Mark Posted March 30, 2005 Group: Members Followers: 0 Topic Count: 0 Topics Per Day: 0 Content Count: 43 Content Per Day: 0.01 Reputation: 0 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/19/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted March 30, 2005 It is based upon pressupositions. Darwinian evolutionist pressupose that blood cells and soft tissue can last millions of years and do not question their hypothesis that these animals are in fact millions of years old. It is sort of like the analogy of the man in the mental ward. He had been committed because he thought he was dead and nothing could convince him that he was dead. Finally one day a doctor got the bright idea to prove to him that he was dead. He asked the man if dead men could bleed. The dead man laughed and said it was impossible. So the doctor pricked him in the finger with a needle. The committed man looked in astonishment, as under his breath he said, "I guess dead men can bleed." <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Great anecdote thanks Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RGR Posted March 30, 2005 Group: Royal Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 512 Topics Per Day: 0.07 Content Count: 8,601 Content Per Day: 1.13 Reputation: 125 Days Won: 2 Joined: 07/16/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/04/1973 Share Posted March 30, 2005 Evolutionists have their entire lives and reputations resting upon Darwin's theory, so most of them are not open to anything other than "evidence" to prove their theory. All evidence which proves contrary to this theory is discarded and ignored. A fine example of this behavior can be found in the work of Dr. George Wald, Nobel Prize winner for Science in 1967. Dr. Wald says the following: "When if comes to the origin of life on this earth, there are only two possibilities: creation or spontaneous generation. There is no third way. Spontaneous generation was disproved 100 years ago, but that leads us only to one other conclusion: That of supernatural creation. We cannot accept that on philosophical grounds; therefore, we choose to believe the impossible: that life arose spontaneously by chance." That's ignorant. A lot/most scientists want to know the truth. While there are always a few bad apples, most scientists are probably not going to ignore something that would destroy evolutionism (namely because it would be revolutionary, maybe for fame too). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> How do you figure that? They've ignored the Bible all of these years! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budman Posted April 1, 2005 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 75 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 407 Content Per Day: 0.06 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 10/09/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted April 1, 2005 That's ignorant A Nobel Prize winner for Science is ignorant. Wow. warm regards -bud Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apothanein kerdos Posted April 1, 2005 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 331 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 8,713 Content Per Day: 1.21 Reputation: 21 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/28/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted April 1, 2005 There are a lot of scientist out there that are searching for truth. Those that are honest do not rest their career on Darwinian evolution because they realize it is a theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts