Science and Society

Ned, do you really want to start this again? LOL Seriously, it will be interesting to find out who is behind this new campaign to manufacture "local" school board resolutions.

This argument must be laid to rest along with all other forms of religious intervention in the education of children.

There is nothing wrong with being religious; I just don't want any religious zealot who incapable of evaluating evidence relying on divine intervention for things they cannot understand.

The theory of evolution is just that - a theory but the preponderance of evidence suggests that it is true. There is no rational basis for creationism - it requires faith or in other words; "a belief in the supernatural".

People who would argue this point should really consider Russell's Teapot conjecture. That may require more mental maturity than many in the creationist wing can handle though.

I don't believe in magic.

Florida is the 'new' Kansas.

Good article Ned but Ih hanit gonna touch it.

jock59801
Go back and read the posts that followed yours over the last few days and I think you will know.

The responsibility of educating our children has been given to us...the parents ..by God..The parents and local schools should make these decisions....not state or Fed Government...thats why I am for Ron Paul.....

arthall33
Parents can and do make these decisions, and if they feel that their children should not be exposed to science then send them to a private school. Public schools have a responsibility to educate our children with the latest available knowledge and their failure to do so has degenerated the U.S. from a world leader in science to a 4th rate also ran. The majority of us want what is best for our children as I must assume you do because of your concern. To not teach them as best we can in the available knowledge is to harm the child. Public schooling is poor enough without making it worse by denying them the same information available to the rest of the planet.
I suggest that, instead, you supplement their education at home as I have. Not undermining what the school teaches but explaining how it fits in. Our knowledge of science is far from perfect, but a working knowledge is required in the real world.

arthall33
P.S. - I like Ron Paul's libertarian views as well.

Taxpayer schools should not be teaching imagination as fact. Theory (or "evolution") is imagination. It is not fact. It is not fact because it changes so much for one thing. It is not fact because there is evidence to the contrary. Teachers should be able to understand that if a historical record describes dinosaurs in detail, it is evidence that dinosaurs lived together with man. There is no way that we can have a description of a dinosaur if they were not living at the same time as man. This is proof beyond a doubt that dinosaurs were living as little as 5,000 (five thousand) years ago. If you want to teach something that is true, teach the knowledge of the nature of dinosaurs as described in the Bible. The Bible even speaks of people who professing (Professors professing) to be wise, they became fools. The last thing that we need is tax supported idiocy!

Well just another way to make Florida look stupid, but it's one of those "little" counties still run by idiot rednecks and the southern baptists. How come it's always evolution? You would think they'd be screaming about any science? Archaeology? Chemistry? History? All document events prior to their weird biblical time of earth's creation.

The Bible was written before scientific analysis was available. The writers explained it as best they could, given ignorance at the time. Why can't people in the 21st century get a clue?

Why are we blaming schools for teaching theories? It's not their job to teach religion. If parents were responsible, they wouldn't rely on the school system to teach kids religious values anyway. It makes me sick just to think about that. That's the parent's job.

Let them teach theories so your kids can learn different points of view. Then teach them religion.

The Bible, which teaches Creation, also happens to be very historical in it's teaching. It describes at least two different kinds of (living) dinosaurs. You can't have a description of a (living) dinosaur if it was not living at the time! People are willingly ignorant! ...also something that the Bible says.

Whenever I hear someone say "evolution is a theory not fact" it is like a big red flag that says, "I don't know what science is."

Evolution will never be a fact. It is a theory that unites literally thousands if not millions of facts. When a scientific theory has so many facts under it, knocking down one, two, or even a handful, doesn't diminish the theory by all that much.

Daleri - I can describe a dragon but I'm pretty sure I've never seen one. Leviathan sounds like a dragon to me. Or do you really think dinosaurs breathed fire?

Find me real evidence, or leave the science to the scientists.

How embarassing to be living in such an ignorant state. I can't wait to leave this backwater.

Yea, I don't think I can believe the bilbe's so called dinosaurs. Especially since the bones and rock layers have been scientifically dated to the date of their deaths, within a few million years. I've never seen or heard ANY evidence that is pro creationism that can stand up to science. ID and Creationism are but mere "theories" too. So if you don't want "theories" taught, then you can't teach ID or creationism. Also, if ID and creationism are to be taught in schools, seeing as their "theories" with absolutly NO proof, then my theory that Thomas the Train is the creator of all winds on the planet.

Religion and any "theories" religion has, should be taught in church. Any and all sciences that the modern age has given us, should be taught in schools. Neither can mix peacefully. This is why our country's founding Fathers created the separation of Church and State. Trying to mix the two is against our beloved Constitution.

I also agree with many here that say that parents should also be teaching their children. Also if they want any religious text or any "theory" that comes from any religious text taught to their children, then put them into a school that teaches such, don't try and make the rest of the U.S. teach it to their children as well. Take responsibility for your own kids, stop asking the Government to. Just my two cents.

Oh, and P.S.

Ned, you sure know how to pick them. I enjoy all your postings. Keep up the good work.

I guess most of the people posting here are not well educated even by American High School standards.

The rush to judgement about evolution and the abrogation of personal responsibility to an all powerful supernatural being would be quite funny if it were not so serious.

Hey, GOD gave me a brain and He expects me to use it! I can and do think scientifically and my thoughts evolve over time.

JUST LIKE THE PLANTS AND ANIMALS HERE ON EARTH AND PROBABLY ELSEWHERE IN THIS VAST UNIVERSE. JUST AS THE UNIVERSE ITSELF IS EVOLVING.

Evolution is a fact of life, of Physics, Biology and Chemistry and human emotions. Evolution IS change and it is happening all around us and sometimes within us.

Daleri
Re: "People are willingly ignorant!"
Finally an admission of truth!

Daleri
Re: "Taxpayer schools should not be teaching imagination as fact."
That is why they are doing exactly what they are doing.

ALL:
If we were created in gods image we would all be perfect in every way. Fact is we are all imperfect in every way, some worse than others.

Andy Clark, you have it entirely wrong and THAT is why there is ANY debate. EVOLUTION IS NOT A THEORY! That is the point of the whole article. It is as valid as geology, as astronomy, as anthropology and any other study. WHY it happens is where the theory lies, but evolution is a fact - no arguments, no debate, no questions: it happen as surely as respiration does in living human beings. Until people stop thinking of evolution as a theory (perpetuated by the term "theory of evolution" such as Darwinism or survival of the fittest, mutation, adaptation, etc, which explains WHY it happens, not questioning THAT it happens.) this debate will continue to be perpetuated by the ignorant and those to whom the fact of evolution goes against their religious dogma. Get it right, please, and stop perpetuating the debate by calling into question the fact of evolution and concentrate on why it happens - which is where the scientific study looks.

fatesrider
Re: "WHY it happens is where the theory lies,"
It's gonna come back and bite you.
>>WHY it happens is where the theory is pertinant,>...theory applies<< would have been a better choice of words.
This mindset takes EVERY WORD at face value regardless of connotation.
Good Luck

How do you know there were no "fire breathing dragons"? Are you sure there was no such thing even though many ancient legends speak of them. The Bible is not the only record of fire breathing dragons.

Daleri: Are you familiar with the word "fiction?" Writing something down doesn't make it a fact.

I read the Taylor County resolution this morning. Good grief, they don't know the difference between evolution and the big bang. Their school board needs to go back to school.

Keep religion out of public school curricula. Fundamentalists would have us back in the dark ages. They want to distort science to make it support their dogma. Faith does NOT require confirmation. Religion is for the individual and belongs in church/mosques/synagogues. Facts and science belong in public schools. I'm so sick of fundamentalists around the world screwing up everything. Put a lid on them or the world will continue to spiral downwards.

There's another aspect to all this. That is that this country is now home to many more philosophies than just the Judeo-Christian philosophy. We have so many different religions represented in this nation that it's ludicrous to teach only a single representation of Why Things Are The Way They Are. Even as a card-carrying atheist I can see that it's truly necessary to separate church and state. As our nation grows in population and diversity, it also needs to grow up and understand that the Christian philosophy isn't the only fish in the sea.

Read about the Hardy-Weinberg Principle, math and logic in support of evolution.

Daleri - Maybe there were fire-breathing dragons. Maybe there weren't. But your point was that these vague descriptions were DEFINITELY dinosaurs, which proved that dinosaurs and humans co-existed, which somehow "proved" that evolution was false. I was just pointing out that such logic was obviously silly.

@jock59801, doesn't rebuttal of such an argument lend credence to it?

Dr. Carl Baugh has proven that man walked with the dinosaurs. Their footprints are on the same strata. The geologic column is a fraud as many petrified trees are found vertical penetrating so called millions of years of strata. Evolution is proven to be incorrect but still being an open minded person, I don't mind if it is taught as a theory. Religious fanatics on the other hand can't stand it if Creation is taught as well. Who then is the religious nut cases? Christians or Evolutionists?

You know nothing of science. A fact must be observable and replicate-able. Since the so called big bang and so called evolution are neither they both must be relegated to nothing more than theory. To elevate these to fact is to admit that science has no part in them and that in fact their promotion is due to Religious Zealotry. Are you and people like you admitting that you are part of a new Priesthood of Inquisition? Perhaps you would prefer to put us Christians to death for not agreeing with you... The Popes tried that a long time ago, but then they were not Christians either.

DR - I love it! You claim that someone proved that man walked with dinosaurs because their footprints are on the same strata (although pictures of this are mysteriously unavailable), and then you claim that geological strata are a fraud! Well, which is it?

DR, I'm sorry. I had not realized the depth of your fear. I can assure you that no one wants to put you to death or hurt you even a little bit. We don't even care if you agree with us. We just want our children to be taught science in science class. Really. That's all it is. No one has to get hurt. No one has to have their values questioned. Parents can teach their children all about their faith. Just keep it out of our kid's science classes. Is that so much to ask?

Dr.: “nothing more than theory” tells us that you’re unfamiliar with the meaning of the word “theory” when used in a scientific context. I’m well acquainted with science. You, however, obviously are not. As for your “sidebar” about putting people to death – huh? Where the heck is THAT coming from?

My statement just underscores the reality that Evolutionists have no interest in science or open mindedness as your bizarre responses indicate. Religious fanatics manifest themselves in a variety of manias. Evolutionists within their religious zeal attempt to pass a theory as fact and then cry foul when open minded people would want to present Creation in the classroom as well.

If Evolutionist Priests are successful in presenting theory as fact to the exclusion of all open minded thinking then a slippery slope is indeed well established. Your criticism of my statement not only is indicative of your lack of the knowledge of true science but your lack of the knowledge of history as well.

It is obvious that you do not understand what a theory is. The Theory of Evolution is just that: a theory; neither proven nor disproved, There exists a great body of factual evidence to support the validity of the theory and much of practical benefit has ensued. However, like a lot of other theories that have major practical use it has not yet become a fact in its own right.

The debate - if it may be called that - exists because some people are unwilling or incapable of thinking for themselves. These people are either lazy or dumb and quite willing to be led by the priests and shamans of the world each exercising a personal agenda involving money and power. They are scared by and of the truth - whatever it may be.

Jock: you did not read my post...

I said that the geologic COLUMN is a fraud as the strata presupposed to have taken millions of years to deposit are indeed proved to have been deposited in a matter of hours as the upright fossilized trees prove.

This is the problem with evolutionary religious zealots... nothing that is said in contradiction is considered seriously it is only held up to mockery.

By the way there is a plethora of substantiating data extant at the increasing numbers of creation science museums in this country.

LOL ... we really need to find a way to accelerate evolution. How do religuos people get up in the morning??

(LOL ... we really need to find a way to accelerate evolution. How do religuos people get up in the morning??)

Boy. you got me there... personally I hate religion as it invariably involves people getting hurt. (just history)...

Dr wrote: " I said that the geologic COLUMN is a fraud as the strata presupposed to have taken millions of years to deposit are indeed proved to have been deposited in a matter of hours as the upright fossilized trees prove."

Nonsense. The upright fossilized trees are invariable found in areas that are known to have formed from swamps which clearly deposit sediment much faster than other places.

"This is the problem with evolutionary religious zealots... nothing that is said in contradiction is considered seriously it is only held up to mockery."

Pot calling the kettle black. Your "vertical trees" argument was shot down years ago yet here you are continuing to repeat it.

The "creationist museum" is the true joke. Darn near every "evidence" they present boils down to "because we say so".

The "creationist museum" is the true joke. Darn near every "evidence" they present boils down to "because we say so"

..You obviously did not look at it, or the evidence... I am not surprised...

The basic argument stands that if one is a true scientist one cannot state a theory as fact without being a scientific prostitute. Evolution is a theory and has to remain as such as it is not observable nor replicate-able.

If one wishes to state that evolution is fact then that person becomes no more than a religious zealot. And as i have stated, religion ultimately hurts people.

"..You obviously did not look at it, or the evidence... I am not surprised..."

I read it in great detail. YOU are the one who obviously glossed over everything because they were saying what you wanted to hear. Just like you glossed over the utter demolition of the old geological column argument that has been around for years but which you were mindlessly repeating today.

Name ONE piece of evidence from said museum that is NOT "because our side say so"

"The basic argument stands that if one is a true scientist one cannot state a theory as fact without being a scientific prostitute."

Again, another "because I say so" argument. Evolution is both a theory AND a fact. Natural selection has been OBSERVED. That makes it a fact.

Something that is established and confirmed by two or three witnesses other than the Bible, which also speaks of a fire breathing dinosaur, is proof that it is not fiction as many people assume. The far east has no Bible history but it does speak of fire breathing dragons the same as the Bible. There are beetles that to this day light on fire. I have a friend that said he has seen a tarantula do the same (I don't know if it was tarantula or a beetle that he saw). If we never saw such a thing, it is hard for us to believe it until we do see it. The same goes for electric eels. I have been shocked by one of them. ...and then there are lightning bugs. If we never saw them, it would be hard to believe they existed. These are all things that speak of the power and nature of God, including the dinosaurs!

OK, I take it back. Not "all" of the museum's "evidence" is "because we say so". A significant amount of it is appeal to ignorance fallacies (in other words, "we don't know either way, therefore creationists win").

"There are beetles that to this day light on fire."

Dragons are reptiles. Beetles are insects.

And where is your proof of these animals? Oh, thats right...

"I have a friend that said he has seen a tarantula do the same"

My friend said so. That doesn't constitute evidence anywhere besides the playground. Thank you for demonstrating the utterly low level of intelligence of the typical creationist.

"I don't know if it was tarantula or a beetle that he saw"

So he can't tell the difference between a spider and a beetle and yet you expect us to take his word of a bug on fire? ROTFLMAO.

"The same goes for electric eels."

Electricity and fire are two different things. Again, you only demonstrate what an ignoramus you are.

"and then there are lightning bugs."

Which is NOT FIRE.

Creationism isn't science, it's religion, no matter how you spin it. There is NO evidence that a supernatural being created the universe and no evidence that a supernatural being created life - on this planet or on any other. Do you holler just as loud about gravitationists or relativists?

As for the "evidence" from the creationist "museum":
"The Burdick Print (or Burdick Track) is claimed by some creationists to be a "giant man track" from Glen Rose, Texas. However, it is one of several prints on loose blocks of rock which show strong evidence of a carved origin, and is acknowledged by Glen Rose residents to be one of the carvings made by George Adams in the 1930's. It shows serious anatomic errors as well as subsurface features which truncate at the print's surface, confirming it's carved origin. Furthermore, the orientation of algal fossils in the rock suggests that the original "up" direction was the side opposite the alleged footprint. In other words, evidently the carver unwittingly created the print on what was originally the bottom side of the rock."
This was proven to be false nearly 80 years ago, yet this place is still passing it off as legitimate. This guy probably moonlighted making Bigfoot tracks. But how nice of them to offer replicas for sale - along with replicas of every other phony piece of evidence.

Daleri: Every culture on the planet has mythology regarding nonexistent animals. There are rock paintings of many of these animals, which is proof of two things: 1. Someone conceived of their image, and 2. Someone drew that image. It does NOT prove they existed. I think it very likely that the references in the bible to a behemoth and a leviathan are the results of someone finding some large bones – dinosaur, or mega-mammal – and imagining an animal to fill in the blanks.

The Fire Beetle exhibits bioluminescence, it doesn’t actually burn. There are many creatures that exhibit this trait – but not any of the higher animals such as reptiles, birds, or mammals do. Lots of fish do – especially those that live very deep underwater. Bioluminescence is a chemical reaction which evolved for a number of reasons – communication, defense against predators, and attracting or finding prey.

"Evolutionary Theory" is an enormous collection of scientitific facts united by well-tested biological mechanisms. Evolution itself has been observed many times in the modern world, and its trail of evidence in the fossil record is both profuse and obvious. If anyone wants to understand the science of evolution, you may want to start with the National Academy of Sciences report that Ned pointed out to us last week: http://blogs.abcnews.com/scienceandsociety/2008/01/evolution-overw.html

Creation is an historical account. Luminescence is one thing. The following is another thing altogether:"The bombardier beetle is a small insect that is armed with a shockingly impressive defense system. Whenever threatened by an enemy attack, this spirited little beetle blasts irritating and odious gases, which are at 212 degrees F. out from two tail pipes right into the unfortunate face of the would be aggressor.
"Dr. Wermann Schildknecht, a German chemist, studied the bombardier beetle to find out how he accomplishes this impressive chemical feat. He learned that the beetle makes his explosive by mixing together two very dangerous chemicals (hydroquinone and hydrogen peroxide). In addition to these two chemicals, this clever little beetle adds another type of chemical known as an inhibitor. The inhibitor prevents the chemicals from blowing up and enables the beetle to store the chemicals indefinitely. With so many independently confirmed accounts of so many stories of a fire breathing dragon, it is something worth considering. If I didn't see a frog hop on water and a snake with useless legs with my own eyes, I would find it hard to believe, like my friends account of a tarantula that runs away with its abdomen lighting up as it runs. I questioned him several times and he was adamate about what he saw.

... and the descriptions of the dinosaurs in the Bible are not vague at all. Read them for yourself. They are very descriptive.

Why is it that you only question the account of creatures that you are unfamiliar with and have never seen? Many other animals that we know of are described there as well and we don't question those accounts because they exist to this day!

Correction: What actually happens is this: Secretory cells produce a mixture of hydroquinones and hydrogen peroxide (and perhaps other chemicals), which collects in a reservoir. To produce the blast, the beetle releases some of this mixture into a reaction chamber, where catalases and peroxidases (peroxides?) cause the mixture to oxidize in chemical reactions that generate enough heat to vaporize about a fifth of the mixture. The pressure of the released gasses causes the heated mixture to be expelled explosively from the beetle's abdomen. ... -- That is what is going on from an unbeliever's point of view. There are still mini explosions going on that can severely injure the beetle's attacker.

So, Daleri expects us to believe that creation is a historical account. I suspect he/she means creationism or intelligent design or some other such twaddle. The biblical account of creation is just a tale. Granted a tale from long ago when mankind had little understanding of the natural world or his place in it. If I take it literally then I also have to believe that there really are fairies at the bottom of my garden!

Frankly, I am fed up with people and organizations that continually ask to confuse reality with faith.

Reality requires facts and truth.

Faith requires neither.

Science is reality; it is exploration and a constant search for ideas, facts and truth. Ideas (theories) are tested and discarded if they fail. In the process many facts and facets of truth emerge to strengthen the case for or against any given idea.

Now, there is no similar crucible of truth for faith, one is asked to; "just believe". If you believe, then fine, you have faith; if not then you are an outcast, not of the body, a sinner, an infidel etc etc. Around this faith is then erected a belief structure that seeks to both reinforce the faith and undermine the non-believer, Then we get ideas like creationism etc springing up, supported by their grossly distorted view of society and the science that serves it.

These distortions seem to stem from fear of the unknown and gross ignorance on the part of the faithful. It is easier to let someone else do their thinking for them.

I wonder indeed what they would make of Russell's Teapot Conjecture. It is an analog of religious faith and beautifully illustrates the futility of such endeavours.

Daleri: I had never heard of this insect before - very interesting. Why is this evidence of a supernatural being, or a fire-breathing dragon? There are also "accounts" of unicorns, mermaids, elves, fairies, trolls, and leprechauns. Do you believe they also existed?

The bible is scientifically unverifiable. A scientific theory must be able to be challenged. Someone who simply says "it's true because I know it's true" is not talking about a scientific theory, but rather a religious belief.

I believe your friend was mistaken, as was my friend who insisted the lizard in her back yard was a gecko, despite the fact that she described a green anole to me.

Why is it that you only question the account of creatures that you are unfamiliar with and have never seen? Many other animals that we know of are described there as well and we don't question those accounts because they exist to this day!

Daleri: I'm not sure if you're addressing me, but i'll take a stab at this. I question the account of the existence of dinosaurs in the bible because science has shown that they died out 65 million years ago. Why do you think that if someone writes a description of an animal, they must have seen it in real life? Do you believe that human beings 5-6k years ago didn't have any imaginations? They were painting mythical creatures on rocks 30,000 years ago.

... and the descriptions of the dinosaurs in the Bible are not vague at all. Read them for yourself. They are very descriptive.

Daleri: I've read them. the descriptions are nothing that couldn't have been inferred from bones or fossils. And the accounts are certainly more exciting than "we found some big bones and didn't know what they came from."

Keep the nonsensical hypothesis of the existence of God out of our schools.

It's not even a theory.

Dr.
I strongly feel that you are not aware of the difference between Hypothesis, Theory, Law and Fact. This discussion has carried over from prior posts in Evolution: the Pushback" and in Evolution: "Overwhelming and Compelling" (links at top left of this page) I suggest that you read the posts in these two blogs so we don't have to repeat ourselves.

...and on the ninth day, God created unicorns, sprites, minotaurs, and mermaids. Bad day at the office.

I don't think that even Jesus would forgive some of the incredibly stupid anti-evolutionists on this forum. I have a feeling that there will be tomatoes thrown at you from inside the gates of heaven from God himself, who developed an amazing and delecate process by which things evolve. Ignoring His work is to ignore His grace.---- DUH.

It is simply embarrassing to have this argument. Every other advanced country in the world is laughing at us right now. No wonder the US is on the decline, we are reverting instead of progressing. Religion and public education don't mix. Religious fundamentalists need to put a lid on it.

Christian faith relies on 2000 year-old documents believed to be true. Let's not forget that people have been tortured and/or expelled from the church for telling that the earth is not flat or that it revolves around the sun. Most rules of any faith reflect the knowledge of their time.

Hector Art, if it makes you feel any better, it's just the South we're laughing about ;)

Then again, it's not so funny to laugh when said country has a nuclear arsenal and an increasing amount of fundamentalists with a vote

Eurotrash
Now THAT is a truely frightening thought.

Many so called myths were later found to be true. The coelacanth was supposed to be dead may millions of years ago until it was found to be a living fish. The Komodo dragon is also still living. Seeing many of the fish of the Amazon is like a trip back in time. There are female manatees that look like they have a woman's breast. (You wouldn’t believe it unless you have seen it) There are rhinos that when described could turn out to be horses with a horn. Just don’t confuse pagan fears with biblical truth. Celtic myths are pagan. As a matter of fact, if it wasn’t for biblical teaching, there would have been no reformation, no industrial revolution and so on because we would all still be pagan tribes beating each other over the head.

Wait a minute. "coelacanth was supposed to be dead may millions of years ago until it was found to be a living fish" Millions of years? So you acknowledge that the earth is 4.5 billion years old?

"Name ONE piece of evidence from said museum that is NOT "because our side say so"

So SERVO: you did not see the pictures of the human / dinosaur footprints? Nothing was "i said so" your tenor is emotional which is not unexpected as you seem to need to defend your religion at all costs even if logic is thrown out the window.

The public school system must not teach any theory as fact as it then becomes more like a socialist propagandist machine rather than a learning environment.

The religious priests of this silly theory have attacked students for writing about Jesus in compliance with assignments. See ACLJ. The American Center for Law and Justice has had to sue the public "learning" institutions on a regular basis for violating 1st amendment rights and quashing any challenges of the theory of evolution. It is also interesting to note that the Nativity scene and Christmas music is not allowed in "learning" public schools, but my niece mentioned that seances and mention and study of demons is permitted and encouraged during halloween. How consistent.

For those who are reading this please keep in mind that you will notice one theme recurrent. No matter what logic is presented the Priests of evolution when backed in the corner will invariably lash out with accusations and insults. You will notice here that uses of the word "stupid" and other insults were made. It is this religious rage that exposes evolutionists / atheists as not being believable or honest.

Frankly, because I am honest, i have no problem with evolution being taught in schools as long as it is presented honestly as a theory, and other theories such as Creation or Intelligent Design should also honestly and openly be taught, permitted and discussed in a non hostile manner.

The Bible speaks of physical things together with their spiritual implications. It cannot be understood without the spiritual implications. For that we need the Holy Spirit to teach us all things. If you read the account carefully, it says later on that the plants had not yet sprouted.

What do we call a browser? We call it a window through which we access the internt. What is so wrong with saying the windows (or the clear shields) of heaven were opened?

Why do you insist on knocking the Bible when you can't even explain how dinosaurs got there???!!!

Dr.: "you did not see the pictures of the human / dinosaur footprints?" These "footprints" have been proven to be false.

"Many creationists once claimed that fossilized human footprints or "man tracks" occurred alongside dinosaur tracks in Paluxy Riverbed near Glen Rose, Texas, supposedly refuting evolution and the standard geologic timetable. However, careful investigations of the Paluxy evidence in recent years have shown that the alleged human prints involved a variety of misidentified phenomena, including metatarsal dinosaur tracks, erosional markings, and a smaller number of doctored and carved specimens--most of the latter on loose blocks of rock (Cole and Godfrey 1985; Kuban 1986a, 1986b, 1986c, 1989; Hastings 1987, 1988; Strahler, 1989)."

Ie - your "evidence" has been proven to be phony.

And you still either don't understand what a scientific theory is, or you simply choose to ignore it. Your conclusions are invalid. Creationism is based on religious beliefs, not science. And please, your referring to those of who adhere to science as "evolutionist priests." This is clearly intended to be an insult, so you might as well knock off the "poor me" song and dance.

Daleri
Issues without proofs are actually non-issues. Science offers proofs but some simply refuse to accept them. I for one, have taken a careful look at these proofs of creationism and have actually seen no proof at all, only misconceptions, falsehoods and forgeries. I also look at the evidence from science and while I do see mis-interpretations and occasionally a falsehood I also see scientific rebuttal and corrections. THAT is why the term "Theory of Evolution" is used. That evolution happens was proven by Darwin using observation and logic, albeit their are some errors in his works due to a lack of technology. The theory is all about HOW evolution occurs, not IF. And theories evolve as more is discovered, dogmatic faith can not evolve, it is anchored in thousands of years of ignorance. This is why Catholics and many other christian faiths have accepted evolution, they recognize that the reason that evolution is not part of scripture is because it was beyond the scope of the early authors of said scripture as well as the recipiants of said scripture.

Why do you insist on knocking the Bible when you can't even explain how dinosaurs got there???!!!

Daleri: Dinosaurs weren't there, and there is no evidence that they were. There is a great deal of evidence, however, that they lived many millions of years ago, and went extinct after a comet struck the earth ~65 mya. there is also a great deal of evidence that H. sapiens is descended from a hominid that lived in Africa ~ 5 mya. No, scientists don't have a "big book of science" to refer to. We look at actual physical evidence - something with which you are unacquainted.

Correction - "albeit their" was meant to be "albeit there". Sorry.

The proof is right there in front of your eyes if you would just read it. That is a much greater proof because they saw and described the dinosaurs for us to even know what their nature was like. The so called scientist's gibberish or anything else for that matter means nothing at all.

How could the dinosaurs have been extinct if they were seen and described in detail no more than 5000 years ago???!!!

Re: "How could the dinosaurs have been extinct if they were seen and described in detail no more than 5000 years ago???!!!
How do you think that I can describe a dinosaur having noever seen one? Your argument is nonsense.

Your descriptions of dinosaurs are not nearly as descriptive as those of the Bible because none of you have ever described any of their nature (the way they are and the way they act.) You can't do that with bones. The Bible can and did because they were living dinosaurs that were being described! If you are not willing to accept it, there is nothing that I can do for you because it is fact that is as clear as day.

We know a lot about the lifestyle of Dinosaurs: How they cared for their young, what they ate, how fast they grew, what protiens were in thier DNA, what their climate was like. What we don't know is what color(s) they might have been. Do you know what color the skin of T.rex was? Do you know what color the feathers were on Archaeopteryx? This we would all like to know but so far have not been able to ascertain.

Ed, we cannot have a discussion if you do not respond to the issue of the nature of the dinosaurs that were described. The nature is not only what they looked like but how they acted. This is impossible without having a living dinosaur. You are not being very scientific. You cannot respond to it because you have nothing to say and that is how much say you sho