Science and Society

You know, it's almost to the point where it's a bigger waste of time arguing over it than actually looking at it in a scientific viewpoint. There will always be religion, and there will always be science. The two are always going to fight over who's right and who's wrong. Hell, I'm sure there'll be wars over it in the future. So for now, my mind is made up. I know that evolution happens and is going to continue to happen. Untill someone from the I.D. side can show the exact same amount of plausible evidence, not just a few things, and spout that God did it as evidence, I'll continue to believe this. I'll also continue to believe in God as well, I can do that and know that evolution without fear that my belief system is going to come crashing down around me. I evolve, I adapt my belief system around what science tells me. Now, I'll leave you with the greatest religious quote I've ever heard. "Religious wars are nothing more than two people fighting over who's imaginary friend is better." And with that, let the argueing begin!

we are still a free country and people are allowed to voice politically incorrect views specially when they upset communists and godless academics.

If people understood both science AND faith, as complementary views, then we would not have Intelligent Design creationists pushing their blinkered views. I went to a promo for "Expelled" at a local church ... and they weren't peddling truth. But if it makes a few bucks to bash rational science, then they'll fit right in with the anti-science Bush acolytes.

There is really no contest on who is trying to "expel" intelligence. Science is a completely open process. The ID proponents can't compete in that open process, not because they are discriminated against, but because they are simply wrong.

"Anti-Darwinist" film?

Well, Ned, I can see you're buying into the rhetoric of Ben Stein and company.

Biologists don't call themselves "Darwinists." That's the name the godder lobby came up with to bash science and scientists, naming them as if they're just another dubious faith-based evidence-free religious sect.

If you're going to call it anything, call it "anti-science." Or maybe anti-reason, anti-intellect, or anti-science-education.

Hank Fox,
You are right of course, but to be fair, the film itself probably calls itself "Anti-Darwinist," so that may be why Ned chose the term. THEY certainly think they are fighting "Darwinism."

It is actually very interesting. I have heard creationists point out errors in the Origin of Species, thus trying to show that the "bible" of the "Darwinists" is flawed, so the "theory" of evolution must be wrong. They really don't seem to get science at all. How the ongoing process of science is always correcting itself and progressing, and how far we have come since Darwin, who of course was wrong about many things.

I watched the Ben Stein's super trailer and it just about made me cry to think that there still may be people with reason left on this earth. This has got to be the best movie since Schindler's list or something like that.

It's not anti-anything. It's just pro-stupidity.

hi beatruefriend! I'm glad you were moved by it. Religion can certainly move people very profoundly. I think that's great. But science is not based on emotions. Science and religion are both important but need to be kept separate.

Evolutionists have to wake up to the fact that living dinosaurs were documented thousands of years ago in more ways than one. This means that evolution needs to go the way of the dinosaurs.

It was truth of Science that moved me coming out of the mouths of human beings.

I find scientific 'reason' hardest to believe in the fact that no man has ever lived over a thousand years to actually see with his own eyes how much the world would change in that time period. But then I have these educated people trying to convince me about what the world was like MILLIONS of years ago. Anyone could make a pretty cool story, but no one can actually comprehend it, no matter how educated youu are.

You're right, PQQAm. There is documentation of living dinosaurs all over the place. They're called birds.

I've heard many, many arguments citing documentation of dinosaurs living with man (usually it's the Bible, itself), and it's never failed to be question-begging. You can't attribute evidence in a such a tenuous manner and then argue that you have evidence. That's not how science works.

Jon L. - Of course we can't know exactly what it was like millions of years ago, but there was quite a bit of evidence left behind in the rocks that we can piece together fairly well. Combine that with observations of the modern world, where scientists have actually watched and measured evolution happening at rates every bit as fast as it would have to to explain the fossil record. All of the evidence actually comes together quite well.

Five hundred years ago, religion was arguing for the earth being the center of the univers. Now we look back at that concept as ridiculous.

So I would imagine that in five hundred years, historians will look at Ben Stein as an idiot. Some of us do now....

Earth being the center of the universe is one thing, evolution is another thing altogether. One issue at a time. Evolution ...is the only thing that you have to hold on to and you all are losing your grip!

The dinosaurs described in the Bible and other places are historical documentations. Yes, this is evidence and it is the only history that we have.

Whenever anyone finds a dinosaur bone, they have found a confirmation of what the Bible has been saying for thousands of years.

PQQAm - Well, there were thousands od species of dinosaurs, and most of them were quite small. And none of them breathed fire. So there was a few points the Bible seems to have missed. Which is understandable; the Bible was not intended as a scientific document.

PQQAm: You apparently did not get the memo from the ID people who falsely try to disavow themselves from biblical creationists.

We can figure out later if it was just ID or a biblical creation. You don't know what the dinosaurs did or did not do because no one was there to see them ...except the people that saw them 4000 years ago. They described them for us and the Bible is not the only account of a fire breathing dragon.

Hmmmm ... give us a passage from the Bible on that one.

PQQAm - Yes, legends of fire-breathing dragons are older than the Bible, and still no one has actually found one. Dinosaurs were not fire-breathing dragons. I'm still not understanding how the Bibles description of a mythical fire-breathing creature somehow proves that evolution didn't happen. There are a few logical steps that seem to be missing there.

Having actually seen, touched, and walked among the fossilized footprints of humans and dinosaurs, interacting with each other, in the same layer of rock, I just can't fathom why anyone still believes in evolution. People would rather hide evidence than face the facts. When "science" requires more blind faith to believe than religion, what good is it? Are we so desparate to not believe in religion that we have to walk around believing something the very rocks of the earth disprove?

Mr Potter, a salient point of the incident is the fact that Dr Myers is actually IN this film. He is thanked in the ending credits. In spite of that, the producer kicked him out. And he's not the only person who appears in the film that hasn't been allowed to see it; Eugene Scott (sorry if I spelled her name wrong) was also interviewed for the film and has been blocked from seeing it. What is the producer afraid of? And how does his behavior square with your experience?

INFORMATION YOU WON'T HEAR IN THE MEDIA ABOUT RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM.
POLITICAL FUNDAMENTALISM HAS KILLED BILLIONS MORE THAN RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM EVER DID.
POLITICAL FUNDAMENTALISM HAS JAILED AND MAIMED AND DESTROYED THE LIVES OF BILLIONS MORE THAN RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM EVER DID.
IT'S POLITICAL FUNDAMENTALISM THAT WE NEED TO KEEP IN CHECK AS RELIGION IN GENERAL IS FUNDAMENTALLY GOOD IN NATURE AND INTENT.

The other dinosaur that was described was a sauropod. Put the two together and you have evidence that cannot be refuted because the other other one was a Spinosaurus otherwise known as "the dragon". You don't know that the dragon did not breathe fire because no one today has seen it. So no one today can say one way or another but the people that described it can say that it breathed fire.

No, political fundamentalism (whatever that is) has not killed "billions" more than religious fundamentalism. Nothing has killed billions, yet. But, give the religious people some more time, they are working on it.

Robert

Did you take pictures? If such evidence existed, where is it? Anyone who could prove what you say could easily get it published in any scientific journal and would be instantly famous. Yet this hasn't happened. Why not? And I don't mean "prove" it to other creationists. I mean show us all, if it is so obvious. I keep hearing about these footprints and I'm really curious, but for some reason I can't find any pictures, anywhere. And you wonder why we don't believe you?

That is what this film is about. It is a cover-up and a conspiracy. The so called scientists more than likely throw out any human remains that they find together with dinosaurs.

If Intelligent Design is a legitimate scientific hypothesis, let alone a full blown theory, where is the objective evidence from a single repeatable and verifiable experiment that proves even one of the NECESSARY assumptions upon which ID relies? There is no objective data from repeatable and verifiable experiments because ID as most proponents push it relies entirely upon circular logic and unprovable assumptions.

* Assumption - A supreme intelligent designer must necessarily exist.
** So, where is the objective experimental data that proves this supreme intelligent designer exists?

* Assumption - The supreme intelligent designer that must necessarily exist, also must necessarily be the Judeo Christian God of the Bible.
** So, Where is the objective experimental data that proves the Judeo Christian God of the Bible exists?
** Or, where is the objective experimental data that proves the Judeo Christian God of the Bible is the one and only intelligent designer?
** Or,where is the objective data that proves the intelligent designer wasn't Jupiter, Zeus, Buddha, Odin, Zoraster, etc. etc.?
** Also, where is the objective data that proves the creation stories from every other religious tradition is wrong?

* Assumption - It is impossible for random uncontrolled events, even if given billions of years, to evlove more complex life from less complex.
** Where is the objective data that proves more complex life CANNOT EVER evolve from less complex life?

* Assumption - There is one, and only one, supreme intelligent designer.
** Where is the objective experimental data that proves there was one designer and not multiple designers?
*** Maybe plants, mammals, fish, insects, etc. etc. had separate designers. Or each specific plant, animal, and insect had its own designer, meaning there was one designer each for lions, and tigers, and bears - oh my, etc. etc.
*** Maybe each complex system had its own designer, and then different designers combined the systems in different ways to make different life forms. In other words, maybe muscular systems, and nervous systems, and digestive systems, etc. etc., had their own designers, and then a different group of designers designed different life forms from those systems.
*** In other words, maybe one group of designer designed the pieces of the puzzles, and then different designers put the pieces together in as many different ways as they could think of.

* Assumption - Only a supreme intelligent designer, i.e. one that is omnipotent and omniscient, is intelligent enough to design all of the life we see.
** Where is the objective data that proves a being, or beings, of lesser or non-omniscient intelligence could not possibly have designed any or all of the life on this planet?
*** Maybe a prehistoric but extinct race of people used eugenics and genetic engineering programs to design the life we now see.
*** Maybe a prehistoric but extinct race of people cracked the unified field theory and built machines able to change and manipulate matter and energy at will. Then, instead of using low tech eugenics and genetic engineering, they just had the high tech machines design and create the life we see now.
*** Or, maybe highly advanced aliens came here and did it with either of those two methods.

Now for the big irony. I actually belive in ID, and I believe it should be taught in schools - but only in authentic philosphy classes and religion classes; not science classes because ID is not science. At best ID is a religious hypothesis or religious theory.

Also, my version of ID is unacceptable to every ID proponent I have ever met. I believe that God chose to design evolution as His process for developing and changing life. I believe evolution is the process God designed for us to eventually evolve toward complete understanding and eventual union with Him. And I am intellecually honest enough to admit that I can't prove it.

It's not just the theory of evolution that the fundamentalists are denying, I actually saw a comment in another blog that denied Einstein's theories on Relativity. They deny anything that they simply can not comprehend, it's absolutely incredible.

Scientists have barely tapped in to 3% of universal workings. There are so many unexplainables in the life which we live, along with the life that we don't know about. People think they have the answer to everything or will someday find the answer, which, yes, have helped us acquire knowledge and wonderful aids for the life of which we live. However, no matter how much people keep pushing and pushing, they will never even begin to comprehend how much they will never ever know. The reason for the word mystery is because of the meaning...MYSTERY..some things are just not meant to be figured out! Science and Religion go more hand in hand than anybody can fathom.

M and M
Yes but which religion? Do you want your children to be taught the hindu creation myth as scientific fact? How about the mayan creation myth? If I were allowed to teach evolution I would teach the tibetan creation. Would you like that one? Or how about we only hire teachers that stick to facts.

Science classes are supposed to teach our kids how to use the scientific method of discovery in the world. This methodology requires factual support of any 'theory' put forth. Evolution isn't a theory and ID supports that fact. ID is like Darwinism in that it is a theory of evolution - why evolution happens. But it is a fundamentally flawed theory because it can not be scientifically proven - the initial assertion is flawed because no one has ever provided any direct evidence to support the existence of a supreme being, let alone that it is responsible for anything. Beyond that, the evidence in support of ID is equally flawed and has been refuted without rebuttal. In other words, other scientists have pointed out the flaws in the evidence to support ID and no one on the ID side has come up with any other evidence to support their side.

ID, therefore, provides an excellent example to teach our kids about the dangers of flawed initial assumptions (or hypothesis), flawed evidence, flawed presentation and flawed defense of a theory. There is often a fine line between science and pseudo-science, which the ID'iots are trying to blur. Showing our kids how this kind of thing happens in science is an invaluable lesson for them. It will help hone their critical thinking skills.

In conclusion, to "Political Fundamentalism = The Real Danger", fundamentalism is merely the strict, unyielding adherence to a set of ideals or beliefs.

I think the danger lies in fundamentalism alone, whether religious, political, social or what have you. And regardless of how many deaths one or the other has caused, one is too many. Killed with kindness and good intentions (a hypocrisy at best) is just as dead as killed over political differences. Though you assert that "RELIGION IN GENERAL IS FUNDAMENTALLY GOOD IN NATURE AND INTENT." I argue that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. And religions have a lot of convenient excuses to send a lot of people to hell the hard way.

People are having a real problem facing the issues. Evolution is on its way out because it simply does not explain anything. The issue is that we have too much design to explain away. Another problem is that the historical record that we have of the flood and inconvenient details like descriptions of dinosaurs are also too much to explain away. It is our History. Evolution doesn't explain everything that we see. The historical account of Creation does give reasons for the way things are, not only how things happened by why things happened they way they did. You know the worse thing about it? It all makes a lot of sense.

The "only" evidence that we have is documented historical evidence and the evidence of design. That is quite a lot of evidence if you ask me. It is the only alternative that we have. We can't make things up so we have to go by these evidences that we have.

Spinosaurus is the infamous Sea Serpent or Dragon described both in history and the Bible. Spinosaurus is the only dinosaur that fits the description of Leviathan. I could be wrong theoretically but there is no other creature to date that comes close. This, of course, confirms the historical accounts found in the Bible of such a creature.

There is absolutely NO scientific evidence of any dinosaurs existing after the extinction event 65 million years ago. All claims otherwise by creationists have been totally disproven by science as either outright lies or misinterpetations of the evidence. For example the so called evidence of human footprints next to dinosaurs was shown to be just eroded footprints of another dinosaur that looked similar to a human but were clearly not human. And tales about fire breathing dragons doesn't make that historical evidence. Humans have handed down fairy tales in every culture, that doesn't make it true. No physical evidence exists for these creatures and they are not even practical scientifically anyway. Just because it says in in the bible doesn't make it true. For example its scientifically impossible to live inside a whale for days or get strength from long hair!! The bible is loaded with errors. I will go with science on the history of life on this one.

If everything continues the way we see things happen, that means that these forces or powers are God. We know that this cannot be true because they are merely physical forces and are in no way eternal no matter how much it appears that way to us. Any "laws" that we make should come with the asterisk of *theory* meaning that we don't even have any way of measuring things to be sure they continue the way they appear to us. This way, we won't look so bad if or when our observations are refuted.

It is impossible to have a description of a dinosaur without ever having seen one... then again, God is the One describing them but it was clearly confirmed by the writers. It is two different kinds of dinosaurs BTW plus the sea creature that swallowed Jonah. We really have nothing today that could swallow a person whole but there were sea creatures that could have in the past.

Bah! Humbug! The more you argue with creationists, the more you give them credence. Just pat them on the head and let them spout. As long as the truth and scientific evidence are there, the less the need to argue about it.

Andy,

Amen to that!

oh my gosh - are you all at this ridiculous biblical fire-breathing dragon thing again? Point us to the dragon fossils in Israel please - preferably in close association with the scorched bodies of goat herders. Provide physical evidence that the dragon did the scorching. Then we might take you seriously.

So PQQAm, the fossils we now have in museums couldn't possibly, in any way, have lead the writers of the bible to describe what they thought they would have looked like in the flesh?

For some reason, I get the feeling a lot of the ID community spends a lot of time with their fingers in their ears yelling "la-la-la-la-la".

Fact: The bible is a 2000+ year old book written and EDITED by men. Men who feared the sun would stop coming up if they sinned enough. Men who thought the earth was the absolute center of the universe. Men who thought the glowing orb in the sky revolved around us. Men who had no clue what a "germ" was. Men who though mental illnesses were possessions by demons. Men who though birthmarks were obvious signs of devil worship.

In other words, ridiculous, superstitious, comparative cavemen with no understanding what-so-ever of the world around them.

hopefully, someone out there reads what I've written and becomes aware of the fact that the bible is a good book, it tells us how we should live and that God loves us, but it is just a book of stories, written to fill in the gaps in knowledge and help us become good people of faith. It is not the end-all, beat-all authority on the world around us. Those who try to make it appear as though it is, are foolish at best and, if in a position of power, deadly at worst.

It is impossible to have a description of a dinosaur without ever having seen one... then again, God is the One describing them but it was clearly confirmed by the writers. It is two different kinds of dinosaurs BTW plus the sea creature that swallowed Jonah. We really have nothing today that could swallow a person whole but there were sea creatures that could have in the past.

PQQAm : Baloney. We have descriptions of gnomes, trolls, elves, fairies, leprauchans, unicorns, cyclops, centaurs, gorgons, hydras, krakens, and about a million other mythological creatures. Dinosaur bones have NEVER been found in proximity to human bones or artifacts. NEVER. People have been drawing pictures of imaginary creatures on cave walls for tens of thousands of years. Once a system of writing was developed - they continued to do the same thing. Obviously, they had better imaginations than creationists do.

According to the footnotes in my Bible, the objective theologians and historians believe the Biblical mention of leviathon refers to the crocodile and behemoths were most often the hippopatamus.

From the Catholic Encyclopedia:
"BEHEMOTH, is generally translated by "great beasts"; in its wider signification it includes all mammals living on earth, but in the stricter sense is applied to domesticated quadrupeds at large. However in Job, xl, 10, where it is left untranslated and considered as a proper name, it indicates a particular animal. The description of this animal has long puzzled the commentators. Many of them now admit that it represents the hippopotamus, so well known to the ancient Egyptians ; it might possibly correspond as well to the rhinoceros."

So, according objective rational Bible scholars, behemoths and leviathans ARE NOT DINOSAURS.

Okay Quietman, I went to the website and looked at many of the pictures and read every label looking for the picture with the people tracks. So, where are the pictures of the people footprints the ID'ers and creationists are so excited about? If anyone claims that any of the prints I saw were supposedly made by humans, then they are merely demonstrating how most people (especially ideologues of any flavor or persuasion) only see what they believe rather than believe what they see. The few prints that vaguely had the rough shape of a human foot HAD NO TOES, and so they could have been made by anything.

B K - Yes, Quietman knows that and was just responding to my query, which I appreciated.

You people who are soo religious should try taking some geology classes and see for yourselves that the bible is wrong in many ways.
Don't tell me that you can agree with biology without thinking evolution has some part in it.

I wonder if the moviemakers see the irony when they themselves are doing all the expelling

Try giving a hint of criticism on a fundie forum a la rapture ready and see how fast you get "expelled" there.
This movie seems like a classbook example of religious fundamentalists projecting their own intolerance onto science

I wonder what Ben Stein was thinking. Maybe he saw how easy televangelists were making good money out of the mindless sheep of the midwest and wanted his slice of the pie.

B K
Yes, if you read the articles they rxplain what the tracks really are. Some were even "cleaned up" to look more human. I was letting Jock know which photos were being referenced.

Jock
You might also find the cretaceous "hand print" and cretaceous "hand bones" articles on the same site of interest. I have a rock on my property with 3 of these prints that appears to be carboniferous rock. Of course they are foot impressions but my hands fit nicely except for the thumbs which I can't bend in that direction.

PQQAm: Legitimate scientis require physical evidence. I'm still waiting for you to point to all those dragon bones and charred goatherders.

We can only go with the information that we have. We can't be making up things. ...and please speak to the issues. Don't ignore the facts that we have.

The only idea more outrageous than a universe overseen by God is one that has no God.

I don't see a problem with God and evolution. Why do we try to out-think God? Sure, Satan could have left the bones in the ground to fool us but they are there why should we deny our what our senses tell us? If you believe in the New Testament that Jesus was born, lived, died and was resurrected you are covered! I wouldn't care if there was evidence that Jelly Beans populated the earth before us. Have faith but that doesn't mean you have to deny knowledge and scientific inquiry. The better use of time is what to do with the knowledge we get.

So you all agree that Behemoth is not a hippo and Leviathan is not a crocodile. We are making progress.

PQQAm: The facts are - you have no physical evidence to support your conjecture. Show us the dragon bones associated with human remains.

I showed you a historical account because that is all that we have right now. We have to be responsible with what we have.

Does the description of Leviathan fit the description of a crocodile?

No.

Does the description of Leviathan fit the description of Spinosaurus?

Yes and very much so. It was that old serpentine like dragon that was described on several or many occasions throughout history.

If it fits, you have to consider it.

Do you also question if there was ever a "horse" or an "ostrich" which were also described?

cturple, you want me to show you an "occurrence" that we have no reason to believe ever happened. Since when would Leviathan scorch a human and get buried at that instance? At the time of the flood, everything was running to save itself and Leviathan perhaps did not need a boat although I cannot say for sure if it would have survived that amount of time in the open water. I am quite sure that people pretty much stayed away from leviathan.

The flood lasted a good five months before the water began receding which, again, makes a lot of sense. The mistake people make is not to believe the account of the flood and the other things like descriptions of a sauropod and Spinosaurus otherwise known as that old Serpent, the Dragon.

PQQAm : Scientists have found a number of mammoth remains with spear points embedded in the bones. We have NO dinosaurs anywhere near anything resembling human artifacts, nor do we have human artifacts near anything resembling fire breathing dragons. Show us the physical evidence. Chemical analysis would certainly be able to identify bones charred by organically produced flames. If dinosaurs were alive - the bible would be full of stories about them. Instead, you have a handful of vague references to large animals that can be explained in a number of ways - none of which involve dinosaurs.

And there is no scientific evidence of a global flood. Again - show us some physical evidence.

i just watched the trailer and i have to say, the producers' position in not allowing myers and dawkins into the screening is fantastically hypocritical. in the movie, stein is trying to make this free speech argument and cast opponents to id as intolerant and prohibitive of free and open discourse on the subject (he likens them to nazis, of course, complete with the marching and saluting footage). i can't imagine more ironic situation: keeping ideological opponents from watching (and subsequently commenting on) your movie.
on a separate note, stein has finally immersed himself in enough of his own hubris that he believes he is some sort of messianic rebel, here to teach us all about free speech and god. for shame. he has a serious misunderstanding of scientic method, but what's new with this argument?.

Do you also question if there was ever a "horse" or an "ostrich" which were also described?

PQQAm: um...no - we still have horses and ostriches, and the fossil record is full of evidence of those animals being found in association with human remains. Also dogs, cats, deer, pigeons, raccoons, armadillos, tortoises, giant ground sloths, bears, coyotes, and pigs. no dinosaurs.

There is both physical and historical evidence of a flood but I was speaking of the historical evidence. Everywhere that people went, they took the same story of the same worldwide flood with them. The burden of proof is on you to show me that this abundant historical evidence is not true.

There are references to Leviathan in the Bible. It says that they frolic in the sea.

...and we still have dinosaur remains that fit the descriptions of the creatures that are described in History.

If they ever did find evidence of dinosaurs and humans together, they would likely throw it out the same way they have a habit of throwing out dinosaur skin.

PQQAm: There is NO physical evidence of a global flood. there is NO physical evidence of dinosaurs in association with human beings. The burden of proof is on you to support your claims. Show us the physical evidence of fire-breathing dragons, and then show us evidence that they existed with humans.

If they ever did find evidence of dinosaurs and humans together, they would likely throw it out the same way they have a habit of throwing out dinosaur skin.

PQQAm: "BEIJING, Dec. 4 (Xinhuanet) -- A partially mummied dinosaur was found in North Dakoda with its intact skin tissues, media reports said Tuesday quoting paleontology researchers.

The fossilized dinosaur, dubbed Dakota, may reveal secrets locked away for millions of years, allowing scientists to calculate its muscle volume and reconstruct its musculature in ways previously difficult to do. "..........Don't be ridiculous. Scientists don't throw ANYTHING away. Scientists keep plant pollen.

Cturple,

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Reality and truth scare them and they are immune to reason. They seek solace in a confabulation.

Andy Clark: actually, I think "reason" is their Kryptonite.

Cturple,

Nice one!

Can someone please explain to these people that the Bible does not constitute "historical evidence"?

There are dozens and dozens of creation myths in various cultures around the world. Why do folks think the writings in the Christian bible have any more significance than what Native American medicine men might dream up while tripping on peyote? Who knows, maybe *they* are right.

You can't take a fairy tale (i.e. The Bible), and use it as a starting point and insist that it is infallible and a true historical document, and expect that argument to be persuasive to anybody except those who follow that particular brand of religion.

I grew up a Catholic, and my priest taught that the Old Testament was a collection of parables. He believed that evolution was the tool God used to execute his grand plan. If you want to believe in God and still accept that fact that 2+2=4 and not spend all your time banging your head against scientific reality, then that would seem to be the wisest path of logic to take. Why is it so hard?

It's too bad that people know nothing about how true and accurate the Bible is or they just don't want to admit that what it says is true. There are hundreds of independent confirmations of the same story of the same worldwide flood of Genesis. It is one of the easiest things to verify in all of history because everywhere that people went, they took the story of the flood with them.

If you can come up with more than two hundred accounts of people all over the world that say the flood did not happen, then you have more evidence than I do. I know there is no such evidence already so the account of the Genesis flood is a true account, as in, it really did happen.

Paleontologists couldn't even come up with a description of Spinosaurus or similar that is given us in the Bible. The proof that such a creature existed is the discovery of Spinosaurus bones.

cturple, if you had read the whole article, you would have seen how they used to (or still do) routinely discard dinosaur skin.

Physical evidence that confirms the biblical flood are mountains that have been pushed up where sometimes even shallow oceans used to be, dead animals found in layers, huge earth displacement such as the Grand Canyon, evidence for an expanding earth and I'm sure there is more evidence but if you can't even admit obvious descriptions of two distinct kinds of dinosaurs in the Bible plus the sea creature that swallowed Jonah and if you can't admit the intelligent design of DNA, you likely are not going to believe other evidence either.

People just don't want to face the facts because it requires that we recognize a Creator which also requires personal responsibility for all the things that we say and do.

Dawkins is just fighting a losing battle. His worst fear is that evolution is a bucket, more like a basket, that holds no water and there is nothing else to fall back on. He is holding on to it for dear life hoping against hope that he will not have to face his Creator, you know the one that all the evidence points to.

cturple, if you had read the whole article, you would have seen how they used to (or still do) routinely discard dinosaur skin.

PQQAm: I read the entire article, and I've read a few thousand other articles. Scientists do not discard dinosaur skin.

Archaeologists make use of historical accounts b