• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

The Creation Museum

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Brewtus;1887006; said:
Nothing about the Creation Museum is scientific. Over 800 scientists and educators (including many at Ohio State) in the three states closest to the museum have attested to the following statement (http://www.sciohost.org/states/):
Click to expand...

If you know anything about this issue, you would know that secular scientists have billions of reasons to lie and distort science. All scientists in that statement are NOT neutral, they are biased. Without these "secular humanists" lies and distortion of science they propagate ignornance. The masses have bought their lies and now attack truth.

AIG has taken private money and started research based on the Bible as authority on the earth and universe. They conduct experiments and review data from a biblical perspective. Once they have done this, they attempt to publish their articles with "respected" science journals. These organizations are run by "secular humanists" who cower from the truth, so they attempt to discredit the truth bearers.

Science is big business and for a long time it has not been the search for truth. It has been about half truths and out-right lies. Whatever get them more $$$$$$. People need to be skeptical of all scientists. The lies and distortion of facts by climatologists should prove this out.
 
Upvote 0
1997Buckeye;1887090; said:
If you know anything about this issue, you would know that secular scientists have billions of reasons to lie and distort science. All scientists in that statement are NOT neutral, they are biased. Without these "secular humanists" lies and distortion of science they propagate ignornance. The masses have bought their lies and now attack truth.

AIG has taken private money and started research based on the Bible as authority on the earth and universe. They conduct experiments and review data from a biblical perspective. Once they have done this, they attempt to publish their articles with "respected" science journals. These organizations are run by "secular humanists" who cower from the truth, so they attempt to discredit the truth bearers.

Science is big business and for a long time it has not been the search for truth. It has been about half truths and out-right lies. Whatever get them more $$$$$$. People need to be skeptical of all scientists. The lies and distortion of facts by climatologists should prove this out.
Click to expand...
2mhihc0.jpg
 
Upvote 0
kinch;1886858; said:
lolwut-269x300.jpg
Click to expand...

I greatly respect all others opinions and enjoy reading posts here at BP. I have read many things that i disagreed with but I would not put myself out to be ridiculed with my stance on this issue if I did not feel strongly about it. I have read many scientific journals and been in groups at OSU that have discussed their merits. these processes deal mainly with Dogma and not science. If you approach any scientific question with an outside interpratation of how life began that is not evolution, you will NOT be published. No matter how solid the evidence is.

There is no harm in looking at data with a different perspective. Science is supposed to be the search for the TRUTH. It is not and has not been for a long time. It is now about control of $$$$$$$.
 
Upvote 0
Buckeye513;1887101; said:
2mhihc0.jpg
Click to expand...

That was a funny movie. Great clip to pick.

This is a very difficult subject to discuss since so many people, even christians, have accepted evolution as "fact". It is a theory. Just like a biblical earth is a theory. Evolution and christianity are both religions. Todays scientists are the priests of tommorow.
 
Upvote 0
1997Buckeye;1887104; said:
This is a very difficult subject to discuss since so many people, even christians, have accepted evolution as "fact". It is a theory.
Click to expand...

It's difficult to discuss because creationism apologists don't have the scientific grounding to understand what is meant by 'theory' when used in this sense.

A scientific theory isn't just a guess. It is a description of events that has been verified through multiple attempts of falsification.

"Biblical earth" isn't a theory it's a metaphor.

Anyways I'll let you get back to your ranting against those billionaire scientists and their get rich evolution scam.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Muck;1887121; said:
It's difficult to discuss because creationism apologists don't have the scientific grounding to understand what is meant by 'theory' when used in this sense.

A scientific theory isn't just a guess. It is a description of events that has been verified through multiple attempts of falsification.

"Biblical earth" isn't a theory it's a metaphor.

Anyways I'll let you get back to your ranting against those billionaire scientists and their get rich evolution scam.
Click to expand...

Muck, I appreciate your post but it is slightly condescending. I would argue that most "scientists" don't have the scientific grounding to understand what is meant by 'theory' when used in this sense.

When I was in school, I was taught the steps to produce a scientific experiment. It started with hypothosis and ended with LAW. That is the process. Since evolution in impossible to prove, these "scientists" have now changed this scientific process. It still starts with hypothosis but LAW is nowhere to be found. Now the final step is quorum. They have bastardized the process for their own purpose.

You are right about what a scientific theory is. But please show me reputable scientific information that even slightly lends creadence to evolution. There is NONE. It is all spin. Most data gathered from science points to a Creator.

Why do you say, "Biblical earth" isn't a theory it's a metaphor? Can't it be both?

As to your last point, "Anyways I'll let you get back to your ranting against those billionaire scientists and their get rich evolution scam."
I really enjoyed your sarcasim. It made me LOL. I am not against science or even them becoming rich. To be honest, I don't know any billionaire scientists, but I do regularly meet with some millionaire scientists. It is great to be able to have these conversations with educated and open minded people.

Thank you for your response.
 
Upvote 0
1997Buckeye;1887102; said:
There is no harm in looking at data with a different perspective. Science is supposed to be the search for the TRUTH. It is not and has not been for a long time. It is now about control of $$$$$$$.
Click to expand...
I sincerely hope you didn't graduate with any kind of science degree from Ohio State as I'd be very disappointed if that's what they are teaching students these days. If someone truly had a "Theory of Creationism" that was better supported by the current evidence, they would undoubtedly win a Nobel and be a very wealthy person. There is more notoriety and money in overturning long-held scientific theories (Newton, Pasteur, Galileo, Darwin, Einstein, Hawking, etc.) than just accepting the status quo.
 
Upvote 0
Brewtus;1887180; said:
I sincerely hope you didn't graduate with any kind of science degree from Ohio State as I'd be very disappointed if that's what they are teaching students these days. If someone truly had a "Theory of Creationism" that was better supported by the current evidence, they would undoubtedly win a Nobel and be a very wealthy person. There is more notoriety and money in overturning long-held scientific theories (Newton, Pasteur, Galileo, Darwin, Einstein, Hawking, etc.) than just accepting the status quo.
Click to expand...

LOL,

Did you even read any articles at http://www.answersingenesis.org/.
That is their entire research. Great scientific articles that the "main stream" science community refuse to acknowledge.
 
Upvote 0
1997Buckeye;1887164; said:
You are right about what a scientific theory is. But please show me reputable scientific information that even slightly lends creadence to evolution. There is NONE. It is all spin. Most data gathered from science points to a Creator.
Click to expand...


What do you call fossils? Carbon dating? What about all the humanoid skeletons that have been found that just aren't quite modern humans? I'm sorry, but there is an overwhelming amount of evidence for evolution, and absolutely none for creationism. You are grasping at straws.
 
Upvote 0
Upvote 0
1997Buckeye;1887275; said:
LOL,

Did you even read any articles at http://www.answersingenesis.org/.
That is their entire research. Great scientific articles that the "main stream" science community refuse to acknowledge.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm familiar with AiG and as I'm sure you know there are many websites that counter every claim made by them. But instead of posting links, why don't we engage in a discussion as Kinch suggested. What exactly is your "Theory of Creationism" and what evidence do you have that supports it?
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top