"Scientific proof of creationism"

Someone, please, tell me where I can learn more about this "scientific proof" of creationism. Apparently I missed that article in Nature. As a systematist, how can I study evolutionary relationships if evolution is bullshit?

From my hometown newspaper, reporting on the school board:
Janke... took a couple of vanloads of people to hear a presentation on creationism. He said that the presenter showed scientific proof regarding creationism. He would like to get him in LaMoure for a lyceum on the subject.

(Sorry, it isn't online. I get a pdf by email.)

What the hell? The worst part -- this guy is related to me, he's my dad's cousin or something. I knew he was religious, but this blinded by it?

because Dr. Miller conclusively proved that creationism and ID are both loads of steaming horseshit.

maybe he has a website and then I could be enlightened. :crazy:

:shrug:

if they used baby back ribs?????

women and men have the same number of ribs

one side just so he could remove it to make woman.

It says so in the bible.

ask him, if the universe is only 6000 years old, how can suns be millions of light years away and we can still see the light they emit?

I have never thought of that! That's great!

They're just a few hundred miles up in the sky.

Carbon dating is another bit of hard science they completely ignore.

"Old light", like "old dinosaur bones", are just a test to see if you get thrown into eternal damnation for all eternity or not.

Sorry, any God I believe in is a bit less of jerk-around :-/

Variable lightspeed. In the first 7 days or 7 years or whatever, light traveled much faster than it does today.

Or else God created the light as if it had already been traveling for some period of time.

Man, you gotta hang out with more young-earth creationists. They really do think about apologetics like this to answer that kind of thing. They'll even try to come up with "scientific" evidence that these things happened.

:-)

has hired a Rove like advisor to take care of those pesky facts?

It's more like the creationists are fabricating bullshit to cover up for their known unknowns. They do have to go into this science thing with the universe they have, not the one they might have wished they had -- but that never stopped them from pretending otherwise.

Untidy of God to leave earth-smashing (smiting?) comets and lots of traces of planetary evolution lying around.

"Scientific proof" suggests that a scientific theory has been examined and proven. That's what science is about: theories that can be subsequently examined, and either proven or disproven. Since there's no way to "scientifically test" creationism to disprove it, it can't really be called that.

It's amazing that these adult board members ever made it past the 6th grade. Hmmm.. Maybe they didn't, do we have no proof that they did?

This begs the question.. How do they plan on teaching two conflicting lessons in the same classroom? I hope the kids are smart enough to figure out that scientific theory completely debunks ID theory.

scientifically.

To do that I need positive empirical evidence of the movement's existance. I think that is quite easily done.

But, alas, I suspect I am chasing a misspelling.

there isn't even any evidence.

Repeated experimentation confirms this result. Thus, there is scientific proof that creationism exists.

As far as proving scientifically that the tenets of creationism are fact, well that's just fucking crazy.

That explains it all for me. I am now a believer.

This was actually in an issue from a couple weeks ago. I never noticed it until a LTTE appeared in this week's issue basically saying, "WTF?" and "What happened to separation of church and state?"

BTW... I also like your avatar. I used to have that as my background on my computer. :D

Apparently she's rare, because most of those orange tabbies are male for some reason. Anyway, she's got food-related neuroses (she's a pound cat, no telling what her former life was like), so that pic cracked me up when I first ran across it.

In my 23 years of practice, I have come to the conclusion that roughly 75-80% of orange tabbies are male.

OTOH, male tricolors (calicos and tortoiseshells) are truly RARE, and always infertile.

creationism itself.

You would know that if you had been touched by His noodly appendage

Science concerns observations and experimental investigation and testing of things in the natural, not supernatural world.

far more answers than a million thoughts put into only words!
Millions of thoughts of man have changed and been disproved in just the last century and nature itself has caused most of those changes. For those who "live by the book" are doomed to ignorance. The bible is certainly one of those books!

Being skeptical of everything is a good starting point - IMHO - especially in a science class!

Indeed I'd expect the Science teacher to point out the many holes in current evolution theory, and to note that while science can not "prove" a lot it gives "actionable, useful best answer" to many questions. And that the scientific method is a solid way to advance science knowledge.But just because some questions can never even be started on by Science because they can not be answered by Science (including creation), there is no reason to teach anything beyond it is good to be skeptical.

=============================================================

USA Today reports that proponents claim that all the (Kansas) vote did was allow kids to be skeptical of Darwin's ideas - and that the standards, broad guidelines that school districts use to write their own curricula, don't force school boards to change what they're doing, and likely won't affect what teachers in many large school districts teach.

But USA Today also reports that critics say the changes will encourage activists in small, rural districts to push for more overtly religious science lessons.
======================================================

I hope that does not happen.

There is no proof of god using the scientific method. Period. Case closed. They have to run from the scientific method for their "proofs."

From a theology perspective, "proof" is the opposite of faith and faith is the basis of our relationship with God. I just can't say this enough, there is NO proof of "creationism" or god. None. Nada. Nil. Zero. Zilch.

but science can't. Reality is what it is. Beliefs can be changed to fit the argument or moment.

motion machine. He said he had been working on it for 5 years, and had just had a major breakthrough. He was planning on quitting his job to devote all of his energies to the engineering and production of the machine.

The great breakthrough was faith in Jesus. Indeed, Jebus was the true primal force that would keep the machine running forever, producing more energy than was put in.

The guy was dead serious. I did not know that he was psychotic before that exchange.

"I did not know that he was psychotic before that exchange"
:rofl:

is science is not out to prove or disprove a creator. What is sad is they try to disprove science through a particular belief system(maybe because they are scared of answers).

evolution and all of science need not be incompatible with a belief in a deity. I, myself, like to envision a "creator" as having set up all the ground rules and getting the ball rolling, and then watching what happens.

"Intelligent Design" and religion are PHILOSOPHIES. They are artificial constructs of the human imagination. You cannot see or touch them, or physically manipulate them, unlike the world of flesh and blood and atoms and quarks. By definition you cannot "prove" or "disprove" them.

All we have are theorys which are backed up by other theorys which in turn are back up more theorys, with each level increasing in confidence.

here's scientific proof that W is not a great leader. go to the google homepage and type in the word "failure" w/o quotations then click the I'm Feeling Lucky button. hilarious i thought.

There are many who claim to have scientific proof (not withstanding that they understand neither science or proof).

Here are a few:

http://www.case-creation.org.uk/acfc.html

http://www.creationresearch.org/

http://www.answersingenesis.org/

Have fun.

wrt to intelligent design/creationism, when you have to invoke some sort of supernatural force to explain something, you're no longer in the realm of science.

He's a succinct one, that Mike. :)

See?