Comments on: Second out of the gate: Alachua County http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=1627 Defending and promoting sound science in Florida Mon, 20 May 2013 17:38:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: Ivorygirl http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=1627#comment-250850 Ivorygirl Fri, 03 Aug 2012 16:30:43 +0000 http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=1627#comment-250850 Chris, as some one else has pointed out, if you want to achieve a smidgen of credibility, please do a better job with your grammer and spelling. Your last post was an English teacher’s nightmare. My underwear is never wadded up, although it does draw a parallel with your personality. It’s just covering an ass. To plagiarize Huxley I would rather be a cousin to an ape, than a liar for Jesus like you obviously are. Strange you are not familiar with ignorant, bronze-age goat-herders, didn’t you recently quote from Genesis? You said “Your question is incomplete. I have no idea” no idea? That’s the most truthful statement you have made to date. Why would I answer your question, all your word twisting and disingenuousness shows you for your transparencies? You lack the intestinal fortitude to say who you really think the creator is because you know that you can not present any evidence of a magical, omnipotent, yet imperceptible creator, magically poofing things into existence Ex Nihilo. You also choose to insult and sneer over the very notion of trying to convince me with real evidence, rather you choose to appeal to me with your inane insults and unreasonable hatred of natural science and education. You are a compulsive liar for Jesus who is utterly determined to come up with any statement, no matter how ridiculous, or how false, in order to convince people that evolution is wrong. The fact that it makes you appear like a brain damaged idiot in the process, seems not to concern you Chris, as some one else has pointed out, if you want to achieve a smidgen of credibility, please do a better job with your grammer and spelling. Your last post was an English teacher’s nightmare.
My underwear is never wadded up, although it does draw a parallel with your personality. It’s just covering an ass.
To plagiarize Huxley I would rather be a cousin to an ape, than a liar for Jesus like you obviously are.
Strange you are not familiar with ignorant, bronze-age goat-herders, didn’t you recently quote from Genesis?
You said “Your question is incomplete. I have no idea” no idea? That’s the most truthful statement you have made to date.
Why would I answer your question, all your word twisting and disingenuousness shows you for your transparencies? You lack the intestinal fortitude to say who you really think the creator is because you know that you can not present any evidence of a magical, omnipotent, yet imperceptible creator, magically poofing things into existence Ex Nihilo. You also choose to insult and sneer over the very notion of trying to convince me with real evidence, rather you choose to appeal to me with your inane insults and unreasonable hatred of natural science and education.
You are a compulsive liar for Jesus who is utterly determined to come up with any statement, no matter how ridiculous, or how false, in order to convince people that evolution is wrong. The fact that it makes you appear like a brain damaged idiot in the process, seems not to concern you

]]> By: Chris http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=1627#comment-250398 Chris Thu, 02 Aug 2012 04:41:32 +0000 http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=1627#comment-250398 Ivorygirl, why don't you give me a clue as to what segment of evolutionary biology has your underwear wadded up. For the most part your questions were answered but I realize you comprehension is low being the descendent of mutated ape like creatures, so i'll do my best to work with you. You're going to have to strain your brain and be a little more specific with your questions. And I'm not familial with any ignorant goat herders or any books they may have written. So I'll have no reference to their writings. #1 Who/what is the designer/creator? How can I scientifically test your answer?
 Your question is incomplete. I have no idea. I suppose you'll have to select a creator or designer based on what you think he, she, it , them or they created. Pin it down a little closer than moth balls to moon dust. What type of scientific testing are you suggesting? Depending on the conclusion you desire we could just sketch it out with water colors. That should provide the form of prima facie evidence you're accustom to. I don't think we can move on to question #2 until you've rewritten you vague question #1. Ivorygirl, why don’t you give me a clue as to what segment of evolutionary biology has your underwear wadded up.

For the most part your questions were answered but I realize you comprehension is low being the descendent of mutated ape like creatures, so i’ll do my best to work with you. You’re going to have to strain your brain and be a little more specific with your questions. And I’m not familial with any ignorant goat herders or any books they may have written.
So I’ll have no reference to their writings.

#1 Who/what is the designer/creator? How can I scientifically test your answer?


Your question is incomplete. I have no idea. I suppose you’ll have to select a creator or designer based on what you think he, she, it , them or they created. Pin it down a little closer than moth balls to moon dust.

What type of scientific testing are you suggesting? Depending on the conclusion you desire we could just sketch it out with water colors. That should provide the form of prima facie evidence you’re accustom to.

I don’t think we can move on to question #2 until you’ve rewritten you vague question #1.

]]> By: Ivory girl http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=1627#comment-250363 Ivory girl Thu, 02 Aug 2012 02:03:55 +0000 http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=1627#comment-250363 Chris, we can all see how you avoided answering any of my questions.. Evolutionary Biology still works after a 150 years of refinement and research. Why is that a bad thing Chris? Was it because it was never meant to be a feel-good philosophy for sophists? It must be hard for you to ignore a 150 years of scientific research, but that's what people who "lie for Jesus "do right? Care to try again? and remember,quoting from a 4,000 year old book written by a bunch of ignorant goat herders does not constitute science. 1 Who/what is the designer/creator? How can I scientifically test your answer? 2 What did this designer/creator design? How can I scientifically test your answer? 3 How did the designer/creator design? How can I scientifically test your answer? 4 When did the designer /creator design? How can I scientifically test your answer? 5 What would be an example of something that was not designed by the designer/creator? How can I scientifically test your answer? 6 How can I differentiate between something that was or was not designed by the designer/creator? How can I scientifically test your answer? 7 If complexity requires a designer/creator, who/what designed the complex designer/creator, ad infinitum. How can I scientifically test your answer? 8 If all scientists accepted creationism as being true how would that benefit humanity? What new areas of research, or cures, or greater understandings of biology would it provide? Chris, we can all see how you avoided answering any of my questions.. Evolutionary Biology still works after a 150 years of refinement and research. Why is that a bad thing Chris? Was it because it was never meant to be a feel-good philosophy for sophists? It must be hard for you to ignore a 150 years of scientific research, but that’s what people who “lie for Jesus “do right?

Care to try again? and remember,quoting from a 4,000 year old book written by a bunch of ignorant goat herders does not constitute science.

1 Who/what is the designer/creator? How can I scientifically test your answer?
2 What did this designer/creator design? How can I scientifically test your answer?
3 How did the designer/creator design? How can I scientifically test your answer?
4 When did the designer /creator design? How can I scientifically test your answer?
5 What would be an example of something that was not designed by the designer/creator?
How can I scientifically test your answer?
6 How can I differentiate between something that was or was not designed by the designer/creator? How can I scientifically test your answer?
7 If complexity requires a designer/creator, who/what designed the complex designer/creator, ad infinitum. How can I scientifically test your answer?
8 If all scientists accepted creationism as being true how would that benefit humanity? What new areas of research, or cures, or greater understandings of biology would it provide?

]]> By: Chris http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=1627#comment-250319 Chris Wed, 01 Aug 2012 22:57:05 +0000 http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=1627#comment-250319 Ivorygirl, you continue to provided an excellent display of total ignorance about the world beyond the dogma you're indoctrinated with. If you're satisfied with the humanistic magical bag of tricks produced by the faithful as answers to your existence, it's ok with me. But it's obvious your hatred for the concept of a creator has nothing to with science. As to your questions, you're not looking for answers to these questions, your looking for conformation of your own religion. I provided you with what I felt was the best explanation for the questions as a whole and of course you call it BS. But BS is all you have to offer. Ivorygirl, you continue to provided an excellent display of total ignorance about the world beyond the dogma you’re indoctrinated with.

If you’re satisfied with the humanistic magical bag of tricks produced by the faithful as answers to your existence, it’s ok with me. But it’s obvious your hatred for the concept of a creator has nothing to with science.

As to your questions, you’re not looking for answers to these questions, your looking for conformation of your own religion. I provided you with what I felt was the best explanation for the questions as a whole and of course you call it BS. But BS is all you have to offer.

]]> By: Ivorygirl http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=1627#comment-250211 Ivorygirl Wed, 01 Aug 2012 15:53:11 +0000 http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=1627#comment-250211 No Chris I don’t know everything and I never implied that I did, but I am smart enough to recognize pseudo scientific bull shit when I see it and that’s what creationism is. As I expected you failed to answer any of the questions I presented. No Chris I don’t know everything and I never implied that I did, but I am smart enough to recognize pseudo scientific bull shit when I see it and that’s what creationism is.
As I expected you failed to answer any of the questions I presented.

]]> By: Chris http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=1627#comment-250073 Chris Wed, 01 Aug 2012 04:52:33 +0000 http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=1627#comment-250073 Ivory girl, I'm really disappointed, I actually thought you had something. The blanket statement, " all of creationism is a fraud," is a very bold comment. To honestly hold this view I would think one must know all there is to be know. Is that you? Claiming all of creationism is a fraud is no different than saying all of evolution is a fraud. Much of evolution is true and much of it is pure faith based religion. As to your questions, there are many answers depending on what you believe. The fact is we are here. If there is a reasonable explanation for our existence it should be plausible. Here are a few creation stories. http://www.magictails.com/creationlinks.html If there is any truth in any of these stories it should stand out. We know the appearance of life or abiogenesis is not evolution and every evolutionist will quickly condemn anyone who suggest it could be . Evolution doesn't create anything but rather by killing off and mutating parts of what already exist, change is accomplished. So evolution would be out of the question as a creator. Presently science has seven theories of how life arrived on the planet none of which can or have been tested or shown to produce anything close to life. http://www.livescience.com/13363-7-theories-origin-life.html As for your questions 1 through 7 secular science can't answer any of them. Several suggestions have been made as to how life arrived on the planet. Dawkins who is unable to produce an answer suggest aliens may have seeded the planet with life. But has no answer as to who the aliens are, where they are and how they came to be without a creator in the first place. There are two major world views, one being nothing came from nowhere for no reason and created everything. And the other, someone created everything. As for myself I've never seen nothing do anything. But I have seen the creation of medicines, computers, planes and many other things by someone. I've never seen a toilet made, but I feel confident that someone made it because of it's similarities in design and it didn't make itself. Out of all the explanations available for what is, the Bible has by far the most reasonable explenation. There is a plausible process and purpose. Genesis chapter 1:1" In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." And in the rest of the chapter the book gives numerous detail of what he did, many of which are confirmed by science today. For instance, the creation took place in a very short time. All living things require a suitable environment and food, without it they perish quickly. There is no time to evolve, nothing lives millions of years, years, days or minutes without these necessities. All of this is provided in chapter one. Another point is each living thing is created after its own kind, not only does that explain genetic homeostasis it also gives meaning to the so called Cambrian explosion where extremely complex organisms just pop into existence right of the bat. Is it millions of years of nothing doing something or is it a creator creating? Recognizing similarities and components in living organisms for instance is easily testable and shows continuity in design. This is no different than recognizing the use of nuts and bolts to build planes, computers, and toilets as a identifying characteristic of a specific builder. It's a choice, do you see new life forms in evolving in chicken soup or do you see nothing coming from nothing? Keep in mind that none of Genesis nor the rest of the Bible is compatible with Darwinian evolution and secular or religious humanism. Creationism is a completely different world view. Creationism is a view which interprets the same scientific evidence without the restrictions imposed by atheistic or evolutions theories. The Bible is not contrary to real science, but rather complementary. Ivory girl, I’m really disappointed, I actually thought you had something. The blanket statement, ” all of creationism is a fraud,” is a very bold comment. To honestly hold this view I would think one must know all there is to be know. Is that you?

Claiming all of creationism is a fraud is no different than saying all of evolution is a fraud. Much of evolution is true and much of it is pure faith based religion.

As to your questions, there are many answers depending on what you believe.
The fact is we are here. If there is a reasonable explanation for our existence it should be plausible. Here are a few creation stories. http://www.magictails.com/creationlinks.html If there is any truth in any of these stories it should stand out.

We know the appearance of life or abiogenesis is not evolution and every evolutionist will quickly condemn anyone who suggest it could be . Evolution doesn’t create anything but rather by killing off and mutating parts of what already exist, change is accomplished. So evolution would be out of the question as a creator.

Presently science has seven theories of how life arrived on the planet none of which can or have been tested or shown to produce anything close to life.
http://www.livescience.com/13363-7-theories-origin-life.html
As for your questions 1 through 7 secular science can’t answer any of them.

Several suggestions have been made as to how life arrived on the planet. Dawkins who is unable to produce an answer suggest aliens may have seeded the planet with life. But has no answer as to who the aliens are, where they are and how they came to be without a creator in the first place.

There are two major world views, one being nothing came from nowhere for no reason and created everything. And the other, someone created everything.

As for myself I’ve never seen nothing do anything. But I have seen the creation of medicines, computers, planes and many other things by someone. I’ve never seen a toilet made, but I feel confident that someone made it because of it’s similarities in design and it didn’t make itself.

Out of all the explanations available for what is, the Bible has by far the most reasonable explenation. There is a plausible process and purpose. Genesis chapter 1:1″ In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” And in the rest of the chapter the book gives numerous detail of what he did, many of which are confirmed by science today. For instance, the creation took place in a very short time. All living things require a suitable environment and food, without it they perish quickly. There is no time to evolve, nothing lives millions of years, years, days or minutes without these necessities. All of this is provided in chapter one.

Another point is each living thing is created after its own kind, not only does that explain genetic homeostasis it also gives meaning to the so called Cambrian explosion where extremely complex organisms just pop into existence right of the bat. Is it millions of years of nothing doing something or is it a creator creating?

Recognizing similarities and components in living organisms for instance is easily testable and shows continuity in design. This is no different than recognizing the use of nuts and bolts to build planes, computers, and toilets as a identifying characteristic of a specific builder.
It’s a choice, do you see new life forms in evolving in chicken soup or do you see nothing coming from nothing?

Keep in mind that none of Genesis nor the rest of the Bible is compatible with Darwinian evolution and secular or religious humanism. Creationism is a completely different world view. Creationism is a view which interprets the same scientific evidence without the restrictions imposed by atheistic or evolutions theories. The Bible is not contrary to real science, but rather complementary.

]]> By: Jonathan Smith http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=1627#comment-249897 Jonathan Smith Tue, 31 Jul 2012 15:01:30 +0000 http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=1627#comment-249897 Chris, I think Ivorygirl just called your bluff. I for one would like to see your responses. Chris, I think Ivorygirl just called your bluff. I for one would like to see your responses.

]]> By: Ivory girl http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=1627#comment-249712 Ivory girl Tue, 31 Jul 2012 01:01:07 +0000 http://www.flascience.org/wp/?p=1627#comment-249712 "You must have quit a list of documented scientifically recognized frauds produced by creationist” Chris, you are such a hoot !! all of creationism is a fraud.I’m always impressed with how much ignorance and stupidity you can fit into so few words. I'm confused about science? Please tell me why I have to assume that you are an authority of science who can determine what is and is not science? You’re not, those who visit this site know you’re not, so why do you need to keep confirming it over and over again with every ridiculous comment you make here. If you think creationism/ID is a valid scientific proposition lets see your evidence stand on its own ground and that does not mean spewing your straw man statements about the so-called problems with evolution. How about answering these questions before you rattle off another one of your negative rants? 1 Who/what is the designer/creator? How can I scientifically test your answer? 2 What did this designer/creator design? How can I scientifically test your answer? 3 How did the designer/creator design? How can I scientifically test your answer? 4 When did the designer /creator design? How can I scientifically test your answer? 5 What would be an example of something that was not designed by the designer/creator? How can I scientifically test your answer? 6 How can I differentiate between something that was or was not designed by the designer/creator? How can I scientifically test your answer? 7 If complexity requires a designer/creator, who/what designed the complex designer/creator, add infinitum. How can I scientifically test your answer? “You must have quit a list of documented scientifically recognized frauds produced by creationist” Chris, you are such a hoot !! all of creationism is a fraud.I’m always impressed with how much ignorance and stupidity you can fit into so few words.
I’m confused about science? Please tell me why I have to assume that you are an authority of science who can determine what is and is not science? You’re not, those who visit this site know you’re not, so why do you need to keep confirming it over and over again with every ridiculous comment you make here.

If you think creationism/ID is a valid scientific proposition lets see your evidence stand on its own ground and that does not mean spewing your straw man statements about the so-called problems with evolution. How about answering these questions before you rattle off another one of your negative rants?

1 Who/what is the designer/creator? How can I scientifically test your answer?

2 What did this designer/creator design? How can I scientifically test your answer?

3 How did the designer/creator design? How can I scientifically test your answer?

4 When did the designer /creator design? How can I scientifically test your answer?

5 What would be an example of something that was not designed by the designer/creator?

How can I scientifically test your answer?

6 How can I differentiate between something that was or was not designed by the designer/creator? How can I scientifically test your answer?

7 If complexity requires a designer/creator, who/what designed the complex designer/creator, add infinitum. How can I scientifically test your answer?

]]>