnick"

ha ha the guys still cracks me up tho, I'd debate em

He isn't that good

- Con

Hey man, haha, although we are not on the same side, I totally agree with everything you said in this post. I even gave you a star because I not only recognise a good debater with a wicked sense of humour, I also respect a person who continues to debate despite of having negative ATS points. Hahaha, I too have negative ATS points!!!

First time I saw this guy, I cracked up too! That's why I used his videos. I didn't want to use hardcore crazy atheist video to raise the temperature of this thread. He is more of a comic relief. You said it yourself, he is hilarious! And it's not like I am putting up off topic videos. These videos are related to the topic.

Well, have another good laugh on me. See the video above first, it's related.



[edit on 9-7-2008 by Gigantopithecus]

Originally posted by Yosimitie Sam
reply to post by Gigantopithecus

 

Stop

ing ATS dude. Read the terms and conditions. It's the same as littering.

I mean its really boring and old. Do you have anything to contribute ? or just

[edit on 9-7-2008 by Yosimitie Sam]

Hey man, lighten up a little ok? I know the rules. Here it is: Debate the Post and NOT the Poster. No disrespect, I think you need to read it more than I do. As compared to this short jab at me, I definitely contributed more than you. Anyway, these videos are related to the thread, they are not spams. Perhaps you can give me 1 percent of the space you give everyone else? I am just a newbie ok bro?

[edit on 9-7-2008 by Gigantopithecus]

Originally posted by Gigantopithecus


Hey man, haha, although we are not on the same side, I totally agree with everything you said in this post. I even gave you a star because I not only recognise a good debater with a wicked sense of humour, I also respect a person who continues to debate despite of having negative ATS points. Hahaha, I too have negative ATS points!!!

Yeah I had minus 8000 at one time but I have seen other posts of yours I think we can all agree on and was going to talk to you about it.

Im off to run an errand but Ill make a note to remind myself here to ask you about points you make in some other threads.

ttyl

- Con

Ahhh yes a good ol stir up the ID vs ToE thread. The same people bringing out the same tired arguments and the same tired insults and the same tired insults. Obviously I havent missed anything since I was last here.

Creationists: take yout theories and go live happily ever after. Please refrain using a condescending tone because somebody doesn't subscribe to your THEORY.

Evolutionists: See above.

Nobody knows the answer. Anyone who thinks they do is fooling themself.

It's not about being right, it's about finding an answer you can live with and be at peace. But you can't find a worthwhile answer if you aren't aksing the right questions. It's not about molecules and thermodynamics or scripture. The question is: How can I live a meaningful positive life and have a meaningful positive effect on my environment? Find your answer, help other people find theirs, and allow people the choice to accept an answer different from yours.

To the OP: If there were such an explanantion that satisfies those criteria, there would be no debate at this point, since FACTS would be presented and nothing could refute them, and everyone with a functioning brain would believe the same thing.I haven't heard of such a set of FACTS. Not saying they won't arrive someday, but until that time people need to stop labeling their theories as facts, and then lose the pompous self-righteous posturing.

This stuff always makes me laugh. You guys will go to any length to smear an Atheist. At least you're only fooling the weak-minded. You can have those on your side. I prefer quality of quantity. Sometimes you guys have some decent arguments that actually require more than a half clever joke to refute. But with stuff like this you're giving us a softball to smash out of the park.

Wow this seems like it was one hell of a ride!

I read this entire thread and couldn't stop and with the exception of the very biased and I will say well Orchestrated plan to set the ID people up for failure, it was one of the best threads I have ever read. I am sorry to see all that research go to waste. One thing I have to make clear and this is something I think I know a little bit more than the average google lawyer, is Astyanax canceling out clearskies attempt to use irreducible complexity just because some dimwit lawyer can think of another reason a mouse trap makes an excellent (but ugly) tie clip.

I watched the Dover trials very very closely and many of my colleagues agree that was the most OBVIOUS opportunity the attorneys for ID had passed up. Someone here called it "classic". I call it damn lucky the Attorney for ID wasn't on the ball seeing the tie clip as no different than Dawkins random mutator trick where in both examples the assumed preconceived outcome proves intelligent design NOT evolution. It is the same thing the OP has been using all along and I have to agree with the sentiments of all those who have complained about it too. I see the OP is more than well versed in logical fallacy and find it hard to swallow he didn't know why ID has never been proven. Of course he does and anyone who has ever kept up with this argument also knows.

One thing I am sure you all have learned is to never fall for this kind of thing again. They should also know it is for this same reason, transmutation, trans speciation, or macro evolution fails to be proven under the same strict scientific method.

The tie clip would have been taken apart using the same logic Dawkins computer model had been. Even though the ACLU had tried to make this a case where future challenges to evolution would be unconstitutional, it failed in doing that. The kind of court case where such a ruling would cover court cases all over the land is the Supreme Court.

It would have been interesting to see how the OP argued his way out of that one and if he cares to,, I would love a shot at him in a formal debate because the tie clip paper weight argument isn't going to get you out of it with me without a re-cross to the paper weight being stuffed like the assumed consequence they use to falsify it.

AshleyD, I compliment you on your effort but I must agree you were naive to fall for this and it is a shame to see people get such a charge out of such a long and arduous effort taking full advantage of someone so dedicated to prove something most know can not be had you only known more about what can only be seen as a trap to humiliate the ID crowd.

Perhaps THAT is the reason ID'er's have changed the science as more of a new science dedicated to debunking evolution and to keep that "eh hem" science honest.

It's ironic isn't it, when I read many of the examples given here by the evolutionists, or any old threads on evolution where citations are offered as proof, the proof now has already been discarded as a hoax or another mistake. It's like Piltdown all over again only it doesn't take as long these days. We see the same self righteousness defending evolution with such arrogance and self assured cockiness, suggesting anyone not in agreement either hasn't studied enough evolution or is stupid because they are religious idiots. Then about a year later read those same threads and it should give any creationist a good laugh

Sort of like the prehistoric birds and fish that have all finally turned out to be nothing special. The DNA being examined on the T-Rex found in Montana having soft tissue, skin and blood still intact is yet another area of carbon dating that will have them spun for a while I am sure. I see the day finally coming and I believe it will be in our life time that Darwin will finally get the credit he deserves as the true quack nutcase he was and this science will finally evolve into ID

Originally posted by Gigatronix



This stuff always makes me laugh. You guys will go to any length to smear an Atheist. At least you're only fooling the weak-minded. You can have those on your side. I prefer quality of quantity. Sometimes you guys have some decent arguments that actually require more than a half clever joke to refute. But with stuff like this you're giving us a softball to smash out of the park.

Actuallly that looks awefully familiar to the one Atheist majormalfunction used to make Christians look silly.

Originally posted by XIDIXIDIX


Actuallly that looks awefully familiar to the one Atheist majormalfunction used to make Christians look silly.

Wouldn't suprise me. Nothing says "I'm losing this argument" like quoting an ignorant joke written by someone else. These types of images are used specifically to enrage someone, therby bypassing the actual argument and leading the conversation right into senselessness.