Quote from: BitChick on October 15, 2013, 02:08:48 PM

About the genetics issue:

Quote

In regards to hypothetical ideas about human evolution, one of the most commonly used arguments for shared mistakes inherited supposedly through common descent between humans and great apes has been the HBBP1 pseudogene. On the other hand, it is also one of the most perplexing arguments for human evolution because the sequence is so well conserved among humans and apes. According to evolutionary dogma, selective restraints should have been lifted on the pseudogene gene millions of years ago, thus allowing it to mutate freely.

see: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/arj/v6/n1/human-beta-globin-pseudogenes

Noobody is arguing about that one particular gene that this site picks out. The genes in question make up a huge majority of your genetic structure, actually. So while these guys "win" on this one example, they still "lose" on the 20,000 others. And, again, it's not proof that "god did it," it's at most proof that "we don't know how it happened."

Quote

The crater? From another article :

Quote

The New York Times article ignores another problem: the ongoing debate over the validity of the whole impact theory and the nature of the Chicxulub impact crater itself. (Some respected Earth scientists do not even believe it was a crater impact, as explained in the 1996 secular book The Great Dinosaur Extinction Controversy). Several difficulties remain unanswered:
◾ Why are there so many craters all over the Earth, with all sorts of different dates that dont correlate with the fossil record?
◾How did light-sensitive organisms that live in shallow water survive, while the dinosaurs died?
◾Wouldnt the dust from an asteroid impact create deadly acid rain that would wipe out amphibians and fish, but not necessarily large animals?

◾ Because earth used to be constantly bombarded with craters back when it was first coming together. Our solar system consisted of lots and lots of gas and rocks, and as rocks came together through gravitational pull, they became planets. There were still tons of rocks floating around in space, though, and they all kept slamming into earth and other planets and moons. Eventually, the number of leftover rocks decreased, and also earth got a gas atmosphere that burned up most rocks when they entered, and the number of new craters decreased. We still had some huge rocks flying around in space, though, and still do (one is scheduled to come really close in the next few years). Doesn't matter that craters have different dates. Only thing that matters is that one of them is as old as when dinasaurs became extinct.
◾ Because the thing that killed off dinasaurs wasn't a lack of light? It could have been a change in atmospheric composition, or, more likely, a change in global temperature. Cold-blooded dinasaurs died when it got too cold for them to survive, while mamals survived just fine.
◾ Why would an asteroid impact create acid rain? The cloud that gets tossed up is just dirt, not tons of burning carbon and sulfur. Besides, any amount of rain on earth is only a teeny tiny fraction of the amount of water in the oceans. It would be practically impossible for acid rain to polute oceans to the point where all fish die.

Quote

Dinosaurs lived with man (many were called dragons by most cultures BTW but us super smart people came up with a new name for them)

Dear god I hope you don't actually believe this. If this were true, you'd think we'd actually find some dragon bones, teeth, skins, scales, or anything else used by humans from that time period. Why do we have tons of antiques made from leather and bone from as far back as a couple thousand years ago, but yet not a single thing made from dragons? You'd think items like that would be extremely valuable, highly sought after, and very carefully preserved.

Quote

From another article:

Quote

One of these cells is 65 million years old, and one is about 9 months old. Can anyone tell me which is which?
Her inferred answer was no.
Will evolutionists now be convinced to think about rewriting dinosaur history?
As AiG wrote in a news release 12 months ago about this find (in a release which was distributed nationwide to the secular media):

The tissue/blood vessels are not millions of years old at all, but were mostly fossilized under catastrophic conditions a few thousand years ago at most. (I.e., by the global Flood of Noahs time, about 4,300 years ago.)

No amount of catastrophic conditions can fossilize something in just 4000 years, sorry. Takes WAY longer than that. It's not just flesh becoming hard and rigid, it's all biological matter becoming completely replaced with minerals (stone). And no amount of catastrophic conditions can make atoms split apart faster than they actually do, which is how we tell how old things are.

Quote

All that said, people have an amazing way of "finding" facts that support their preconceived ideas. You can say that about Christians but I can say that about what is called "Science" today. There are many things that are simply theories that are talked about like they are facts that is not good science.

The difference is that science says, "Well, this is the best idea we got, based on this and this and this and this and this. And maybe it's wrong, but at least it's all based on this evidence." Religion says, "This is the idea we must have. Let's find evidence to support it, such as this and this, but not this." One starts with no answer, and tries to find it using whatever it can, the other starts with an answer (your so-called "truth"), and tries to find evidence to fit it.

Sorry, but, unlike what you and your group may believe, evolution is not actually a disputed theory. At all. Not any more than the heliocentric theory, or the theory that the earth is round. There is just way way way too much evidence for it, and every time we make a prediction based on this theory, it gets confirmed yet again. If you want to try to disprove that theory, at most you will make parts of it a bit more questionable. You won't automatically make your fantasy be correct, because the question isn't "Evolution vs Creationism," it's "Evolution vs Creationism vs Zeus vs Aliens vs Hologram vs Just a dream vs Martian migration vs... vs ... vs ... and so on and so forth." To get your creationism theory to even be considered, you'd have to actually find some evidence of something being intelligently designed (so far there's zero of that), or some evidence of a god leaving a message or something behind, one that could not have beeen created by humans, such as with a written book.