October 9th, 2013
02:27 PM ET
Creationists taunt atheists in latest billboard war
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.
About this blog
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.
The Flying Spaghetti Monster is pleased...very pleased.
Gee thanks, Antonin
I am a born again, conservative evangelical Christian.
I place Ken Ham on a scale of 1 to 10 as a 10+ an embarrassment to evangelical Christians. Only Pat Roberson (he gets an 11) does a better job of making us look like idiots.
When Answers in Genesis mailings come in the mail to my church they go strait into the shredder.
Can I become a Christian? Your Christian love is too contagious to pass up.
Touche, good point, I just did what I dislike what Ham does, bash everyone who does not agree 100% with him.
That makes me a hypocrite now doesn't it. Ugg. Working on that one, or I could say I have mastered that on.
I don't agree with how this organization is advertizing their faith but I also don't understand why most atheists are so hateful towards christians. If we respect your beliefs or lake of beliefs, why can't you respect ours?
Because your beliefs make it impossible for my children to get a proper education, Americans citizens to have equal rights and it stifles free thought and inquiry.
That clear it up for you?
That's not a very defined response. How exactly have your children and their education been effected. Evolution not taught in their classes?
The persistent attempts at re-introducing prayer to schools.
Yeah...well, attempts that bring about no results are hardly hurting you kids in any way.
just wasting the time of our lawmakers, as well as the taxpayer's money.
Yeah...discussing issues that citizens find important is so not in there job description.
"""just wasting the time of our lawmakers, as well as the taxpayer's money."""
Speaking of the power of prayer, how's that been working out for our Congress? They hold prayer sessions every day.
Now THERE'S evidence for ya.
Proper education? Do you not want your children to have their own beliefs whether or not it what you believe? You're definition of a proper education is not the same as others. I could say the same about my children's education and that they are being taught something that I do not believe in.
people in a cult want their children to be raised with the same cult belief system.
people outside the cult usually see a bit clearer.
If out children want to learn about religion they will – but they deserve better than to be brainwashed into it.
You are free to define your own religion. You are not free to define your own science. Not how it works I'm afraid. If you want comparative religion courses, I think that would be great. But anything else would be supporting a single religious view and that is contrary to religious freedom. The only fair option is to keep religion out the science class and keep it in the philosophy/history classes where it belongs.
because christians try to deny others their civil rights, using their holy book as justification
because you don't respect our beliefs. stop playing the victim. do you know how many times on this blog alone i've been told i'm going to burn in hell with glee from a christian? LOTS. so stop pretending christians treat atheists so well - they don't. christians believe atheists are worthy of being tortured for all eternity. no hatred from christians? lol.
and i don't hate you. i love you. i really do. i want you to think for yourself. i want you to stop believing in a fairy tale and instead believe in your fellow brothers and sisters. i want you to realize you don't need god to be a good person.
Well, just like some atheists are different than others...some christains are different than others. I am not praying the victim and am sorry for what others have said to you to make you feel defensive and angry.
Thanks for your kindness but in the same way that you want me to "stop believe in a fairy tale" I want you to believe in a God who loves you. I truly believe that you do need Him, you just don't know it yet.
I dare you to pray and read the bible for one day...just one day. Pray to God and say "God if you are actually real, then reveal yourself to me in some way"...you can think it is as crazy as you like but until you are serious in trying it you will never know.
I respect your believe but the fact is you want me to believe what you believe and I want you to experience what I believe. 🙂
Even IF he did that, he'd never admit it to you.
Haha. Very true. I don't need that admittance though, just hope that he/she gives it a shot!
There is neither a reason nor a point to trying to believe in a god that does not exists. To do so would require equal time to 1000s upon 1000s of other non-existant gods. I have better things to do with my time.
in addition, evangelism makes christians look like pompous a$$es
Agreed – but I felt the same way about the atheist billboards too be honest.
Because the separation of Church and State appears to be some sort of optional guideline that is pushed aside on a daily basis.
AIG is exactly the kind "religion" that infuriate many Atheists, but not just Atheists. Their promotion of bad science in the name of "religion" gives a bad name to Christians everywhere and does a disservice to any who fall prey to their ridiculous concepts.
What beliefs do we hold???? We don't respect your beliefs if they impede on equal rights for people, ie LGBT; women's rights (birth control, abortion) or any other part of the public sector. When christians learn that their belief is not the only recognized belief in a secular country we will have reason to back off but until then we will stand for all citizens of the world and call out the absurdities.
Collecting donations for a "Thanks Flying Spaghetti Monster You're Wrong" sing... any takers?
Put me down for 10$
"Thank science for the ability write this message to such a wide audience."
I'm a Flying Spaghetti Monster agnostic.
Besides, those beliefs "ain't got no pancake mix."
Noodles is not impressed ...
The entire argument for religions is based on the essential assumption that fictional works of literature made by human hands is 100% true.
You are incorrect. Not all people of a faith is a literalist. That is a misconception of many western people.
But it is understandable as it's the predominant view that gets media attention these days.
Not believing in the literal bible though always made we wonder where you draw the lines between literal/figurative and symbolic? How much literary knowledge and scholastic background do you have to even know what words were even in the originals or what the originals ever were. If there's one thing I've learned in my studies, the religion of Paul was only one view amongst MANY in the early church. His just happened to have a better support system (i.e. Rome).
Wow, "slap them in the face with it". Typical.
it's the only way to get the attention of someone behaving dimensionally.
Is it "typical" when atheists have done it?
Typical, those guys did it so we can do it too and still say its wrong to do! lol tard.
Evolution is fact.
Even the Catholic church accepts that!
There is an ever growing mountain of evidence from different branches of science accu.mulated over more than a hundred and fifty years that verify evolution.
Creationists have yet to advance a single shred of evidence to support their assertions.
As a matter of fact, the leading rabble rousers in the Creationist world – The Center for Science and Culture (sponsored by the Discovery Inst.itute) openly admit that their goal isn't to teach what they think is fact. An internal doc.ument leaked in 1999 described the Discovery group's objective in pushing for creationism to be taught in schools as "to defeat scientific materialism and its destructive moral, cultural and political legacies". They want to use Intelligent Design as a "wedge" to separate science from its allegiance to "atheistic naturalism".
In other words, they fear that teaching FACTS to children will drive them away from religion.
evolution is not a fact. its an ancient finch-beak theory that is based on almost no actual science and just a fancy book written in the 1800s, long before the advent of the electron microscope or the discovery of proteins inside cells. life can not create itself, nor can it transform itself into another animal unless it was programmed to do so (see butterflies). I have spent a tremendous amount of time trying to belive in evolution and all I got was this lousy tee shirt that says (Evolution: because God didnt do it)
"Evolution is not a fact"
Tell that to the banana, wheat, dogs, and drug resistant bacteria.
Please, sit down before you hurt yourself.
Evidence for evolution appears in the fossil record, vestigial features, study of ebryonic development, biogeography, DNA sequencing, examining pseudogenes, study of endogenous retroviruses, labratory direct examination of natural selection in action in E-Coli bacteria, lactose intolerance in humans, the peppered moth's colour change in reaction to industrial pollution, radiotrophic fungi at Chernobyl all add to the modern evolutionary synthesis.
We have directly observes speciation in Blackcap birds, fruit flies, mosquitos, mice, Shortfin molly fish.
If you would like to see exactly how the improbable can happen, you can use the computer simulation of life's development called Avida.
The principles of evolutionary biology are applied on a daily basis by countless people in disparate fields.
Without a firm understanding of evolution, modern agriculture would be impossible.
Pharmaceutical biochemistry would be non-existent, reducing our overall health and life expectancy.
Computer programmers use a principle called "Evolutionary Computing / Genetic Algorithms". This engineering technique is routinely used in aerospace engineering, architecture, astrophysics, data mining, drug discovery and design, electrical engineering, finance, geophysics, materials engineering, military strategy, pattern recognition, robotics, scheduling, systems engineering and a host of other fields.
Darwin's 5 laws are confirmed and used in practical applications every single day by people all over the world.
Since Darwin first posited his theory, evolutionary scientists have tried to lessen the conflict between evolution and religion.
They worry that the public association of evolution with atheism will hurt evolutionary biology, perhaps impeding its funding or acceptance.
The great majority see no conflict between religion and evolution, not because they occupy different, noncompeting magisteria, but because they see religion as a natural product of human evolution.
Sociobiological evolution is the means to understanding religion, whereas religion as a "way of knowing" has nothing to teach us about evolution.
There is no doubt that if the opposing side does center their debate around the idea of human evolution that you will be confronted with the “missing link”. There are several ways to approach this argument. First of all, there are two different accepted hypotheses on the rate of evolution. Gradualism is slow acc.umulation of adaptations over time. This is the most well known and often used by both sides. If there is a slow acc.umulation of adaptations over time, there should be intermediate forms of all species that can be found in fossil form. This is where the “missing link” idea comes from. The other idea about the rate of evolution is called punctuated equilibrium and it gets rid of the necessity of having a “missing link”. This hypothesis says that species stay the same for very long periods of time and then have many quick adaptations that make the entire species change. This would mean there are not any intermediates to be found and therefore no missing link.
Another way to argue the idea of the “missing link” is just to point out that not every individual that has ever lived has become a fossil. Being fossilized is actually a very difficult thing to happen naturally and it requires just the right conditions to create a fossil that can be found at a time thousands or millions of years later. The area needs to be wet and have mud or other sediments the individual can be buried in quickly after death. Then it takes enormous amounts of pressure to create the rock around the fossil. Very few individuals actually become fossils that are able to be found.
Even if that “missing link” were able to become fossilized, it is quite possible it just has not been found yet. Archaeologists and other scientists are finding different fossils of new and previously undiscovered species on a daily basis. It is quite possible that they just haven’t looked in the right place to find that “missing link” fossil yet.
lots of missing links have been found. the term is a red herring as there is no one fossil that will "prove" evolution.
Indeed, all fossils are, by their very definition, transitional fossils.
We are ourselves transitional forms. I hope we wind up as something smart, sleek, fast, powerful, cool – unlike the hairless primates we are just now.
I'm respectful of all works of fiction.
No one cares what you think really.
Right back at ya buddy!
I'm certain of that.
Does your ego feel better now?
If the creationists want to buy billboards proclaiming their ignorance, who am I to complain.
You are a pompous little twit.
Now you are a pompous sleepy little twit.
The economy can use all the help it can get.
These people are nuts. I can tell you one thing, atheists are closer to God than some creationist that thinks Heaven is after death and not before.
Yeah, thinking they have the right to express themselves on the topic of faith. Who do they think they are... the Founding Fathers?
Everyone has the right to advertise their own ignorance, but it's not necessarily something to be proud of.
I've seen quite a few atheists on here proudly show off their ignorance on here everyday.
Our heavenly Father is the Founder in fact, you aught to meet Him.
..Before it's too late
"Yeah, thinking they have the right to express themselves on the topic of faith. Who do they think they are... the Founding Fathers?"
Did someone say they couldn't?
In direct words...nope. Though when someone implies another is "nuts", the idea that they want to hear more about what they think usually isn't the logical response.
That's nuts. Why would you think so?
So typical. I bet they wouldn't verbally attack the pedophile mohammed or the nut job known as Abraham that would kill his own son for his god. They have no stones for that so they go after the easy targets, the atheists, since there are only a few.
AND GIVE ME YOUR MONEY, ERR UMM, I MEAN DONATIONS!!!!
Atheists are "easy' targets? I am sure that will surprise many of them on here.
You didn't even think about this. He even explained what an easy target is and you still didn't get it. You just wanted to jump at him and in doing so showed your ignorance and stupidity. All groups are easy targets when they are small in numbers. Life is a numbers game; how do you think religion, as crazy and unreal as it is, can still be around? Numbers. That's why they can't shut up. If they lose numbers, they will become like Thor and Zeus.
if i'm ever in Cincinnati, i'm definitely going to the Creation Museum. i can't think of anything funnier. i wonder how long they'll let me laugh before they ask me to leave...
They welcome atheists. But you do have to be respectful of others and of God.
I bet they'd let anyone in. As long as they pay.
how can they be respectful of a being in which they do not believe?
By staying out of their building for a start.
How can an atheist be respectful or disrespectful to a fictional being? It's like asking somebody to be respectful of the Fonz an a Happy Days museum.
You idiot, no one expects you to respect God. What common sense dictates is that you respect the beliefs of others. That doesn't mean you have to agree, just that you disagree politely.
nope. you should respect people, not crazy ideas. if you have a nutjob idea like christianity does with their invisible sky fairy, that's an idea unworthy of respect. you want us to respect your ideas/beliefs? put forth ideas/beliefs worthy of respect.
Becuase you, of course, have proven yourself to be the apex of respectful discourse.
D'uh, stay out of Riverdale.
Bzzzzd – should they make sure and disagree as politely as you?
@Bootyfunk- "you should respect people, not crazy ideas."
You obviously can't respect a person if you don't respect their beliefs. Your opinion on whether it is "crazy" or not is irrelevant.
"invisible sky fairy"
No one believes in an invisible sky fairy you troglodyte. I hope that doesn't offend anyone on here since you hypocrites worry so much about how others feel.
"that's an idea unworthy of respect."
No one cares if you think it's unworthy. That's for you to decide for yourself...to yourself.
Maybe someone should smack the wrinkles off your dear ol mother because her face is unworthy to have our eyes look at it. Who cares if you think that's respectful or not.
@Doc Vestibule- "Becuase you, of course, have proven yourself to be the apex of respectful discourse."
Get over yourself Doc. I merely converse with those on their level. If that's too much for you, you might want to take your kiddie gloves and head over to your local school to debate.
@sam- "should they make sure and disagree as politely as you?"
Hey, if people act stupid on here...I will tell them. Playing the wounded commentor doesn't fly on here.
does that mean i can't laugh?
Only after you have made love. Oh wait..that's what your partner does. Sorry.
Cha cha cha
Respect is earned. Obedience is demanded.
If the Creation "Museum" cannot withstand ridicule, they shouldn't be so friggin' ridiculous.
Before you can appreciate the awesome complexity of the Creation Museum, you'll first need to do a bit of research, especially if you're one of those people who think that humans came millions of years after the dinosaurs.
I recommended a thorough examination of a wonderful docu/mentary series from the mid-twentieth century that faithfully and accurately protrays the symbiotic relationship man shared with the dinosaurs.
Oddly enough, even though it directly disproves the "theory" of Evilution, you can still readily obtain copies of The Flintstones.
Make sure you let one rip while your in there, after a good lunch.
Who knows, you may come out of it spiritually alive!!
I don't claim to "know" many things, but I can assure you the Creation "Museum" would only convince someone of truly feeble will. Like many things in christianity you have to want to believe in them before you can actualy believe in them.
I'd rather be burning bibles.
Burning books is what fascists do.
If I burn a book, I'm a fascist.
If the book I’m reading says I have to kill you for growing different crops in adjacent fields, I'm a God-Fearing Christian.
I think I’ll burn the book. Books don’t scream when you burn them.
A Clockwork Orange says one should tolchock yahoodies. It doesn't necessitate its burning though. Books should be revered.
In the case of that book, I think we will make an exception. Never has one book harmed so many been understood as what it actually is by so few.
No, we won't make an exception.
It's amazing that so many people in the US believe in creationism in this day and age. Makes me feel good about my employment prospects.
All any god has to do is show up and everyone will believe in him/her/it. 9 million babies under the age of five die every year and your god, who supposedly can do anything, doesn't do a thing to save them. I know why. No god exists. Never has... never will.
how come god never heals amputees?
he heals people that are blind and can't walk, but never amputees.
he only heals ailments that can be easily faked, like blindness and lameness.
People lose limbs to leprosy...I'm sure you would think differently if you were the healed blind 🙂
And what about Lazerous: raised from the dead after 4 days....ya that's easy: FOR GOD!
3rd hand stories passed down and translated over a couple thousand years not very convincing proof for some of medical miracles.
I only ask for the proof of Thomas – really don't think that unreasonable...
I am blind myself and have yet to be healed.
THANK GOD YOU'RE WRONG says, "To all of our atheist friends."
lol lol lol
creationists on parade
Thank Hitchens you're wrong!
Thank Dawkins, too.
Thank Yoda you're wrong......
Dude! If the bubble is the thought of the words on the right, the pointy part of the bubble would have to be pointing directly at those words. Don't read the Sunday comics, much, huh?
Thought bubbles generally have a string of small 'bubbles' pointing to the character.
Anyway, even if this is AIG's version of a thought bubble, it points nowhere and to nobody (other than down - cue creepy music)
Topher doesn't get it.
Topher, it is a BAD design. It makes no sense.
You are reading my post wrong. Read it like a sentence and then compare it to the blue sign.
I am the antichrist! Muhahahaha!
I would expect the Anti-Christ of be better at dealing with Republicans.
lol, good point.
Ha! Where's the like button?
Post of the day!
You got SERVED, I'm afraid.
1) The headline should say "Creationists battle SCIENCE..." because there are plenty of people who believe in God and evolution.
2) Tomorrow's headline should say "Real world responds back with FOSSILS"
Umm ... creationists believe in fossils. So what is your point?
they believe fossils were planted in the earth by god as a test to faith. creationists don't believe dinosaurs ever walked the earth. that's the point.
What? You don't honestly believe those things. We don't think fossils were "planted" and we most certainly believe in dinosaurs.
Topher, you're a creationist? young earthie? what?
Yep to both.
what do you believe about the dinosaurs? serious question. i apparently didn't understand the creationist view on dinosaurs. i would like to. please explain.
@Topher – Then please explain the progressive order of the fossil record, but understand that "hydrodynamic sorting," "eco-zonation," "floating biomes" and other creationist models to account for this observation have been thoroughly debunked and are so nonsensical that even non-scientists can readily appreciate their absurdity. To make it simple, you could just address why human fossils are exclusively found in strata far above dinosaur fossils. Remember here too that the arguments suggesting humans "differentially escaped" drowning and burial in sediment fails any reasonable application of logic (i.e. every human, the old, sick, very young, etc, somehow survived drowning significantly longer than every single dinosaur including those specifically adapted to purely aquatic life styles, e.g. plesiosaurs). And please don't post links to petraglyphs claiming depictions of human-dinosaur coexistence because even if they were legitimate (they're not) they don't explain the fossil discrepancy. Furthermore, please don't post links to the soundly refuted human-dino foot print frauds.
Feel free to cite your favorite ICR, AIG posts desperately attempting to account for this observation in the fossil record.
"what do you believe about the dinosaurs? serious question. i apparently didn't understand the creationist view on dinosaurs. i would like to. please explain."
Dinosaurs were created on Day 6 with the rest of the land-dwelling animals, including man. Bible mentions dinosaurs a couple of times, though the word "dinosaur" wasn't invented yet and thus the word itself doesn't appear.
you mean the references to 'dragons'? the bible also mentions satyrs, unicorns and c.cokatrice.
It's true, many of them don't believe in dinosaurs. Which is really strange when you consider that even the bible mentions giant lizards roaming around.
Also, doesn't anyone think it is very strange how the bible's version of the sequence of creation and science's version of the sequence of evolution strangely parallel each other? Think about it: First came light (the sun) then mass (earth formation) water, then the sea animals, then land animals, and at the very end............... HUMANS. They both line up. False or not, for the early writers of the bible to get even THAT close to so accurately describing the sequence of events is unfathomable.
People way back in the day had no concept AT ALL of millions, so which would be easier to do? Describe the millions of years to a primitive people, along with such scientific complexities as evolution, or simply graze over it and describe the time period in days? How do we as parents explain highly complicated concepts to our little children? By simplifying them in ways they can understand?
You can believe in God or not. Personally, I do. But why does it have to be an either or situation? Just trying to REASON things out here.
"you mean the references to 'dragons'?"
Yes, dragons. Also Leviathon and Behemoth.
"the bible also mentions satyrs, unicorns and c.cokatrice."
I don't know what those other two are, so I'd have to look them up, but "unicorn" was a reference to rhinos. In fact, that's their scientific name.
I think we can answer some of these questions by cloning. Start with dinosaur DNA from mosquito. I think that would clear up once and for all the "are they real or just planted there" question.
Also, I think they need to just "bite the bullet" and clone a human. It's considered unethical, and probably would be unfair to the one being cloned, but it would also clear up once and for all whether or not God exists and whether or not he actually made man in his own image. If scientists are right, then the DNA would yield a perfectly normal human with a personality, intelligence, dreams and goals just like anyone else. If creationists are right, then the DNA would only yield some freak looking thing, looking more like an alien then a person. (S)he would have no soul, and would act very odd. Probably be like one of those "greys" type aliens like what people claim to see when taken up in the spaceship 🙂
Seriously, one successful human clone would tell us EVERYTHING.
Atheists believe fossils are proof of evolution.
Creationists believe fossils are made by Satan to confuse people.
Not a lot of common ground there...
Don't know where you guys get your information, but that's not our stance at all.
please enlighten us, Topher. perhaps we have inaccurate information about creationist beliefs.
Someone should create a 'Satan Museum' where you could have an exhibit with a bunch of minions all carving fossils at a table with Satan saying things like 'Yeah, I like that one, put an extra leg on the next one, that will really confuse things'. How typically absurd and small minded.
Tanker said ...
"Atheists believe fossils are proof of evolution."
True, they do. But we find they are only proof something died.
"Creationists believe fossils are made by Satan to confuse people."
Satan can't create anything, so he didn't make anything to confuse people. I don't see what's confusing about fossils anyway.
I thought they believed in storm debris, not fossils.
... that fossils are evidence of the Noahican flood, i.e. debris.
OK, I see what you are saying. Yes, I'd say most fossils we have today are the result of the flood. But we DO believe in fossils.
You are splitting the 'same evidence, different interpretation' hair. You believe in quickly mineralized storm debris from less than ~10K years ago. Many actual fossils dispute this "belief".
"You are splitting the 'same evidence, different interpretation' hair."
That's true of anything. We all have a presupposition.
"You believe in quickly mineralized storm debris from less than ~10K years ago. Many actual fossils dispute this "belief"."
How do they dispute it? The fossil record looks exactly like we'd expect it to look if the flood were true. Millions of fossils laid down and covered quickly ... just as a catastrophe would leave.
"How do they dispute it? The fossil record looks exactly like we'd expect it to look if the flood were true. Millions of fossils laid down and covered quickly ... just as a catastrophe would leave."
1) Radiometric dating directly disputes an age of < 10K years for all fossils and are consistent with other methods of dating. (note Isochron dating doesn't assume certain levels of substances)
2) A global flood, which is not in evidence, would not have positioned plant and animal remains as they are found in the geologic record. Why are there not fruit or nut in the Precambrian? surely not all would float. Why are there no rabbits in the precambrian, or dolphins with sharks before ~200mya when sharks go back ~450mya, why no squirrels with similar sized dinosaurs before ~200mya, etc, etc, etc,
So, Creationists believe that fossils are the proof of the common descent, with modification, of life forms over time.
Wow, that is mighty flexible of you guys.
Wow...not sure you know very much about what you are talking about. Creationists don't believe a lot of the things you are saying. Maybe you are a little confused
Interesting, because Science by definition is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.
The proof is in the website: answersingenesis
Dare you to read their articles and prove them wrong.
....If you're up for it
Fine. Then I'll spend it without Him. He's pretty tiresome, anyway. Also, He has a lot to answer for.