Search This Blog

Friday, May 24, 2013

Evolution fails again says Ian Juby...Creation Science makes testable predictions and are proved to be correct. Talkorigins proves to be wrong as usual!




Ian Juby, as he presents some evidence, reveals falsifable predictions made by creationists which  have proved to be true.    Many predictions of creationists have been shown to be true, including the way natural selection works.   In the second video, Ian answers some skeptics:



You see, when I say that talkorigins is a deliberately deceptive site, I am not engaging in ad hominem attacks, I am simply stating fact.   They use material that has been disproved and that they know is not accurate, BUT if the content fools enough people they are apparently content.
Buyer Beware, right?

I believe you could take sixth grades and spend on semester with a Creationist and a Darwinist teaching the class about origins science and ereation versus evolution and, if you did, only a tiny fraction of the kids would ever believe in evolution.  It is too far-fetched to believe.

14 comments:

Cowboy said...

Thanks for this post. A few of us are spreading the word about Propaganda.Talk.Origins. People go to that, and other pooling of ignorance sites like the libelous, cowardly(ir)RationalWiki, then tell creationists what they believe. Make sense to you? Me, neither.

Anonymous said...

Hi Cowboy, perhaps you could explain the libel accusation.

Anonymous said...

Better yet, Bob: have you posted any bogus DMCA claims lately?

radar said...

I notice the silence of Darwinists who used to claim Creationists cannot make testable claims. In fact Creation science has made all sorts of testable claims and predictions that have been fulfilled.

Darwinists, on the other hand, are still waiting for the first observed upwards evolution event. They have had to change their hypothesis 777 times to adjust to new information that would cause normal scientists to dump Darwinism as a failure. It is the religious aspect that keeps it alive because Darwinists detest the God concept.

Anonymous said...

Radar, if I remember correctly you dumped Hovind as a reference prior to starting this blog (it was a while ago, so it's possible that I misremember). Which specific arguments from him caused you to decide that he's too dishonest to use as a source? I'm not defending the guy by any means... just curious.

radar said...

Kent Hovind chose to illegally build on property against government regulations and lied about the project scope and also the money involved. I do not remember the details but I know he is imprisoned on multiple counts that boil down to massive and intentional fraud and arrogance.

I first questioned his veracity when he kept promoting the famed Japanese Plesiosaur as such when it was identified as a basking shark. Although later research makes the idea of the carcass as a basking shark highly unlikely, but the structure of the carcass was not consistent with a Plesiosaur, either. So continuing to use it as evidence indicated a guy who didn't care whether his evidence was sound or not.

We can all make mistakes. Science is primarily about disproving things once thought correct. In other words, we eliminate the impossible and unlikely to settle on the most logical and supportable concept. At least, science did that before the age of Darwinism. If it was not a pillar of Atheistic Humanism, Darwinism would have been cast aside already.

In any event, with Hovind seen to be a convicted liar and fraud, I advised folks to avoid Dr. Dino. His son may well be honorable, I simply have not paid much attention to him, as there are so many reliable YEC and ID sites out there already.

Anonymous, how could you possibly know whether I "dumped" Hovind BEFORE I began writing this blod? Now I am curious back at you...

radar said...

Why would Cowboy Bob be associated with "bogus DMCA claims?"

Stormbringer said...

That's probably one of the cowardly trolls I told you about. He used my picture without permission. I reported it to Wordpress. They suspended him until he took it down. He put it up again, they suspended him again. Wordpress agreed with me that I had a legitimate claim to MY photo, and he kept whining that the claim was "bogus". Meanwhile, the flaming hypocrite uses all sorts of materials from other people, and files takedown notices on other people's sites. But the evidence is clear that he is fundamentally flawed in his atheistic "honesty".

Stormbringer said...

By the way, the weasels at (ir)RationalWiki have been proved to be libelous and defamatory as well as cowards. If I was an atheist, I'd be ashamed to be associated with their childish antics.

Anonymous said...

To answer your question, Radar, you've mentioned Hovind and your aversion to him several times recently. Naturally, I got curious as to whether you had a full story written out on the blog or not, so I went looking. The earliest reference I could find had you already warning folks away, so naturally I assumed you had dumped him prior to starting the blog.

Mind you, it wasn't a exhaustive search, so I could be entirely mistaken. If you did write out the whole story in a post, I'd be appreciative if you'd point me toward it. If not, it would be cool if you'd take a bit of time to write about it some day, if the mood strikes.

radar said...

Actually, Anonymous, there was a good reason for warning people away from Hovind and talkorigins. I actually do not remember when I first realized Hovind was not terribly interested in being correct. The same problem was the flaw I noticed in talkorigins. It goes like this:

You see, there is what you can say that people will believe versus what you say that you actually have reason to believe is the truth. I have to admit that one of the talkorigins guys told me he believed he had to promote evolution for the sake of Christianity. It was tortured logic, but the lies they post on that site are pretty obvious if you do your research so I finally labeled them as deliberate frauds and that was that.

With Hovind, it wasn't simply a matter of posting things that turn out to be wrong and being unwilling to admit it, it was his own life. He was building his dinosaur park without conforming to the law. His wife apparently was making transactions to hide funds involved with the ministry that were taxable. Some people say the IRS went after him because of his worldview, and in light of recent news stories, that may well be true. But it appears that he deliberately broke the law. It also appears that some other people had actually been promoting deliberate tax evasion by church organizations.

I understand that, technically, the income tax is not constitutional. Lots of people have pointed this out to me. But it nevertheless is considered the law of the land and so we pay it. Jesus said to render onto Caesar things that are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's. So Hovind needed to file taxes and obey building codes and all that stuff. Creation.com and Answers in Genesis and Institute for Creation Research and all the other major Creation Science organizations seek to publish truth and obey the law. Hovind needed to do it, too. Right?

radar said...

As it happens, there was a Jesuit concept of "doing evil to bring about a greater good." This is certainly not a Biblical idea, but sometimes people will decide that it makes sense to them.

I watched the film on television as a Darwinist scientist made a model of a pelvis of a so-called human ancestor, Lucy I believe, and made the apelike pelvis conform to a human-like shape! Was that science??? How about the French and their deliberate alterations of Neandertal skulls to make them look ape-like as documented by Dr. Jack Cuozzo?

If I knew of information that would make people abandon Darwinism but I also knew it was faked, I would not use it. I've been raked over the coals for using information that turned out to be true. I have had a couple of regular commenters who ran off after they were caught obviously lying or were proved utterly wrong and they did not have the character to admit their mistakes, they ran off rather than admit that they were wrong.

If I find out I am wrong, I admit it. If I am sure I am right, I will withstand furious criticism. The whole idea is to present truth and valid evidence. I do not believe that Kent Hovind nor the talkorigins guys are devoted to truth and integrity. So therefore I tell folks to avoid them.

There are many so-called Creation Science sites that are compromisers but that is a matter of their conscience. They are a sad commentary on a subgroup of Christianity that puts faith in fallible man above infallible God. There are Darwinist sites that are profane and crude. But if that doesn't bother you I am not going to say anything else. No way do I mention their sites because I am not giving them free publicity.

So it boils down to a philosophy behind a website. Do you intend to give people truth? Do you stand behind what you say? Does your life resemble your words? I've been working in ministry in many ways, mostly outreach and youth, for decades. I have had the pastor label and worked my butt off to fulfill my calling from God. My wife would tell you that I am the same guy in the house and out of the house. Maybe you don't like me but I am what I am.

Anonymous said...

"I notice the silence of Darwinists who used to claim Creationists cannot make testable claims. In fact Creation science has made all sorts of testable claims and predictions that have been fulfilled."

Please highlight a testable claim that you think would be true if YEC were true and would be false if an old Earth and the theory of evolution were true, with the results being in favor of YEC. No strawman arguments need apply.

Searlas said...

Dr. Humphreys used YEC beliefs and accurately predicted planetary magnetic fields & was proved right. Old earth evos were totally wrong.