ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Creation In Scientific Terms

I have a scientist friend, who formerly believed in evolution, but now is not so sure. He will take everything as a scientific statement, so I will have to portray proof of creation in scientific terms. Do you know a place I can find such evidence?

Join Our Christian Singles and Take The Creationism Quiz
 ---Jennifer on 5/3/12
     Helpful Blog Vote (2)

Post a New Blog



No, Atheist you are the claimant who said the Creation site was rife with "bad science" but, as usual, when put to the test, have nothing to offer. Stop trying to evade the truth.

Give a specific example of "bad science" on the Creation website, or have the integrity to admit you are wrong.

What would convince you that God spoke the world into existence?
---Warwick on 5/17/12


warwick,

After all you have a history of making baseless claims don't you? But you cannot provide a specific example, such as how god spoke the universe into existence.
---atheist on 5/17/12


Atheist, no, you are the claimant, therefore it is up to you to prove your case. Your case is dismissed on lack of any evidence.

I believe,by faith, that God created everything in 6 24hr days. And you appear to be saying my belief is "bad science" even though I have not claimed any scientific proof? Even for you this is somewhat 'out there.' BTW I do not believe the Bible by blind faith but by faith mixed with the evidence which supports it. We all have the same evidence, the only difference is the interpretation we apply to it. You may say the Grand Canyon is testimony for uniformitarianism, while I believe it is testimony for catastrophism. The available evidence (not proof) better supports catastrophism.
---Warwick on 5/16/12


"The original dinosaur kinds were made during Creation Week,around 6,000 years ago."
How reliable is the source of this claim? very
Has the claim been verified by somebody or anybody else? yes
Does this fit with the way the world works? yes
*Does this fit with the way the world thinks? no
Is the claimant playing by the rules of science? historical science..yes
Is the claimant providing positive evidence? just a summary-supportive evidence is provided elsewhere
Does the new theory account for as many phenomena as the old theory? evolution is the new belief (<200 years) and creation better explains the evidence we all see.
*Are personal beliefs driving atheistic answers? OH YEAH!
Are they not?
---micha9344 on 5/16/12


It was an error that the post got up three times. But no matter.

You claimed that this site had science based claims on it. When you look at the article in total on the site, you can see a boatload of references.

I give in and pick what doesn't seem any different than any other article. But now you say oh no, this is just belief and doesn't count. So belief doesn't count? So I need to find an article that is science based not belief based before I am allowed under you rules to debunk it.

Excuse me but I thought your whole point was that science backs bible based beliefs. So that's not so? So Noah is mythology?
---atheist on 5/16/12




Atheist I knew you had nothing and your last blog is but confirmation. The article covers what the Bible says. It is not offered as a proven scientific fact, but a statement of belief. That you would label this "bad science" demonstrates you don't know what you are talking about. Your petulent posting of your pointless blog 3 times shows you are annoyed at being cornered.

You say you gave the address of the site as though this means something but it doesn't. You claimed the site was full of "bad science" so I challenged you to give a specific example. After all you have a history of making baseless claims don't you? But you cannot provide a specific example, as one does not exist.
---Warwick on 5/16/12


I gave the address on the site above, I am done with that strawman.

"The original dinosaur kinds were made during Creation Week,around 6,000 years ago." How reliable is the source of this claim? Has the claim been verified by somebody or anybody else? NO. Does this fit with the way the world works? NO. Is the claimant playing by the rules of science? NO.
Is the claimant providing positive evidence? NO.
Does the new theory account for as many phenomena as the old theory? NO.
Are personal beliefs driving the claim? OH YEAH!

Baloney/bunk detected.....
---atheist on 5/16/12


I gave the address on the site above, I am done with that strawman.

"The original dinosaur kinds were made during Creation Week,around 6,000 years ago." How reliable is the source of this claim? Has the claim been verified by somebody or anybody else? NO. Does this fit with the way the world works? NO. Is the claimant playing by the rules of science? NO.
Is the claimant providing positive evidence? NO.
Does the new theory account for as many phenomena as the old theory? NO.
Are personal beliefs driving the claim? OH YEAH!

Baloney/bunk detected.....
---atheist on 5/16/12


I gave the address on the site above, I am done with that strawman.

"The original dinosaur kinds were made during Creation Week,around 6,000 years ago." How reliable is the source of this claim? Has the claim been verified by somebody or anybody else? NO. Does this fit with the way the world works? NO. Is the claimant playing by the rules of science? NO.
Is the claimant providing positive evidence? NO.
Does the new theory account for as many phenomena as the old theory? NO.
Are personal beliefs driving the claim? OH YEAH!

Baloney/bunk detected.....
---atheist on 5/16/12


Atheist do you still maintain this article from the Creation site is also in Hanegraaff's book? Or have you thought better of this?

I do not believe the article is bunk at all. And we need to remember you claim there is "bad science" lurking in this article. So, unless you are lying, provide me with a full quote from this article which you believe is "bad science," and explain exactly why it is "bad science." If it is there that should be easy for you. But...
---Warwick on 5/15/12




Atheist, you call the quote you gave science junk and bunk.
May I have your definition of science and how it relates to the quote?
To help understand my questioning, what you quoted came from a historical perspective, nothing that observational science has any relationship to.
Historical science is evidential, i.e. eyewitness accounts and critically accepted documents verifying authenticity, such as your birth certificate.
There is no way observational science could prove you were somewhere at a certain time, such as your birth.
It can, however prove that you are human and do exist.
---micha9344 on 5/16/12


NurseRobert: Thank you for your straightforward responses. It would seem that you don't believe the Bible account of Creation, neither do you believe in the man-made theories of the Big Bang and Evolution. What then do you believe about origins, if anything? And what is the basis of your beliefs?

BTW, what does "intreptated" mean?



---jerry6593 on 5/16/12


creation dot com forward slash images forward slash pdfs forward slash cabook forward slash chapter19 dot pdf

This article is on the website and its bunk.
---atheist on 5/15/12


NurseRobert, a question for you. What do you mean by the centre of the universe? Is it a tiny fixed pin-point around which everything else rotates?
Or is it a large area (in relation to the size of the universe). If so how large?
---Warwick on 5/15/12


Atheist are you now claiming what you say is written in Hanegraaff's book is directly from the 'Creation' website? Where?

You keep repeating vague "bad science" claims regarding the Creation website but refuse to give specific examples. What exactly are you talking about? Do a cut and paste job on the part/s you believe to be "bad science." If you cannot do that you are just like Dawkins and co. who would not debate creationist scientists, because they are afraid to be exposed, in public, by scientists who know the truth of the matter. Likewise you remain vague because you have nothing, nothing but ignorant prejudice.
---Warwick on 5/15/12


NurseRobert are you trying to convince us you are slow? I have repeatedly said I do not know what is at the universe's centre and believe with our present abilities this cannot be proved one way or the other. Why are you so obsessed about this? Why does it matter to you what is at the universe's centre? Is there something you aren't telling us?

I have also said I hold the whole Bible to be God's Truth, by faith. What part of "faith" escapes your grasp? Have I ever, once, said the Bible can be proved by the scientific method?

Atheist has promoted all sorts of things as scientific fact. When challenged about the "fact" regarding the centre of the universe he finally admitted it was belief based upon photos.
---Warwick on 5/15/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Make Money


Only the Lord can change an atheist's heart. It would be better to pray than to dispute.
---Catholicus on 5/15/12


Warwick,

Wrong about what?

The whole site, that article, and statement in that article is non-science nonsense.

I give you a quote and you can't even figure out that it came from a book, that is in print and published almost in total on the website. So if its in two places it doesn't pass your test for something I claim makes no sense? And you call me confused.

Your are relentlessly illogical. Give everyone a break....
---atheist on 5/15/12


Yes, Warwick, I am telling the truth.. I asked you, in very simple terms, if you believed the earth was the center of the universe. That is very simple a YES or NO question.

I also ask you if you believe the Creation story in the bible is fact. Is it or is it not?

Jerry, in response:

1) No.

2) No

3) No

4) No to part a and no, not as I understand Darwin's theory.

5) Neither. There are too many things that can be intreptated in different ways. Any time spend on this site shows that.
---NurseRobert on 5/15/12


Atheist yesterday it was in a book written by a man with absolutely no connection to the Creation site. Now you say "it is on the site." Finally, finally you give enough information to find that which raises your little hackles. Now I have read this article and would like you once more to be specific and quote the offending sections. Can you do that for me?

You seem to be worried about Noah and co. not having enough oxygen. Why would there be a shotage of oxygen where they floated?

Strangely you write "Now are you agreeing that some of the site is junk." Am I? Where did I write that?

But you could just admit the truth, that you are wrong and I will respect you in the morning.
---Warwick on 5/15/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Rehab Treatments


Hi Athiest
I am sure you love being the centre of attention. lol

Christians are divided on the time scale of creation and what a day actually means. but all believe that creation was God's work.

When Adam was born around 4000BC, it coincides with the time humans appeared in Egypt, Syria, Persia etc. Which is in line with the Bible teachings.

The tree of knowledge, is physical being and its vices. Including science. Which is the reason the world is in a mess. Nuclear energy,weapons, chemical contamination, industral waste contamination and now genetical contamination. The use of Phthalates, Bpa, in plastics, that causes cancer, sterility in some and many other things.
Just one example. So science is not quite so hot.
---chris on 5/15/12


1Co 1:20 Where [is] the wise? where [is] the scribe? where [is] the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness,
24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
---micha9344 on 5/15/12


\\Now are you agreeing that some of the site is junk and now claiming I am the idiot because I think it's all junk? Wait till you get to the part of why they didn't need oxygen masks----
"Did Noah need oxygen above the mountains?"\\

We ALL need oxygen regardless of where we are, atheist.

However, isn't it pretty well established by science that the earth's atmosphere had different levels of oxygen at different times?

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/15/12


Warwick, go to creation dot com forward slash images forward slash pdfs forward slash cabook forward slash chapter19 dot pdf. It is on the site.

Now are you agreeing that some of the site is junk and now claiming I am the idiot because I think it's all junk? Wait till you get to the part of why they didn't need oxygen masks----
"Did Noah need oxygen above the mountains?"

Do you buy into all this nonsense Warwick?
---atheist on 5/15/12


Send a Free Religious Ecard


"And said God, Here I given to you besides every herb sowing seed which over all the earth, and together with whatever of tree that within it, fruit tree sowing seed to you will be for eating: Also to every beast of earth, and to every fowl of heavens, and to every crawler on the earth which in it breathing life, together with every green herb for eating: and was so. And saw God he, all that made, and here, good greatly: and was evening and was morning day the sixth." Gn.1:29-31...end of chapter 1, concluding the first chapter of the Bible on the creation, being the literal translation of the Hebrew Aleppo Codex into the English language, and having no english words added nor taken away.
---Eloy on 5/15/12


I have no reason not to believe the earth is at the center of the universe. Ptolomy based his astronomical calculations on that theory, and they are still pretty accurate after 2000 years.
---Catholicus on 5/14/12


"And said God, Let us make man in our shape, as our likeness, that rule upon fish of sea and upon fowl of heavens and upon cattle and upon all the earth, and upon all the crawls that crawl on the earth. And created he God the man in his shape, into shape God, created he him: male and female created he them. And blessed he them God, and said to them God, Flourish and multiply and fill in the earth, and conquer it, and rule upon fish of sea and upon fowl of heavens and upon whatever life that crawls on the earth." Gn.1:26-28...and so on.
---Eloy on 5/14/12


Atheist, firstly you said this quote came from a website, now it's from a book! You are confused.

I have heard of Hanegraaff but know little about him so cannot comment on his accuracy or integrity.

However as you should know he has nothing at all to do with the site Creation dot com, the one I have continually referred to. Therefore the quote you gave has no relevance at all for two reasons. Firstly he was giving an account of what the Bible says, not a scientific treatise. Secondly it doesn't even come from the site discussed! As the man said-you got nuthin!

Now back to The Site in question, back up your comments regarding "bad science" from it, as requested, many times. Or simply admit you are wrong.
---Warwick on 5/14/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Stocks


"And said God, Begin so issue of earth breathing life after its kind, cattle and crawls, and its beasts earthen, after its kind: and was so. And made he God beasts of earth after its kind, and that the cattle after its kind, and that all crawls of land after its kind: and saw God, that good." n.1:24,25...and so on.
---Eloy on 5/14/12


"And said God, Be spawning the waters, teems breathing life, and fowl be flying above the earth over expanse of heavens. And created he God the sea beasts of greatness, and that whatever breathing of life that moves which spawning the waters, after their kind, and with every winged fowl after its kind: and saw God, that good. And blessed them God, in saying, Flourish and multiply and fill in the waters in seas, and the fowl be multiplied upon earth: and was evening and was morning day fifth." Gn.1:20-23...and so on.
---Eloy on 5/14/12


Warwick,

It came from the website, a book called The Creation Answer Book by
Hank Hanegraaff.

Oh. So I picked some non-science author and it's my fault? You chose an article to back up, if you've got the guts. I am not going to play Goldilocks with your claims about there being real scientists who do real science in these fields that publish not non-science or nonsense. You pick and I'll cut up the baloney.
---atheist on 5/14/12


Atheist there are 2 major views of the origin of our universe, planet and life. One is supernatural creation the other involves naturalistic processes. Neither can be proved by the scientific method. Anyone who thinks they can, is deluded. I do not know if your quote comes from the Creation site as you have failed to provide the necessary information. However the writer nowhere claims that his belief can be proved by the scientific method. He is telling us what the Bible says. Therefore to call it junk science is incorrect. What you are saying is that it is in opposition to what you believe.

I ask again please give an example (with proper references) of "bad science" on the creation site.
---Warwick on 5/14/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Diabetes


NurseRobert, you are not telling the truth.

I have pointed out I do not know what is at the centre of the universe, and do not believe we can prove what is at the centre, by the scientific method. If it cannot be proved by this method, it is but belief. I have also stated I do not believe it matters what is at the centre. But this isn't clear enough for you.

But you know it all comes down to what we define as "the centre" doesn't it? If we define it as a fixed pin-point then I believe there is no heavenly body continually at such pin-point position. However if we define the centre as a large area which would still be the centre in relation to the vastness of the universe then some heavenly body or bodies could be there.
---Warwick on 5/14/12


"And said God, Let be lights in expanse of heavens for the dividing between the day and between the night, and be that for signaling and for designating, and for days and years: and be that for lights in expanse of heavens by which light on the earth: and was so. And made he God two of lights of greatness: that which light the major to rule the day, and that which light the minor to rule the night, and also the stars. And set them God in expanse of heavens by which light on the earth, and to rule by day and by night, and for the dividing between the light and between the dark: and saw God, that good: and was evening and was morning day fourth." Gn.1:14-19
---Eloy on 5/14/12


"And said God, Let collect the waters from under the heavens to one place, and show the land: and was so. And called God the land Earth, and the collection of waters called Seas: and saw God, that good. And said God, Begin grass of earth, grass herb from seedling: sowing tree fruit making fruit by kind, wherein seed within it on the earth: and was so. And began so brought forward of earth, grass herb from seedling: sowing by kind that tree making fruit, wherein seed within it by kind: and saw God, that good: and was evening and was morning day third." Gn.1:9-13...and so on.
---Eloy on 5/14/12


Warwick,

The junk science quote came from the creation website. Care to defend any of it on a scientific basis, or can we just apply the Baloney Detection Kit to it wholesale and dismiss it as bunk?
---atheist on 5/14/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Depression


A theist: "This is junk science."

Not really! I have a reliable history book that states that God created everything supernaturally. He only used one step:

Psa 33:6,9 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made, ... For he spake, and it was done, he commanded, and it stood fast.

At least we offer an explanation for the origin of matter and the origin of life. What do you offer besides "I dunno"? You consider yourself a mere random accident of an uncaring and undefined set of chemical anomalies. What a vacuuous pedigree!

What you call "science" is merely childish conjecture supported only by intimidation and fraud.
---jerry6593 on 5/14/12


NurseRobert: My appologies if I have misunderstood your position. Please clarify:

1) Do you indeed believe in the supernatural, biblical 6-day Creation?

2) Do you believe that no death occurred on earth before Adam's sin?

3) Do you believe in the universal flood of Noah?

4) Do you believe that the Big Bang Theory and Darwin's Evolution are false theories?

5) Which do you trust more - the Bible or college professors?



---jerry6593 on 5/14/12


"And said God, Let be expanse within the waters, and let be for dividing between waters of waters. And made he God the expanse, and divided between the waters which from under the expanse and between the waters which above the expanse: and was so. And called God the expanse Heavens: and was evening and was morning day second." Gn.1:6-8...and so on.
---Eloy on 5/14/12


Genesis 1 in the Holy Bible: "In beginning created he God the heavens and the earth. And earth was unsightly and barren, and darkness over deep, and Spirit God appears spreading over the waters. And said God, Let be light: and was light. And saw he God the light, that good, and divided God between the light and between the darkness. And called God the light Day, and the darkness called Night: and was evening and was morning day one." Gn.1:1-5...and so on.
---Eloy on 5/13/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Study


The original dinosaur kinds were made during Creation Week,around 6,000 years ago The land-based dinosaurs were created on Day 6 of Creation Week,along with man. If there were aquatic dinosaurs, they were created on Day 5....There was no suffering and death before Adam sinned dinosaurs from the beginning lived alongside man and all the other created kinds.All air-breathing vertebrate land animals (including dinosaurs) that were not aboard Noahs Ark perished in the global Flood around 4,500 years ago. But they did not become extinct at that time because pairs of each kind were preserved on the Ark.

This is junk science.
---atheist on 5/13/12


In a related blog: Whose side are you on? It's hard to distinguish whether you're a Christian or an atheist.---jerry6593 on 5/13/12

If you go back and read the interactions, my question derived from a comment Warwick made about Athiest making a statment as fact instead of belief. I challenged Warwick to state, unequivocally, that his belief is fact. He was either unable or unwilling to do so.

Im not an athiest, and I certainly believe in God, but at this point, the jury is out as to the creation of the universe.

And NO, the earth is NOT the center of the universe.

As for being hard to believe I'm a Christian, I have often give the same thought about you.

Sorry people, I don't mean to hijack the thread.
---NurseRobert on 5/13/12


Atheist it was you who made the claim of bad science on the Creation site. But as you have very adequately demonstrated it was a lie, just another in a string of lies, because you cannot back up your empty claim. It would be so easy to defend your claim if it were true, but it isn't.

You are a truly pathetic and dishonest person, a true example of the 'morality' of the Godless.
---Warwick on 5/13/12


They all appear false. You pick one if you want to play this silly game.
---atheist on 5/12/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Verses


A theist: "They are all bad science."

Here's YOUR definition of GOOD science:

Nothing magically became everything in one infinitesimally small point and then exploded to become the everything we see today.

Life spontaneously created itself from nonliving matter by an unknown, natural process.

Life forms in the Cambrian Layer magically appeared as if evolved from nothing.

Life forms decided to make themselves better, so they modified their own DNA by magic.

When life forms die, they are gradually buried over thousands of years, and their bodies magically protected from scavengers all the while.

And this you call "science"????? ROFL!
---jerry6593 on 5/13/12


Atheist you have contempt for Christians so would immediately supply exact details and references of "bad science" on the Creation site, if it existed, but don't because it is an empty claim. As you are the one making the (false) claim it is up to you to prove your point.

Over the years I have witnessed debates between creationist Christians and atheists regarding evolution and have seen their false claims destroyed, one by one. I remember one between Dr Carl Wieland from Creation Ministries and Dr Paul Willis. Willis began strongly, confident (like you) that he was correct. By the end his confidence level was very low. He lost the debate by an almost 4:1 margin!
---Warwick on 5/12/12


They are all bad science. What,s the point of me choosing one. you pick one and we,lltake it from there. You get the first move,
---Atheist on 5/11/12


Atheist, tests such as "Shermer's baloney detection kit" are useful but of course limited by the testers ability to operate outside of bias.

However in testable, observable, repeatable science the bias of the tester will not affect the result as, for a simple example, the boiling point of pure water at sea-level will always be 100 centigrade. It matters not whether the tester is Hindu, Buddhist or atheist.

I still await a specific, referenced, example of "bad science" from the Creation site. You obviously don't have one.
---Warwick on 5/11/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Arthritis


Warwick //Are personal beliefs driving the claim? Do your personal beliefs drive your claims? Of course they do. So what is the point of this?
---
Will you ever understand that you are really wasting your time trying to convince those who have chosen to believe in the evidence as depicted by science over that of changing interpretations of the Bible?
---lee1538 on 5/11/12


Warwick,

There are only claims on the website. You pick one.

You know the point of the questions in the Baloney Detection Kit,---why do you pretend otherwise? It works for astrology, and it works for god spoke creation into existence. Both have claims, neither can pass the test.
---atheist on 5/11/12


Atheist, I still await a specific, referenced, example of "bad science" from the Creation site.

How reliable is the source of the claim? What are the judges beliefs?
Have the claims been verified by somebody else? Does this mean does anyone else agree?
Does this fit with the way the world works? In whose opinion?
Has anyone tried to disprove the claim? And failed?
Where does the preponderance of evidence point? As we are talking evidence as opposed to proof I ask: Is truth majority opinion?
Is the claimant providing positive evidence? What does this mean?
Are personal beliefs driving the claim? Do your personal beliefs drive your claims? Of course they do. So what is the point of this?


---Warwick on 5/11/12


BTW Atheist Micheal Shermer is a 'Skeptic', sceptical about everything but microbe to man evolution. Now he wouldn't be biased would he?
---Warwick on 5/11/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Asthma


Let's start with any one claim you can find on the site that passes the following tests:

How reliable is the source of the claim?
Does the source make similar claims?
Have the claims been verified by somebody else?
Does this fit with the way the world works?
Has anyone tried to disprove the claim?
Where does the preponderance of evidence point?
Is the claimant playing by the rules of science?
Is the claimant providing positive evidence?
Does the new theory account for as many phenomena as the old theory?
Are personal beliefs driving the claim?

Your choice.

Do you recognize this list? It's Michael Shermer's baloney detection kit, after Carl Sagan's.
---atheist on 5/10/12


Logic does not come from randomness.
Therefore, any logical statements must have a logical source.
If an atheist speaks logically, he wasn't produced randomly.
---micha9344 on 5/10/12


Atheist, I asked you for a specific example of "bad science" on the Creation website, with specific references and what do I get? The usual vague criticism of those who dare disagree with you!
---Warwick on 5/10/12


That is wonderful, ELENA! God is truly amazing!

Watching my friend turn taught me to never give up on anyone. The power of Gods love can reach and change ANY man. Im glad I "sold out" myself :D
---CraigA on 5/10/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Cholesterol


Yes. Jerry, fossils don't exist.

Warwick. Andrew Snelling and anything that comes out of his mouth.
---atheist on 5/10/12


Yes Atheist, in reality! The Creation site does not endeavour to prove the Bible by science as that would be elevating man's changing beliefs above the word of God. It does however show the many flaws in evolution, And that this belief does not prove the Bible wrong.

Bad science? Give a specific example with references.
---Warwick on 5/10/12


Hello,Bro.CraigA. That is wonderfull! I have nev'r heard a real athiest turn Christian. I did have a friend where I used to work he was a devout Moslem and he almost "spit fire!" he would get so,mean and hatefull to Christians and then we both got transferred (it been many years ago) wow! The next time I saw him he was preaching on the streets in one of the most dangerous areas and wow! he really "sold out" to Christ! he smiles and everything! Heb.5:4,5.
---ELENA on 5/10/12


A theist: "Seriously, 'in reality.'????????"

Here's YOUR "reality":

Nothing magically became everything in one infinitesimally small point and then exploded to become the everything we see today.

Life spontaneously created itself from nonliving matter by an unknown, natural process.

Life forms in the Cambrian Layer magically appeared as if evolved from nothing.

Life forms decided to make themselves better, so they modified their own DNA by magic.

When life forms die, they are gradually buried over thousands of years, and their bodies magically protected from scavengers all the while.

And this you call "reality"????? ROFL!


---jerry6593 on 5/10/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Lasik Surgery


Athiest, the reason no genuine believer can win a debate with you is "faith." You follow the evidence of your eyes, and reason there from. You concluded, "If I were God I would not allow this or that"
Here is the fundamental difference between a man of faith and an athiest. The athiest is "of the world." Judges everything by worldly standards, views life from the standpoint of time and sense, and weighs everything in the balances of his own carnal mind. But the man of faith brings in God, looks at everything from His standpoint, estimates values by spiritual standards, and views life in the light of eternity. He receives whatever comes as from the hand of God, and rejoices in hope of the glory of God.
---Mark_V. on 5/10/12


Jennifer, you CAN win a debate with an atheist. My best friend was atheist and into witchcraft and he is now a follower of Christ. You just have to set your own feelings aside and listen very closely to the Spirits guidance. God can see what they need to hear much more clearly than we can. Let Jesus speak thru you.

There were many times I became aggravated to the point that I wanted to yell at him for being so stubborn and the Lord would tell me to back off. Over a month or so my friend began to see some of things the Lord was speaking thru me and could not deny the truth any longer.

Never give up. Love hopes in all things.
---CraigA on 5/9/12


Warwick,

Seriously, "in reality."????????
---atheist on 5/9/12


Jennifer, your friend went to school and studied a plethora of books claiming science as fact. As a student of science, his mind needed to be open to accept the theories as presented. And I'm sure he had to research many of these theories and asked many question to learn what needed to be learned.

Now ask him to study just one more book - the King James Bible. This is to be his research: to pick out and make notes of all the science facts presented in scripture. He will surely find science fact written three thousand years ago that has only has been recently dicovered and proven within the past one hundred years. It is to be the last book he reads.
---Steveng on 5/9/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Bullion


Atheist, in reality the Creation site has many articles which show that evolution is not fact therefore does not disprove Scripture. Why would any knowledgeable Christian use mans falible, ever-changing beliefs to prove the Bible correct? God's word is above man's changing opinions. It stands on its own.

I have seen numerous debates between Christians and atheists and the atheists mostly lose. Scientists from Creation Ministries International have challenged Richard Dawkins et al to debate the issue but Dawkins and co. ran from it. They know it is safe to appear on left-wing atheist TV/radio where their faulty pronouncements will not be challenged. Maybe you could encourage them to accept the challenge? Don't hold your breath.
---Warwick on 5/9/12


The creation site is full of articles trying to prove "scientifically" what the bible says, and denounce with bad science evolutionary theory.

Mark, you can't win an argument with an atheist.
---atheist on 5/9/12


Jennifer, from a few decades of experience I would suggest you access creation dot com. It is crammed with articles which give the creation view point. I have come to know all the scientists who work there and respect their scientific and Biblical knowledge. There are also excellent resources available for purchase.
---Warwick on 5/9/12


Jennifer, you will never win an argument with an athiest or evolutionist. Just not possible.
"But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Cor. 2:14).

You can give them the Truth, yet it will mean nothing to the those who are in the flesh. God has to change them. They cannot change their own hearts.
It's something like: A person who always looks at the negatives in life. While the positives are there, all they see is negative. No one puts a gun to their heads, they are just not "able" to see the Truth. The ability is not there "nor can they know them"
---Mark_V. on 5/9/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Menopause


Evolution in respect to man has never proved the missing link. Every attempt has failed. We have seen a few fakes.
As I understand it humans have a fused chromosome so have 23 pairs and not 24, which is unique.
I think it is hard to argue against evolution in general. Species adapt and change all the time.
Yet there is no factual proof we evolved from apes. Many species have similar DNA,it does not make them the same species. Nor do they inter mate.
---chris on 5/8/12


Jennifer: I am such a scientist. I was schooled in the Darwinian Philosophy, and as a physicist working in the Defense/Aerospace Industry, I came to find "holes" in the theory. As a scientist, I knew that any theory could be falsified by demonstrating that it violated only one established scientific principle. Over the years, I "collected" scientific evidences of the falsity of the house of cards called "Evolution".

I had reached about 100 of them when, a few years back, I came upon a book which contained thousands. It's called "The Evolution Handbook", and is available from evolutionfacts dot com.


---jerry6593 on 5/8/12


Try talkorigins dot org and then answersingenesis dot org.

Choose a topic, such as the age of the earth, and look them up on both websites. Do this with your friend and you can learn from each other.

Let me know how it comes out...
---atheist on 5/7/12


Do a web-search for "Creation Ministries International".
---hLN on 5/5/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Penpals


aka: I know what you mean about the internet....

My concern is if someone knows a 'site'/book which they know does not leave too many 'loose ends' - most explanations start from the idea that the Bible is true, which my friend does not accept, so he will not aceept our basis.

I can explain problems with their methods of proof (especially of the 'ancient world') but positive proof I fear I may make some mess-up (which I have seen extensively online!)
---Peter on 5/4/12


//Do you know a place I can find such evidence?//

The Internet is the first thing that humanity has built that humanity doesn't understand, the largest experiment in anarchy that we have ever had.

Eric Schmidt

good luck!
---aka on 5/4/12


Lee Strobbel of "A Case for Christ" fame has an other book called "Case for a Creator"
---Scott1 on 5/4/12


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.