By Eric Marrapodi, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor
(CNN)– A new video billboard in New York's Times Square has a message from creationists, "To all of our atheist friends: Thank God you're wrong."
The video advertisement at 42nd Street and Eighth Avenue in Manhattan is one of several billboards going up this week in New York, San Francisco and Los Angeles, paid for by Answers in Genesis.
Answers in Genesis is best known as the multimillion-dollar Christian ministry behind the Creation Museum outside Cincinnati.
The museum presents the case for Young Earth creationism, following what it says is a literal interpretation of the book of Genesis, which says the Earth was created by God in six days less than 10,000 years ago.
Ken Ham, president of Answers in Genesis, said the idea for the advertisements came from an atheist billboard in Times Square at Christmas.
During the holidays, the American Atheists put up a billboard with images of Santa Claus and Jesus that read: "Keep the Merry, dump the myth."
“The Bible says to contend for the faith,” Ham said. “We thought we should come up with something that would make a statement in the culture, a bold statement, and direct them to our website.
"We're not against them personally. We're not trying to attack them personally, but we do believe they're wrong," he said.
"From an atheist's perspective, they believe when they die, they cease to exist. And we say 'no, you're not going to cease to exist; you're going to spend eternity with God or without God. And if you're an atheist, you're going to be spending it without God.' "
Dave Silverman, president of the American Atheists, said he felt sad for creationists when he saw the billboards.
"They refuse to look at the real world. They refuse to look at the evidence we have, and they offer none," Silverman said. "They might as well be saying, 'Thank Zeus you're wrong' or 'Thank Thor you're wrong.' "
Silverman said he welcomed another competitor to marketplace, noting that after atheists bought a billboard two years ago in Times Square that read "You KNOW it's a myth," the Catholic League purchased competing space at the entrance to the Lincoln Tunnel for a sign that read "You KNOW it's true."
"I would suggest, if they're actually trying to attract atheists, they should talk about proof and reason to believe in their god, not just some pithy play on words," Silverman said.
Ham says part of the goal of the campaign is to draw people to the website for Answers in Genesis, where he offers a lengthy post on his beliefs for the proof of God.
Ham insists that this campaign is in keeping with their overall mission. "We're a biblical authority ministry. We're really on about the Bible and the Gospel. Now, we do have a specialty in the area of the creation account and Genesis because that's where we say God's word has come under attack."
Ham said Answers in Genesis made the decision to split its marketing budget for the ministry between a regional campaign for the museum and this billboard campaign, rather than a national campaign.
IRS filings for the ministry in recent years have shown a yearly operating budget of more than $25 million. Ham said the marketing budget is about 2% of that, about $500,000 a year. Though they are waiting for all the bills to come due for this campaign, he said he expected it to cost between $150,000 and $200,000.
Silverman noted that his billboards were not video and cost approximately $25,000 last year. He said another campaign was in the works for this year.
"They're throwing down the gauntlet, and we're picking it up," Silverman said, adding that his group would "slap them in the face" with it.
Ham said that despite criticism from other Christians for being negative and the usual criticisms from secularists he received on his social media accounts, the advertisements have been a success.
"We wanted people talking about them, and we wanted discussion about this. We wanted people thinking about God," Ham said.
The Creation Museum and the theory of Young Earth creationism are widely reviled by the broader science community.
In a YouTube video posted last year titled "Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children," Bill Nye the Science Guy slammed creationism, imploring parents not to teach it to their children. "We need scientifically literate voters and taxpayers for the future," he said. "We need engineers that can build stuff and solve problems."
The museum responded with its own video.
For the past 30 years, Gallup Inc. has been tracking American opinions about creationism.
In June 2012, Gallup's latest findings showed that 46% of Americans believed in creationism, 32% believed in evolution guided by God, and 15% believed in atheistic evolution.
For as long as Gallup has conducted the survey, creationism has remained far and away the most popular answer, with 40% to 47% of Americans surveyed saying they believed that God created humans in their present form at one point within the past 10,000 years.
The Creation Museum said it recently welcomed its 2 millionth visitor since its opening in 2007.
Young-earth creationists, of course, are just plain gullible idiots. There just simply isn't a kinder way to convey this. Their most fervent spokespeople, like Ken Ham, reply on alleged expert testimony from people like Andrew Snelling.
Dr. Alex Ritchie wrote about Snelling's activities:
Will the Real Dr Snelling Please Stand Up?
Dr Alex Ritchie, The Skeptic, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp 12-15
Dr Alex Ritchie received his BSc. (Hons) in Geology and a Ph.D at the University of Edinburgh. He worked as a palaeontologist at the Australian Museum from 1968 to 1995 where he is currently a Research Fellow.
For several years, Australian creationists, representing the Creation Science Foundation Ltd, [now Answers in Genesis] have been publishing articles and addressing school and public groups on the topic of the age of the Earth. The theme of these articles and talks is that there is scientific evidence that the geological features of Australia are explicable within the context of an Earth which is only some 6-10,000 years old and that most such features can be attributed to a world-wide flood which occurred more recently still. The author of these claims made them with the authority of a BSc (Hons) in Geology and a PhD. However, in a recently published paper, this same author makes some very different claims about the age of geological features of the Australian landscape.
These remarkably contradictory, and unexplained, claims by one of the very few Australian creation 'scientists' who has genuine scientific qualifications, calls into question whether anything said by this group on the subject can be taken seriously.
Dr Alex Ritchie, palaeontologist at the Australian Museum, takes up the story.
There appear to be two geologists living, working and publishing in Australia under the name of Dr Andrew A Snelling. Both have impressive (and identical) scientific qualifications – a BSc (Hons), in Geology (University of NSW) and a PhD, for research in uranium mineralisation (University of Sydney).
Curiously, both Drs Snelling use the same address (PO Box 302, Sunnybank, Qld, 4109), which they share with an organisation called the Creation Science Foundation (CSF), the coordinating centre for fundamentalist creationism in Australia.
But the really strange thing about this is that the views of these two Drs Snelling, on matters such as the age of the earth and its geological strata, are diametrically opposed. This article, the result of my extensive searches through the literature, highlights this remarkable coincidence and poses some serious questions of credibility for the Creation Science Foundation and for either or both of the Drs Andrew A Snelling.
For convenience I refer to them below as follows:
(a) Dr A A Snelling 1 – creationist geologist, a director of CSF and regular contributor to, and sometime editor of, the CSF's quarterly magazine, Ex Nihilo (now CREATION ex nihilo).
(b) Dr A A Snelling 2 – consulting geologist who works on uranium mineralisation and publishes in refereed scientific journals.
Snelling 1 seldom, if ever, cites articles written by Snelling 2 and Snelling 2 never cites articles written by Snelling 1.
For the past ten years Dr Andrew Snelling BSc, PhD, the CSF's geological spokesman, has been the only prominent Australian creationist with geological qualifications. His credentials are not in question here, only his influence on science education in Australia.
Snelling 1 writes articles for creationist journals and lectures throughout the country in schools, public meetings and churches. Although his geological credentials are usually highlighted in creationist publications it would be more accurate to describe Snelling 1 as a Protestant evangelist, not as a geologist. Some CSF literature openly refers to him as a 'missionary'.
Why should Snelling 1's activities concern the scientific and educational communities? To appreciate this, one needs to analyse his published articles to see how geological data and discoveries are misused and reinterpreted from a Biblical perspective.
CSF members subscribe to a lengthy, very specific Statement of Faith. Apart from purely religious clauses, not relevant here, several clauses carry serious implications for those in scientific and educational circles, especially for those in the Earth (and other historical) sciences. As the extracts below reveal, to a dedicated creationist, scientific evidence is always subservient to Biblical authority.
1. The scientific aspects of creation are important but are secondary in importance to the proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ as Sovereign, Creator and Redeemer.
3. The account of origins presented in Genesis is a simple but factual presentation of actual events and therefore provides a reliable framework for scientific research into the question of the origin and history of life.
5. The great flood of Genesis was an actual historical event, worldwide in its extent and effect.
The following attitudes are held by members of the Board to be either consistent with Scripture or implied by Scripture
(i) The scripture teaches a recent origin for man and for the whole creation.
(ii) The days in Genesis do not correspond to Geological ages, but are six
(6) consecutive twenty-four (24) hour days of creation.
(iii) The Noachian flood was a significant geological event and much (but not all) fossiliferous sediment originated at that time.
(iv) The chronology of secular world history must conform to that of Biblical world history."
These statements reveal 'creation science' to be an oxymoron, a contradiction in terms, based on religious dogma (and a simple minded dogma at that). Despite its name, 'creation science' has little to do with real science and, in fact, represents the antithesis of science.
Everything in his creationist writings and activities indicates that Snelling 1 subscribes fully to CSF's Statement of Faith. Where this clashes with scientific evidence, the latter is always secondary to the former and his message, although often cloaked in scientific jargon, is simple and unequivocal; indeed one of his favourite lecture topics is "Why, as a Geologist, I Believe in Noah's Flood".
From the Gospel according to Snelling 1, the Earth is geologically young, created ex nihilo ("from nothing") by a supernatural being, during a short, well defined construction period of only six days. This miraculous creation event, usually dated some 6000 years ago (around 4004 BC), is not the end of the story. The Earth we live on today is not the same as the original created model, which was almost totally destroyed and remodelled some 1,600 years later (around 2345 BC) by an irate Creator who conjured up an unique, world-wide Flood to do the job.
This Flood, lasting just over one year, tore down all previous land surfaces, rearranged the continents and thrust up all existing mountain chains. It also destroyed all pre-existing life forms, plant and animal – except for a chosen few saved on Noah's Ark. Thus all of the remarkably complex geology of the present day Earth's crust formed during the one year of Noah's Flood and all the innumerable fossil remains of former animals and plants were all buried and preserved by the same Flood.
Snelling 1 (1983a) presented his views on Flood chronology in an article, Creationist Geology: The Precambrian. After reviewing mainstream views on geology and evolution, he remarked:
"On the other hand, creationists interpret the majority of the fossiliferous sedimentary rocks of the Earth's crust as testimony to Noah's flood....Creationists do this because they regard the Genesis record as implying that there was no rain before Noah's flood, therefore no major erosion, and hence no significant sedimentation or fossilisation."
"However the flood was global, erosional and its purpose was destruction. Therefore the first major fossilisation commenced at this time, and the majority of the fossils are regarded as having been formed rapidly during this event. Creationists therefore regard sedimentary strata as needing to be classified into those formed during the time of creation week, pre-flood, flood (early, middle and late), post-flood and recent" (p. 42)
Snelling 1 then quoted one J C Dillow, a creationist writing on the Earth's supposed pre-Flood "vapour canopy":
"It should be obvious that if the Earth is only 6000 years old, then all the geological designations are meaningless within that framework, and it is deceptive to continue to use them. If, as many creationist geologists believe, the majority of the geological column represents flood sediments and post-flood geophysical activity, then the mammoth, dinosaur and all humans existed simultaneously .... Some limited attempts have been made by creationist geologists to reclassify the entire geological column within this framework, but the task is immense." (Dillow 1981, "The Waters Above". Moody Press, 405-6)
Snelling 1 criticised Dillow and other creationists for restricting Flood strata to Phanerozoic rocks (Cambrian and younger) and claimed that most Precambrian rocks are also Flood deposits:
"It is my contention that those who do this have failed to study carefully the evidence for the flood deposition of many Precambrian strata and have therefore unwittingly fallen into the trap of lumping together the Precambrian strata to the creation week. The usual reason for doing this is that the evolutionists regard Precambrian as so different, so devoid of life in comparison with other rocks, that creationists have simply borrowed their description." (1983, 42).
Snelling 1 thus pushes the earliest limits of Flood strata far back into the Early Precambrian (early Archaean) times , before even the first appearance of fossils resembling blue-green algae:
"What I am contending here is that fossils, whether they be microscopic or macroscopic, plant or animal and the fossil counterpart of organic matter, along with its metamorphosed equivalent graphite, are the primary evidence which should distinguish flood rocks from pre-flood rocks, regardless of the evolutionary 'age'." (1983, 45).
Lest there remain any doubt, Snelling 1 (1983, 42) stated:
"For creationists to be consistent the implications are clear; Precambrian sediments containing fossils and organic remains were laid down during Noah's flood. Creationist geologists need to completely abandon the evolutionist's geological column and associated terminology. It is necessary to start again, using the presence of fossils or organic matter as a classification criterion in the task of rebuilding our understanding of geological history within the Biblical framework."
It is difficult to believe that the writer of the foregoing article has a BSc (Hons) and PhD in geology! However an examination of other articles by the same author in Ex Nihilo reveals that, to Snelling 1, everything geological (Ayers Rock, Mt Isa ore deposits, Bass Strait oil and gas, Queensland coal deposits, Great Barrier Reef, etc.,) can be explained as the result of Noah's year-long Flood.
DOOLAN, ROBERT & ANDREW A SNELLING, 1987. Limestone caves ...a result of Noah's Flood? Limestone caves... a result of Noah's Flood? (4), 10-13.
READ, PETER & ANDREW A SNELLING, 1985. How Old is Australia's Great Barrier Reef? Creation Ex Nihilo. 8(1), 6-9.
SNELLING, ANDREW A 1982. The Recent Origin of Bass Strait Oil and Gas. Ex Nihilo 5 (2) 43-46.
SNELLING, ANDREW A 1983. Creationist Geology: The Precambrian. Ex Nihilo 6 (1), 42-46.
SNELLING, ANDREW A 1983. What about Continental Drift? Have the continents really moved apart? Ex Nihilo 6 (2), 14-16.
SNELLING, ANDREW A 1984. The recent, rapid formation of the Mt Isa orebodies during Noah's Flood. Ex Nihilo 6 (3) 40-46 (cf. also abstract 17-18).
SNELLING, ANDREW A 1984. The Origin of Ayers Rock. Creation Ex Nihilo 7 (1).
SNELLING, ANDREW A 1986. Coal Beds and Noah's Flood. Creation Ex Nihilo 8 (3), 20-21.
SNELLING, ANDREW A 1989. Is the Sun Shrinking? Creation Ex Nihilo (pt. 1) 11 (1), 14-19. (pt. 2) 11 (2), 30-34. – The Debate Continues. (pt. 3) 11 (3), 40-43 – The Unresolved Question.
SNELLING, ANDREW A & John Mackay 1984. Coal, Volcanism and Noah's Flood. Ex Nihilo Tech. J. 1, 11-29.
If we now turn to the scientific articles published by the other Dr A A Snelling, consulting geologist (also from PO Box 302, Sunnybank QLD, 4109), we find a remarkable contrast, both in approach and content. None of them mention the Creation or Creation Week, Flood geology or the need to revamp the classic geological timescale.
The latest paper by Snelling 2 (1990, 807 -812) is a detailed technical account of the "Koongarra Uranium Deposits" in the Northern Territory. It appears in an authoritative two volume work on "Geology of the Mineral Deposits of Australia and Papua New Guinea" (ed. F E Hughes), published by the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Melbourne. The references list eight earlier papers by Snelling 2 in refereed journals (or symposium volumes) on aspects of uranium mineralisation; three as sole author and five as junior co-author.
In discussing the regional geology (p. 807) and age (p. 811) of the Koongarra uranium deposits, Snelling 2 describes their geological history in fairly technical terms, however, to avoid the charge we lay against the creationists, of taking quotations out of context, I will quote Snelling 2 verbatim from the paper (p. 807):
"The Archaean basement consists of domes of granitoids and granitic gneisses (the Nanambu Complex), the nearest outcrop being 5 km to the north. Some of the lowermost overlying Proterozoic metasediments were accreted to these domes during amphibolite grade regional metamorphism (5 to 8 kb and 550° to 630° C) at 1870 to 1800 Myr. Multiple isoclinal recumbent folding accompanied metamorphism."
For the benefit of lay readers, this statement is summarised and simplified here:
"The oldest rocks in the Koongarra area, domes of granitoids and granitic gneiss, are of Archaean age (ie to geologists this means they are older than 2500 million years). The Archaean rocks are mantled by Lower Proterozoic (younger than 2500 million years) metasediments: all were later buried deeply, heavily folded and, between 1870 and 1800 million years ago, were subjected to regional metamorphism at considerable temperatures and pressures."
There is no question here of "abandoning the geological column and its associated terminology", and the term Myr refers unequivocally to millions of years.
One further quotation (p.807), "A 150 Myr period of weathering and erosion followed metamorphism.", is self explanatory.
There are several further references to ages of millions and thousands of millions of years, and to commonly accepted geological terminology, throughout the paper but, to spare the lay reader, I will only summarise them here:
1. During Early Proterozoic times (from 1688-1600 million years ago) the area was covered by thick, flat-lying sandstones.
2. At some later date (but after the reverse faulting) the Koongarra uranium mineral deposit forms, perhaps in several stages, first between 1650-1550 million years ago, and later around 870 and 420 million years.
3. The last stage, the weathering of the primary ore to produce the secondary dispersion fan above the No 1 orebody seems to have begun only in the last 1-3 million years.
Nowhere in this, or in any other article by Snelling 2 is there any reference to the creation week, to Noah's Flood or to a young age for the Earth. Nor is there any disclaimer, or the slightest hint, that this Dr Snelling has any reservations about using the standard geological column or time scale, accepted world-wide. The references above to hundreds and thousands of million of years are not interpolated by me. They appear in Dr Snelling 2's paper.
The problem is obvious – the two Drs A A Snelling BSc (Hons), PhD (with the same address as the Creation Science Foundation) publish articles in separate journals and never cite each other's papers. Their views on earth history are diametrically opposed and quite incompatible.
One Dr Snelling is a young-earth creationist missionary who follows the CSF's Statement of Faith to the letter. The other Dr Snelling writes scientific articles on rocks at least hundreds or thousand of millions of years old and openly contradicting the Statement of Faith. The CSF clearly has a credibility problem. Are they aware they have an apostate in their midst and have they informed their members?
Of course there may well be a simple explanation, eg that the two Drs Snelling are one and the same. Perhaps the Board of the CSF has given Andrew Snelling a special dispensation to break his Statement of Faith. Why would they do this? Well, every creation 'scientist' needs to gain scientific credibility by publishing papers in refereed scientific journals and books and the sort of nonsense Dr Snelling publishes in Creation Ex Nihilo is unlikely to be accepted in any credible scientific journal.
I think that both Dr Snelling and the CSF owe us all an explanation. WILL THE REAL DR ANDREW SNELLING PLEASE STAND UP?
Several years ago, in the Sydney Morning Herald, as one geologist to another, I publicly challenged Dr Snelling (the young-earth creationist version) to a public debate, before our geological peers, on a subject close to his heart – Noah's Flood – The Geological Case For and Against.
I've repeated the challenge several times since then and it still stands.
For reasons best known only to himself, Dr Snelling has declined to defend the creationist cause.
In the light of the above I suggest the reason is obvious. In his heart, and as a trained geologist, he knows that the young-earth model is a load of old codswallop and is totally indefensible.
correction to second sentence: rely on alleged expert....
Short version of the long post: for a price, some trained scientists will tell gullible young-earth believers what they want to hear.
"An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the
existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence. Because God can be relegated to remote times and places
and to ultimate causes, we would have to know a great deal more about the universe than we do now to be sure that
no such God exists." - Carl Sagan
We can be sure, however, that specific gods such as the Christian god of the bible tall tales, do not exist.
Ask the questions. Break the chains. Join the movement.
Be free of Christianity and other superstitions.
"Science does not know how life started on earth" –Neil deGrasse Tyson
'knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.” For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.' – 2 Peter 3:3-7, NKJV
Of course, The End is always nigh.
“Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.”
—1 John 2:18
Christians have been waiting on tenterhooks for the Second Coming since the Bible itself was written.
Many have prophesied the exact time of date of His return and ALL have been wrong.
Back in the mid 2nd century, Montanus convinced his followers that the 2nd coming would be during their lifetimes. Despite Christ's no show and the continuation of civilization, somehow the cult lasted for centuries.
A couple of hundred years later, a North African Christian tribe known as the Donatists tried the same scam, saying everything would collapse in 380CE.
Around the same time, St. Martin of Tours declared that the anti-Christ had already been born and was on His way to gaining power over the world.
A mathematical Christian group called the Lotharingians were quite certain The End would be in 970CE becuase in that year, the Annunciation and Good Friday were on the same day.
Pope Innocent III prophesied the 2nd Coming for 666 years after the rise of Islam., the year 1284.
Archdeacon Militz of Kromeriz and an ascetic monk named Jean de Roquetaillade both said it would be around 1365CE.
Melchior Hoffman, an Anabaptist prophet, predicted that the world would burn in 1533CE.
The Fifth Monarchy Men, a guano insane English terrorist group, said the apocalyptic battle between Christ and Satan would happen in 1666CE.
George Rapp said it would be September 15th, 1829.
William Miller predicted October 22, 1844. Jesus’ failure to arrive is known as “The Great Disappointment”. Many of his disillusioned followers went on the found the 7th Day Adventist Church, who are still patiently awaiting His return.
Charles Russell, 1st President of the Watchtower Society told his fellow Jehovah’s Witnesses that Jesus would be back in 1874.
Rudolf Steiner maintained that from 1930 onwards, Jesus would grant certain people psychic powers to enable them to witness his presence in the “etheric plane”.
Herbert Armstrong, Pastor General of the Worldwide Church of God said 1975.
Bill Maupin managed to convince his followers to sell all of their worldly goods in preparation for Jesus’ return on June 28th, 1981.
Benjamin Crème stated that on June 21st, 1982 Christ would make a worldwide television announcement.
Mark Blitz, Pastor of El Shaddai Ministries says it would be September 30th, 2008
Jerry Falwell said it’d happen between 1999 and 2009.
Harold Camping told everyone that the Rapture would happen May 21, 2011 after failing in his first predicted date of 1994.
Conversely, many believe He’s all ready come in the form of Sun Myung Moon, Emanuel Swedenborg, Baha u llah, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, David Koresh, Hailie Selassie, John Thom, Arnold Potter, William Davies, George roux, Ernest Norman, Krishna Venta, Ahn Sahng-Hong, Jim Jones, Mashall Applewhite, Hulon Mitchell, Wayne Bent, Ariffin Mohammed, Mitsuo Matayoshi, Jose Luis de Jesus Miranda, Inri Cristo, Thomas Provenzano, David Icke, Shoko Asahara, Hogan Fukinaga, Marina Tsvigun or Sergei Troop.
It would appear that the much lauded Jewish carpenter has been thoroughly dead for 2000 years and will remain so.
Of course most NT scholars think it's highly unlikely that Peter authored Peter 2. Ooops! There goes the certainty of Peter's alleged blessing of Paul's writings as divine scripture. Of course all of Paul's claims about Gospel events are hearsay....
i don't care about your opinion.
an agnostic says we don't know, whereas a religious person claims to know, both atheism and religion are impossible to confirm, only an agnostic can be right, currently. I can not tell where human knowledge will aspire to in the future. I do know that religion is cultural brainwashing and an atheist can never be sure a God does not exist. Only that one has never been proven to exist. Faith or old stories are not proof fyi. A mystery that we can not currently answer and may never because it comes down to a simple impossibility that either a god popped out of nowhere or the universe did. Both seem impossible but yet we are here discussing it which means one must be true. Unless there are other other possibilities our minds can not yet comprehend.
and Carl Sagan is a whole lot smarter than the atheists on this blog.
Attacking and destroying all religion in less than ten seconds: Priceless !!! (only for the new members)
• As far as one knows or can tell, there was no Abraham i.e. the foundations of Judaism, Christianity and Islam are non-existent.
• As far as one knows or can tell, there was no Moses i.e. the pillars of Judaism, Christianity and Islam have no strength of purpose.
• There was no Gabriel i.e. Islam fails as a religion. Christianity partially fails.
• There was no Easter i.e. Christianity completely fails as a religion.
• There was no Moroni i.e. Mormonism is nothing more than a business cult.
• Sacred/revered cows, monkey gods, castes, reincarnations and therefore Hinduism fails as a religion.
• Fat Buddhas here, skinny Buddhas there, reincarnated/reborn Buddhas everywhere makes for a no on Buddhism.
• A constant cycle of reincarnation until enlightenment is reached and belief that various beings (angels?, tinker bells? etc.) exist that we, as mortals, cannot comprehend makes for a no on Sikhism.
Added details available upon written request
Atheist are not ever intimidated by what any fantasy beilieving bible back says or does.....what facinates me is that ever since the bible backs have been believing in their god NONE HAS EVER SEEN HIM....and they don´t think if they think that that is strange.....or better yet that they are INSANE.....WHICH TECHNICALLY THEY ARE.
At least I can spell tyrannosaurus
Maybe tyrannasaurus is a personal name and not the dinosaur called TyrannOsaurus?
Or are you positive they don't know how to spell their USER NAME?
Proceedings of the 1992 TC Creation Conference Manual 280 pages wasted !
Sponsored by the Genesis Insti-tute – which was/is the ICR Old phone # 1-619-448-0900 ? Jim .
and TC creation Science ?
Nuff said !
That´s a TAUNT????????
The joke is that if their god is real and so strong and in charge of everything why do dumb little humans have to fight his battles for him......is it that he doesn´t want to get his little white hands dirty?
If you are serious about this subject then you need to see this video. This is the best video I have seen in a long while.
I don't know anyone who would sit for 2 hours on a post from a blog.
I guess...if one is just an opinionated bigot I suppose.... or unless they have a good grasp on the subject area already. I will always check things out even IF I know I might not like the content. I always think I might learn something. I am in my late 60's now and consider myself a life long learner. Creationists do not seem to be that unless it's inside their own little worldview.
This video is a deal breaker. If you don't come out of this in support of the truth that is hands down apparent then it's YOU who has a serious problem.
Whew, they really stretched that one to fill the time. I don't doubt evolution, but I don't want the federales in every local district mandating what is discussed.
Both sides seem overbearing, perhaps it could at least be brought up as a societal controversy, even show this video as an example of the debate.
Sadly, the kids being taught probably aren't paying attention to either side these days, which is where our efforts would be better spent.
Agreed. The kids likely aren't paying much attention. They really have no choice that is why it is important to teach them evidence. As for morality that could be taught as a Peace Education/Virtues curriculum. It would likely do a much better job than christianity or any other religion. People should keep their religion in the home and if they want to practice it that's fine.
I watched this a couple of years ago, I think on Public TV. It’s pretty good stuff. Thanks for bringing it up.
One of the characteristics of a "primate" society whom were the ancestors of himans if you notice they have a "dominant male that usually runs the group. I am not surprised to note that from early early times there is a male god who is in charge of everything. This is one of the hold-outs of those earlier societies that is masked as a modern ideology. It has it'a roots in dominant primate and submissive society.
spelling error. I meant "humans".
: (only for the new visitors to this blog)
Putting the kibosh on all religion in less than ten seconds: Priceless !!!
• There was no Moroni (or magic underwear) i.e. Mormonism is nothing more than a business cult.
Added details available upon written request.
What is lame about what he said? If YOU can provide REAL evidence that even ONE of those biblical characters existed then we will call him lame ok? Until you do your "opinion" is lame and that's the only thing that IS lame.
Because if you accept they're real then it scares you? It's a cop out to claim they don't exist because I don't have a birth certificate.
So, yes, it is in fact lame and so is your hissy fit.
Actually no. It doesn't scare me...why would it? If someone told me that if 'fairy tales" were real would that scare me?Nawwwww......a hissy fit....lmao....no explanation needed with your call on that one. It's no cop out to claim they are not real because it's on you to prove they are...which you cannot do.
And it looks like many agree with it all having no basis in reality either...how could it? You simply do not know HOW to think. Watch this and you might learn something...or not...lol
Um, what??? Nevermind
that.s what I thought...
If after a several months you might be continue to not contented, notify your boss. Converse honestly and brazenly, but don't clearly show their resentment – preserve professionalism. Inside of a conversation together with your supervisor examine the scope of their responsibilities. Check with once you can modify it to your active give good results corresponds to that that which you browse from the offer you. But if your employer won't aspire to guidance, you should communicate with the authorities of HR.Ensure it is from a authorized mindset, possession of trade marks, patents and know-how. From a marketing and advertising perspective you'll find it impression, status and track record. From a business mindset the benefits that could be derived from the image and perception on the marketplace. SAAB adventures demonstrate what can impact transactions on brand and firm. Instance Louboutin brand name – the way to combat the monopoly within the patent and utilize it to attain opportunity desired goals. london seo company perception in their standing as reduced (although really could perhaps be relatively several)On your own is value considering that the manufacturer and why we respect or will not value. This easy work out will show you how irrational may be the good reasons, particularly the denial of some brand names.
Наша компания предлагает выкуп старых машин в Московском регионе по самым высоким ценам в день обращения. Мы выкупаем автомобили и спецтехнику после аварии и пожара и т.д.. Вывозим авто и спецтехники своим эвакуатором
Soo boring!! ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
And heren is what is really funny – GENESIS 9:18-19- Ham was the father of who ?
And a Ham owns the creation museum ?
Sal is Ham the owns the creation museum tied your bloodline then ?
Actually, Jesus said that's your bloodline!! :-D :-D
Sal is the internet a gift from god – NO -and they want to control life ? The pope just proved there is NO god with that stat-ement.
In comments that will likely rile the more conservative wing of the church, Francis suggested that in engaging in that dialogue, Catholics shouldn't be arrogant in insisting that they alone possess the truth.
Looks like the Nye's and Ham debate is over before it began ?
The DECEPTION of creationists and who Sal – Ken Ham ?
Harvard Medical School. "Neanderthals' genetic legacy: Humans inherited variants affecting disease risk, infertility, skin and hair characteristics." ScienceDaily. 29 January 2014.
Hey Sal you know ?
Is CNN sending me Spam mail? That's one more piece of evidence of the Total stupidity of atheism!! ;-)
The hamster Ham and they are not the truth !
Goddidit! NO god DID NOT DO IT !!!
Icon creationism alt.svg
Truth fish transparent.png
Arguments evolution supporters shouldn't use
Popular quote mines
The Creation of Adam.jpg
v – t – e
Creation Ministries International began life as the Creation Science Foundation, in 1979, when Ham quit his job as a public school science teacher to begin speaking on creationism. In 1986 Ham left Australia to teach at the Insti-tute for Creation Research; by 1987 his absence was causing leadership problems, and in February he handed control over to Andrew Snelling. In 1993, after 7 years in the US, Ham decided to start, with the assistance of CSF, the Creation Science Ministry, which later became AiG-US. By 1995 the CSF had become the Australian arm of AiG. They initially shared board members, but AiG-Australia suffered a hilariously acrimonious schism from its now much larger partner in 2005 culminating in accusations of witchcraft and hurt feelings all round. They changed their name to Creation Ministries International as a result.
Much like AiG, CMI is an ardent promoter of young Earth creationist claptrap. However, CMI attempts to take a rather more "scholarly" tone than does AiG, if that term can possibly be applied to any creationist organization; it uses the presuppositionalist style of argument, which along with the scholarly veneer may help to explain why CMI doesn't have its own ignorance museum, complete with saddled Triceratops.
On the other hand, CMI publishes Alien Intrusion, UFOs and the Evolution Connection, the author of which was featured on Coast to Coast AM. The description of the interviews says that "aliens are actually fallen angels who are not extraterrestrial in nature, but rather interdimensional. ... He noted that some people had been able to stop alien abductions from taking place ... by invoking the name of Christ. He suggested that this lends credence to the idea that the aliens are demonic in nature, and thus susceptible to invocations that run counter to them."
And a list of his cronies ?
CMI list of scientists alive today who accept the biblical account of creation
GOD created everything through Cosmic and Biologic Evolutionary Creation.
UNIVERSAL MAGNIFICENT MIRACLES
Not at your place !
As the skeleton comes out of the closet ?
3 hours ago
How We Got On Land, Bone by Bone
by Carl Zimmer
I loved as much as you'll receive carried out right
here. The sketch is attractive, your authored subject
matter stylish. nonetheless, you command get bought an
edginess over that you wish be delivering the following.
unwell unquestionably come further formerly again since exactly the same nearly a lot often inside case you shield this hike.
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.