Is it just me, or does anybody else get that the theocrats are seriously getting on a fetish where they attribute everything negative to non-believers?
Not to mention how they try to get us to believe they are persecuted martyrs for their faith.
Evolution is religion . The very first line of the Humanist Manifesto is that they believe we evolved, that the universe was self created. When the Christianity this nation was founded on was outlawed by federal judges overstepping their power it did not leave a vacuum, Atheism is now the official state religion .
If evolution had a leg to stand on then why the terror that teaching it warts and all brings out in its worshippers? Why not teach both views and allow the students to think for themselves ? Why do most promoters of evolutionist refuse to study the science and decide truth for themselves instead of letting others think for them and tell them what to believe? Their main argument is that all scientist agree so it must be true. When confronted with the truth that many of the world's greatest scientist including the man N.A.S.A.considers the world's leading authority on geo-physics and everyone knowledgeable about the Terra super computer program agrees is the world's leading expert on super computer modelling for geo-physics is a creationist they still call anyone who is anti-evolution is an idiot. These (idiots) include the Wright Brothers, Werner Von Braun , the world's greatest surgeon , Louis Pasteur , Sir Issac Newton etc. etc. This accusation comes from people who can't explain radiometric dating at an 8th grade level. The atheist HAS to believe in 2 things, evolution and great ages . It is like telling a detective to find out why a body that was found has 10 wounds from a knife in it's back but it can't be murder. What amazes me most about those who are the most vocal promoters of evolution is their total ignorance of the subject. Of the thousands of people {literally} I have spoken to on the subject not one could answer the most basic questions such as how does radiometric dating supposedly work , what 3 blind assumptions are used to take the the number of mother/daughter atoms and fabricate a "date" , what is the maximum age that a fossil could possibly be and still contain identifiable carbon 14 ,etc. etc.
C14 has a half life of 5730 years . If you can handle grade school math by the time you get to 60ka the amount of c14 is approx 1/2250th and can no longer be detected. There are a few games used to make it appear that you could stretch it to 250ka (ka = thousand years} but even if that was true it would not help. If every atom of the earth was c-14 it would all be gone in 660ka . When you can detect c-14 the fossil cannot me more than 250ka if you accept the game and guess what? Every fossil ever found has easily detectable amounts. Coal , regardless of the depth is is at measures about the same, all dino bones measure about the same and DIAMONDS as well. The argument that contamination explains all this is ludicrous as diamonds are impossible to contaminate and if all the fossils in the sediment are contaminated then c-14 would be useless anyway. The range it is somewhat useful at is between 800 and 2000 years and no archaeologist will use it to counter historical data. Even Dr.Lilly warned his fellow evolutionists that his discovery had a serious problem in that the data shows that equilibrium would be reached in 30ka and had not yet suggesting the earth is less than 30ka. We have more accurate measurements now and the problem is worse.
Evolution tries to convince people that chance copying errors sometimes benefit the organism and that these mutations magically accumulate in perfect sequence to create features and eventually totally new organism that never existed in the biosphere. One little bitty problem with that fairy story, in order to have copying mistakes you have to have reproduction. To have reproduction you need self reproducing organisms, where did they come from ? Magic ? Just There ?
Another little bitty problem is that life is information based and science only knows one source for information, the wilful act of an intelligent mind.
Intelligence cannot arise by itself from matter yet that is necessary for evolution to be true. Erasmus Darwin was inspired by the 1st .century B.C Epicurean poet Lucretius. Evolution was ancient then yet evolutionist tell me Charles Darwin was it's founder.
When I was in school I was taught that stalactites , stalagmites , coral , oil , fossils , diamonds , opals etc. took millions of years to form, now we know all that is untrue. If the truth was taught evolution would be regulated to the wastebin of history which is why it strikes terror into the hearts of evolutionists to just teach the science , the science is consistent with the Bible, not Darwinism.
