Well...it had to be on the web...

[erich orser]

Um... thanks for the reDiscovery Institute link. Laughing through my terror-induced tears.

CapnNemo - great article!

 

[sorseress]

Back on topic

Thanks, Cap'n Nemo. Excellent post. We needed that....

 

[um...]

That article by Dawkins and Coyne is simply fantastic, Cap'n. You'd be hard-pressed to find a more lucid smack-down of ID anywhere. I'm not so sure that giving proportionate time to the two "theories" is such a bad idea, though. If we go by number of pages in peer-reviewed papers, then the ratio of ID time to "Darwin" time would be 1 to several (hundred?) thousand. I think we could suck up a few seconds out of an academic year to laugh at the Discovery Institute. Actually, since over 2/3 of students apparently learn no science anyway, it would probably end up requiring no more than a few milliseconds per lifetime to get ID out of the way. Fair enough for me!

 

[CapnNemo]

Thanks, Cap'n Nemo. Excellent post. We needed that....

Hey, no need to be embarrassed, I like a bit of off topic banter as much as the next poster (witness the amber ammonite thread), just thought people might like to read the article. That's one of the (many) great things about Tonmo, these threads wheel and whirl all over the place like an octo scooting through a glass maze for a discovery channel doc.

It's always entertaining.

Who is the next poster by the way?

 

[Phil]

Well, that settles it for me. Nautiloid fossils now prove the biblical flood apparantly.

It's like a veil lifted from my eyes.

Nautiloids: An Amazing Discovery in the Grand Canyon
by Dave & Mary Jo Nutting

What in the world are nautiloids, and what do they have to do with the layers of the Grand Canyon? It’s an amazing story of an amazing discovery with startling implications in the debate over the age of the earth.

Nautiloids were extinct marine creatures that resembled squids living in hard, chambered shells. Paleontologists have known about nautiloids for a long time but, until the past decade, these fossils have been thought to be extremely rare in the Grand Canyon. However, research by Dr. Steven Austin from the Institute for Creation Research has revealed an extensive nautiloid bed running the whole length of the Canyon and extending all the way to Las Vegas, NV. It is now estimated that there are millions of nautiloid fossils in the Grand Canyon itself.

How could such an extensive display of fossils remain hidden for so long? To be fair, they are in the depths of Grand Canyon, on rock ledges in the Redwall Limestone – not exactly an easy place to get to. However, they are accessible and easily visible to the trained eye. So why haven’t they been discovered before now? Dr. Austin believes it is because traditional geologists have not been asking the right questions. He says, “You find what you’re looking for.” Because of his worldview which includes the historical accuracy of the Genesis Flood, Dr. Austin believed there should be evidence of this Flood left in the rock layers of the earth. Through some rather serendipitous events, careful attention to details, and faith in a God who answers prayer, the discovery was made.

The significance of this find is truly staggering — both in its extent and implications. The sheer numbers indicate a mass-kill event and the orientation of the fossils indicated burial under a fast-moving, laminar flow. This totally demolishes the traditional interpretation of the slow and gradual deposition of the Redwall Limestone under shallow, placid seas. It also cuts out “millions” of years of time from the rock strata – time in which evolution was thought to occur. These findings fit perfectly with the Biblical account of creation, followed by a catastrophic Flood.

http://www.discovercreation.org/newlet/NovDec 2004.htm (I wouldn't bother though).

(Oh, and thanks for the great posts and interesting links CapnNemo and Sorseress. A fascinating discussion, everyone. The fossils forum has never been so busy! Great reading.)

 

[cthulhu77]

Hmmm. I am in the process of moving some branches away from a section of my concrete wall, so I can
RUN INTO IT

 

[um...]

Dave & Mary Jo Nutting? Could that be any easier?

"It's a Great Day to Be a Creationist", eh? Yeah, maybe. Bad century, but one heck of a great day.

 

[Jean]

If things don't get better here, I'm thinking about going Kiwi when my hitch in the Army is up.....

c'mon down mate!

J

 

[cthulhu77]

The best source of reliable news out there :

The Onion | America's Finest News Source.

 

[Squidman]

I'm not trying to convert anybody here...

Gaa! There it is again: trying to prove the existence of a God through science! As a decided Christian, that aggrivates me. The proof that Creationists offer against evolution can only convince the already convinced. Those who offer verification of ID generally use circular logic. How frustrating! Upon closer inspection, it appears that Creationists are fighting the wrong battle. ID is only linked to the real center of Christianity. Putting ID in schools isn't going to change anything; those who don't recognize any authority in the Bible will not spontaneously convert after listening to a science teacher mention ID.

I hope that in my inevitably scientific career, I can help resolve this unnecessary issue.

 

[cthulhu77]

Faith is a funny thing...it can work wonders, or tear them down...to me, it is best left up to the individual to decide how spiritual one wants to be, and left completely out of the public sector.
It is kind of amusing to me, though, to hear scientists talk like they have the grasp on reality so firm, that they have no doubts...I usually chuckle.
"more things in heaven and on earth..." ad infinitum !

 

[um...]

Science is the only honest way to produce explanations of the material world. Scientists know they are always somewhat ignorant, or they wouldn't be doing science in the first place. What about any nonmaterial component of reality? How can you be sure that you're not deluded in your beliefs? I think it's fine to have them, but I hate when people won't admit that their faith could ultimately be wrong. Faith isn't any sort of knowledge, because people of mutually exclusive beliefs would end up with contradicting truths. That's ridiculous.

 

[cthulhu77]

LOL...science can barely describe small bits of the natural world, and is constantly at odds within itself, changing more than the latest fad...it is the new religion of the masses for this century, but it has more holes in it than a really good block of swiss cheese.

 

[um...]

Science isn't a collection of data, it's a method of investigation. It's the bus, not the bus stops. The fact that it's at odds with itself is its strength. Especially since that internal conflict is never settled by genocide. Small bits of the natural world? Like atoms? Cells? What do you mean by "barely"?

 

[Cephkid]

Science isn't a collection of data, it's a method of investigation. It's the bus, not the bus stops. The fact that it's at odds with itself is its strength. Especially since that internal conflict is never settled by genocide. Small bits of the natural world? Like atoms? Cells? What do you mean by "barely"?

Precisely! Being at odds with itself isn't a weakness, it's a strength; as it is at odds with itself because it always looks for truth, NOT to prove that IT is correct, and everything else is wrong. It is NOT so arrogant so as to believe it may be wrong, and so seeks the truth, NOT to eliminate any other way of viewing the world.

Just my 2 cents.