Creationists Demand Equal Airtime Over Cosmos Content

Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually . . . no. Before the Aswan High Dam was built, the annual Nile floods came right up the base of the Giza Plateau (we've pictures of that, btw), so getting the blocks there would have been comparatively easy. All of the other 190+ pyramids are in similar striking distance to the Nile at full inundation. The Plateau itself is rock, so the ground is solid. They also had plenty of levers and such, though they did not yet use the wheel. We've no evidence on whether or not they used moveable rollers, however, which is a distinct possibility.



I'm not sure what mainstream history you are referring to. They were every bit as smart as the modern man; we are talking behaviorally modern, civilized, literate Homo sapiens sapiens here, after all. I'd argue that, on the average, they may have even been smarter, since there was a whole hell of a lot less of a safety net to protect them from their own stupidity.



Since I checked out the links you posted, I'll throw that back at you tenfold. It's probably prudent if we just agree to disagree.

Interesting facts. If they didn't build the wheel then how smart can they be. Some rocks have been evaluated to be laser cut and finished. They had no grinder or sander during those times. The history you read in history books is flawed mostly to fit a certain view/timeline. Even with mathematics and calculations done before their time you still believe it was just primitive people that built those pyramids.
The Last "Wonder of the World"
• Thirty times larger than the Empire State Building, the Pyramid's features are so large they can be seen from the Moon.
• Its base covers 13.6 acres (equal to seven midtown Manhatten city blocks), each side being greater than five acres in area.
• A highway lane eight feet wide and four inches thick could be built from San Francisco to New York and put inside the Great Pyramid.
• The oldest structure in existence, having been started 4,617 years ago, it is the sole remnant of the Seven Wonders of the World.
Journey to the Center of the Earth
• Only a solid stone mountain could endure the Pyramid's immense weight. And indeed, a flat solid granite mountain happens to be located just beneath the surface of the ground directly under the Pyramid.
• It is built to face true North.
• The Pyramid is located at the exact center of the Earth's land mass. That is, its East-West axis corresponds to the longest land parallel across the Earth, passing through Africa, Asia, and America. Similarly, the longest land meridian on Earth, through Asia, Africa, Europa, and Antarctica, also passes right through the Pyramid. Since the Earth has enough land area to provide 3 billion possible building sites for the Pyramid, the odds of it's having been built where it is are 1 in 3 billion.
Construction Unequaled by Modern Technology
• Like 20th century bridge designs, the Pyramid's cornerstones have balls and sockets built into them. Several football fields long, the Pyramid is subject to expansion and contraction movements from heat and cold, as well as earthquakes, settling, and other such phenomena. After 4,600 years it's structure would have been significantly damaged without such construction.
• While the bulk of the Pyramid's core was constructed of 4,000- to 40,000-pound blocks of soft limestone, the outer layer of the Pyramid was made of a beautifully bright, protective layer of polished stone. These outer "casing stones" are missing today because about 600 years ago they were stolen by Arabs, (This accounts for the very worn appearance of the Pyramid today, since the inner limestone blocks are not immune to attack by the elements-wind, rain, and sandstrom.) This protective covering was made up of 100-inch-thick, 20-ton block of hard, white limestone, similar to marble but superior in hardness and in durability against the elements.
The Great Pyramid did not always look as "rough" as it does today. Originally it was encased with a layer of tight-fitting, highly polished 20-ton stone slabs.
• The casing stones, 144,000 in all, were so brilliant that they could literally be seen from the mountains of Israel hundreds of miles away. On bright mornings and late afternoons, sunlight reflected by this vast mirrored surface of 5-1/4 acres distinguished the Pyramid as being visible from the moon. (Note: For those interested in possible symbolic significance, in Bible prophecy 144,000 is the number of people-12,000 from each of the 12 tribes of Israel-who are supposed to evangelize the world at the endtime.)
• The people of the area had viewed the Pyramid and its polished stones with awe for
centuries. But when a 13th century earthquake loosened some of these casing stones, the Arabs recognized a great quarry of precut stones that could be used to finish off palaces and mosques. For instance, the casing stones were used to rebuild the new city of El Kaherah plus Cairo mosques and palaces, including the Mosque of Sultan Hasan.
• Amazingly, the outside surface stones are cut within 0.01 (1/100th) inch of perfectly straight and at nearly perfect right angles for all six sides. And they were placed together with an intentional gap between them of 0.02 inch. Modern technology cannot place such 20-ton stones with greater accuracy than those in the Pyramid.
• Even more amazing is that the 0.02-inch gap was designed to allow space for glue to seal and hold the stones together. A white cement that connected the casing stones and made them watertight is still intact and stronger than the blocks that it joins.
Let's pause from our tour for a moment's rest and reflection. Whoever built the Pyramid used a technology that we still do not possess today to cut, move, and cement stones. Whoever built it also had some knowledge of the Earth, because it was built in the right spot- one of the few places that would support such a great weight. The builder also knew where the greatest land mass of the Earth was in both the North-South and East-West directions. Amazing. But we had better keep going. And joining us on the leg of our tour will be none other than Sir Issac Newton...
The Cosmic Yardstick
The Great Pyramid is one of the most comprehensively surveyed buildings in the World. Scientists over the centuries have taken thousands of measurements in their quest to find out more about its mysteries.
Among those intrigued by the incredible accuracy of the Pyramid's construction was the great scientist and mathematician Sir Isaac Newton. Attemping to formulate his famous law of gravity, Newton needed to know the diameter of the Earth. However, in the 1600's no measurement was accurate enough, especially since Newton theorized that the Earth's spin would cause an equatorial bulge. Having heard legends claiming that knowledge of the Earth, the past, and the future were contained in the Pyramid, Newton set out to investigate.
After studying the detailed measurements made by the investigators before him, Newton recognized that many key measurements would be in round numbers if the standard unit of measure was just 0.001 (1/1,000) inch larger than the British inch-which just happens to be the Sacred Jewish Inch. (The Sacred Jewish Inch, 1/25 of a cubit, equals 1.00106 British inches.) This discovery allowed the secrets of the Pyramid to be unlocked and revealed unmistakable and mathematical relationships. For instance:
• We know from geometry that there is a universal relationship between the diameter of a circle and its circumference. Consider this: The height of the Pyramid's apex is 5,812.98 inches, and each side is 9,131 inches from corner to corner (in a straight line). If the circumference of the Pyramid is divided by twice its height (the diameter of a circle is twice the radius), the result is 3.14159, which just happens to be pi. Incredibly, this calculation is accurate to six digits. So the Pyramid is a square circle, and thus pi was designed into it 4,600 years ago. Pi is demonstrated many times throughout the Pyramid.
• Other numbers are also repeated throughout. Each of the Pyramids four walls, when measured as a straight line, are 9,131 inches, for a total of 36,524 inches. At first glance, this number may not seem significant, but move the decimal point over and you get 365.24. Modern science has shown us that the exact length of the solar year is 365.24 days.
All of the evidence in the Great Pyramid shows that 4,600 years ago somebody knew a great deal about the Earth. But it gets better, much better:
• The average height of land above sea level (Miami being low and the Himalayas being high), as can be measured only by modern-day satellites and computers, happens to be 5,449 inches. That is the exact height of the Pyramid.
• All four sides of the Pyramid are very slightly and evenly bowed in, or concave. This effect, which cannot be detected by looking at the Pyramid from the ground, was discovered around 1940 by a pilot taking aerial photos to check certain measurements. As measured by today's laser instruments, all of these perfectly cut and intentionally bowed stone blocks duplicate exactly the curvature of the earth. The radius of this bow is equal to the radius of the Earth. This radius of curvature is what Newton had long been seeking.
Clearly, whoever built the Pyramid had access to information beyond that which earthlings possessed at the time, at least earthlings as we know them. Now, one can argue that we were visited by scientifically advanced beings from outer space who taught us their technology. That is possible from the evidence presented, perhaps even likely. If so, these advanced beings had the paramount goal of leaving behind a message that would endure for eons.
Suppose these beings decided to leave a message. The message would have to be universal yet simple. It would have to survive the centuries and be understandable by all the Earth's inhabitants despite language and cultural differences. The message would have to be understood by many languages that would not come into existence for centuries after the message was written.
So far the message indicates that whoever built the Pyramid knew the Earth well: the length of the year, the radius of curvature, the standard measurement techniques, the average height of the continents, and the center of the land mass. They were able to construct something that we still cannot construct today, and they were able to tie all these things together in this single structure. Were they extraterrestrial, or perhaps even supernatural? The answer is not yet clear. However, thus far we have examined only the outside of the Pyramid.”

Obviously, the above shows that we have barely begun to scratch the surface as to all the perplexing mysteries surrounding the Great Pyramid. Archaeologists still have no answer.
 
Abiogenesis:

I thought this was already proven and demonstrated years ago. Pretty sure that I read about it.
 
Don't creationists pretty much have Sunday morning, do they really need airtime along with Cosmos?
 
Ok, so Cosmos breaks and allows creationists to get some air time, to give their theory of the universe

But if we do that, we have to allow every other religion out there to do the same, and their creation theories etc.

How much you want to bet creationists would not be happy with that?
 
Interesting facts. If they didn't build the wheel then how smart can they be. Some rocks have been evaluated to be laser cut and finished. They had no grinder or sander during those times. The history you read in history books is flawed mostly to fit a certain view/timeline. Even with mathematics and calculations done before their time you still believe it was just primitive people that built those pyramids.

And the thread goes full on Ancient Aliens.
 
I can accept if they say "I think that life arose this way and here's why...." and present evidence.

I'd reject it if they say "I know life arose this way because...", without/ or with shaky "proof".

When somebody says "I know", then I expect irrefutable proof. No exceptions.

Whenever you hear an evolutionist speak, they almost always state everything as if they were facts, and not just guesses like it is.
 
Yet they have no idea what caused the big bang...... i.e there was nothing, and then bang the universe was created......

Awesome, Ok, goddidit, now, if we postulate that the laws of science applied after that point in time, I might be more forgiving. But. the Young earth creationists, like to claim that goddidit 6000 or 10000 years ago, depending on which one is getting more donations on cable at the time.

that's just batshit crazy if you claim to be a scientist. which some of the YEC types do.

I can understand someone with a GED and no scientific training eating this crap up, but when people with degrees in hard science, claim that men walked with dinosaurs, I just want to scream.

Biblical literalism is about as looney toons as you can get, most serious biblical scholars acknowledge that most of the "facts" pointed to in the bible are intended as allegory, throw in things like the 2 different stories of the flood, multiple accounts of creation and bloodthirsty tribal laws from a nomadic culture that thought bronze making was the shit should be the law of the land in modern times, and it just boogles my mind that any rational adult with critical thinking skills could take this seriously.

I'll step off the soapbox now, but damn, stories like this just go right up my atheist ass. :mad:
 
I really don't get why you try to pigeon-hole skepticism and matters that are admitedly blind "faith" as being somehow the same.

Because you have no evidence of either. Yet you believe in one and not the other. Talking on your other point that quacks were outed, well, how long did it take religion to get the skepticism that it has today? A damn long time.
 
You believe in The Word of God.
Religion already has tens of thousands of outlets for consumption all over the world. But that's not enough. It has to poison our schools. And is so intolerant of other messages that a single science-based TV show has religious dogmatists up in arms and demanding "equal time".

And they're still losing....

Pew Research Center in 2012 found that one-in-five U.S. adults (and a full third of those ages 18-30) have no religious affiliation.

I highlighted the important part. They're losing their choke hold (followers = money) and they don't like it.
 
Because you have no evidence of either. Yet you believe in one and not the other. Talking on your other point that quacks were outed, well, how long did it take religion to get the skepticism that it has today? A damn long time.

HAHAHA! It took that long for the skepticism to build because for years upon years you would be slaughtered for standing against "Christianity". It was either, believe this or die...
 
And the thread goes full on Ancient Aliens.

And how! Well, I guess there's no use in doing something half-assed, is there?

I'm all for challenging assumptions; in my decades as a teacher and historian, I've seen plenty of theories revised or outright debunked. Based. On. Empirical. Evidence.
Conker, that wall-o-text you posted is a mishmash of half-truths, twisted facts, and outright fantasy. "Seen from the moon". Really? :rolleyes: Here is a view from the ISS, at 230 miles up; you've got to have a pretty keen eye to find them. Given that, on average, the moon is another, oh . . . 238,327 miles further out, I kinda doubt it. Much of the rest of your list is similar nonsense.

Seriously, they make medicine for that. ;)
 
Whenever you hear an evolutionist speak, they almost always state everything as if they were facts, and not just guesses like it is.

Well yeah, they're presenting facts (AKA evidence) to support their theories. That's how science works. They believe outcome A is probable or likely because of fact X, Y, and Z. Yes, outcome A still needs to be proven, but taking the idea of outcome A as a likely possibility is much more acceptable logically when there are facts to support the ideas.

Science definitely makes more sense than, "Can't explain it so therefore god!".
 
And the thread goes full on Ancient Aliens.

1394042326266.jpg


And I have to shake my head at the people who dismiss evolution as "guesses" or "made up" etc, it's quite embarrassing. I assume you get your science facts from you pastor
 
Whenever you hear an evolutionist speak, they almost always state everything as if they were facts, and not just guesses like it is.

It is fact. Tested, researched, verified fact. Evolution is not a theory, and I genuinely cry for those who don't believe in it. I can force evolution with dogs, I can see evolution in wild species such as fish and bugs. There is no theory here. Please do t come back and say "Then Why is it called a theory". Scientific theory is a unfortunate name given how it's presumed to equal non scientific theory.
 
Seemed a valid quote for the topic.

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.”
― Neil deGrasse Tyson
 
Because you have no evidence of either. Yet you believe in one and not the other. Talking on your other point that quacks were outed, well, how long did it take religion to get the skepticism that it has today? A damn long time.

No evidence that reason works? Are you that foolish? These very things you're typing into are the product of a few hundred years of reasoning. If accepting that 1=1 and that 1+1=2 somehow counts as a miraculous leap of "faith" to you....I feel sorry for you.

What skepticism in religion? There is none. Religion is and has always been a matter of (blind) faith. You either accept that Man and Woman come from Adam and Eve, were damned forever by a talking snake, and the Universe was created in 7 days....or you don't. You either accept that Mohammed was a prophet with the inside scoop from the divine-or you don't. There is no skepticism because the Good Book (or insert holy book here) is the Truth will a capital "T", because it is the "Word of God" (without any proof or room for debate or skepticism).

Eschewing primitive ethics by ignoring they're still in your religious text in no way counts as "skepticism"...it is just that, eschewing primitive ethics.
 
Whenever you hear an evolutionist speak, they almost always state everything as if they were facts, and not just guesses like it is.

Evolution was a theory when Darwin wrote of it. It was a theory because it hadn't been peer tested by countless others. It was a theory when there were only a few papers showing evidence of it. It has been thoroughly tested, experimented on, and documented ever since Darwin proposed his theory. It has been shown how evolution can be steered. It is no longer a theory!

I find it absolutely hilarious how creationist can sit there and make there claim that evolution isn't real while wholeheartedly exploiting evolution every chance that they get..

Horses
Cows
Pigs
Their Children
Etc.
 
I think it was. I remember reading of the experiment and it's positive results,I just don't remember when it was. It was chemical compounds hit with electricity that formed rudimentary amino acids.

It was and the experiments have been duplicated thousands of times. It was also replicated with other stimuli, it turns out that it's actually kind of hard to STOP those basic materials from occurring. A lift of lumber isn't a house though, the next phase is to determine what makes cells happen.

Developments in the study of abiogenesis are irrelevant, though. Faith and knowledge cannot coexist, one always replaces the other.
 
Yeah well everything you are and see was made from stars so .......whatever.
 
It was and the experiments have been duplicated thousands of times. It was also replicated with other stimuli, it turns out that it's actually kind of hard to STOP those basic materials from occurring. A lift of lumber isn't a house though, the next phase is to determine what makes cells happen.

Developments in the study of abiogenesis are irrelevant, though. Faith and knowledge cannot coexist, one always replaces the other.

Thank you, I knew my stroke riddled memory wasn't that far off. Also, I have no interest in the word "abiogenesis". It was being thrown around and I thought I would make a point.


As far as cells go, well here I go. It's known that not all viruses need cells. So we can hypothesis or create a "theory" that in that type of environment a virus, or whatever it was at the time, would evolve to protect itself from the other predators. It would evolve into a cell for protection & it's own survival.

There's the theory.

And now the more sciencey part.

Provide evidence for or against to prove or disprove the theory. Either way, I will accept the repeatable evidence provided.

Thank you and good night.

(Thanks for making me think Twisted Kidney)
 
Evolutionist:
Wow, its really fucking impressive for God to coordinate an infinite amount of photons 15 billion years ago! which came together to form quarks and leptons, and eventually baryons, and then hydrogen nuclei which amassed and fused into helium, until gravity overcame the fuel leading into more explosions and heavier atoms, which eventually joined up to make a teeny little infinitesimal rock that crashed into several other large rocks, and a few comets containing dihydrogen monoxide, eventually forming simple replicating amino acids, which replicated inaccurately until cells formed, and then photosynthesis, and multicelled organisms, and plants, and animals, and changing atmosphere, and asteroids, and primates, and brain mutations.
and end up with mankind!
holy fuck wow, the skill required would be like aiming a laser pointer to an asteroid on the other side of the universe, changing its trajectory so that 2 billion years later it skims through a stellar corona leaving it in the perfect shape of a 1978 US penny. this would be the skills only a god would have.


Creationist:
God is too fucking stupid to do that, he just assembled everything at once like legos. and once you leave the solar system, its just hydrogen, god was fucking lazy. he even reused monkey's dna to make 99% of human dna! God is really not impressive at all, he was just a three-centuries later technologically advanced alien that i believe in.
 
Evolution was a theory when Darwin wrote of it. It was a theory because it hadn't been peer tested by countless others. It was a theory when there were only a few papers showing evidence of it. It has been thoroughly tested, experimented on, and documented ever since Darwin proposed his theory. It has been shown how evolution can be steered. It is no longer a theory!

The Darwinian theory of evolution -- that new species arise from natural selection and random mutation -- is a preposterous theory of course that was a good fairy tale for the 19th century but I couldn't imagine any grown man taking it seriously today.

Surely the theory has had to evolve to hold water. It's certainly possible that new species come about through an evolutionary mechanism. We just don't have enough evidence yet to say that conclusively.
 
The Darwinian theory of evolution -- that new species arise from natural selection and random mutation -- is a preposterous theory of course that was a good fairy tale for the 19th century but I couldn't imagine any grown man taking it seriously today.

Surely the theory has had to evolve to hold water. It's certainly possible that new species come about through an evolutionary mechanism. We just don't have enough evidence yet to say that conclusively.

The only place that Evolution through natural selection and mutation is looked upon as a fairy tale, is in the minds of anti-science religious fanatics who would have people think that we sprang from the dust at the command of an all powerful deity. and you call Darwinian evolution a fairy tale!
 
Evolution is the predominately accepted theory, but it is still just a theory. Many claim it is proven, when it is not. I blame the school system for putting it forward as fact when it is still a theory. That lie is repeated often enough that people believe it on faith. Then I get to sit back and laugh at people going on and on about how science works, and religion is just about faith, while they ignore their own explanations and definitions of both. They have made evolution a religion. It may be backed up by a few more actual facts than creationism, but they still have to take it on faith in the end.
 
So uh...it was just one creationist who made a stink about Cosmos? And it was picked up by "Right Wing Watch" (whatever that is) and now the Internets are howling about it?

Seems much ado about nothing.
 
The Darwinian theory of evolution -- that new species arise from natural selection and random mutation -- is a preposterous theory of course that was a good fairy tale for the 19th century but I couldn't imagine any grown man taking it seriously today.

Surely the theory has had to evolve to hold water. It's certainly possible that new species come about through an evolutionary mechanism. We just don't have enough evidence yet to say that conclusively.

You argue against evolution and then point back at it for your hypothesis.

Positive evolutionary mechanisms trigger genetic changes that become dominate in complex life given a large gene pool.

In a lack of diversity of a given gene pool, the negative is what is expressed.
 
Whenever you hear an evolutionist speak, they almost always state everything as if they were facts, and not just guesses like it is.

But evolution is proven science. We can test it with DNA. We see it in action constantly with viruses and bacteria. All life on earth shares some DNA. Like it or not we all came from a universal common ancestor.

Yet they have no idea what caused the big bang...... i.e there was nothing, and then bang the universe was created......
The difference between science and religion is that one keeps an open mind, and the other is based on something written thousands of years ago, and considers that as proven fact.

We don't know what happened before the big bang but we'll keep it like that until proven otherwise. We're not going to stick god there when we can't figure it out. That kind of thinking would have left us in the stone ages with leaches to cure illnesses.
 
The Darwinian theory of evolution -- that new species arise from natural selection and random mutation -- is a preposterous theory of course that was a good fairy tale for the 19th century but I couldn't imagine any grown man taking it seriously today.

Surely the theory has had to evolve to hold water. It's certainly possible that new species come about through an evolutionary mechanism. We just don't have enough evidence yet to say that conclusively.


Curious - genuinely - why do you consider the theory preposterous? What is about it that sparks you as so out there? Im just trying to understand, nothing more.
 
Here's one for you creationists...

Why aren't you people still marrying your mothers, sisters,daughters, cousins, and granddaughters anymore?
 
Evolution is the predominately accepted theory, but it is still just a theory. Many claim it is proven, when it is not. I blame the school system for putting it forward as fact when it is still a theory. That lie is repeated often enough that people believe it on faith. Then I get to sit back and laugh at people going on and on about how science works, and religion is just about faith, while they ignore their own explanations and definitions of both. They have made evolution a religion. It may be backed up by a few more actual facts than creationism, but they still have to take it on faith in the end.

Sorry, but it has been proven, numerous times. I'll link one example that is (In)famous as making the point very well.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Lenski_affair

If you continue to claim evolution is a theory in the face of Hard science of this nature, then it's obvious that your only interest is promoting your own version of reality, which I would guess, has no basis in science or fact, but only faith...
 
Evolution is the predominately accepted theory, but it is still just a theory. Many claim it is proven, when it is not.
Gravity is a theory, but would you like to try and jump off a height and claim it not to be true?

I blame the school system for putting it forward as fact when it is still a theory. That lie is repeated often enough that people believe it on faith. Then I get to sit back and laugh at people going on and on about how science works, and religion is just about faith, while they ignore their own explanations and definitions of both. They have made evolution a religion. It may be backed up by a few more actual facts than creationism, but they still have to take it on faith in the end.
I don't see a church for evolution or a bible for it. Thing about science is if someone proves it wrong, then we change it. We're not going to hold onto something forever just because. That's science.
 
Evolution is the predominately accepted theory, but it is still just a theory. Many claim it is proven, when it is not. I blame the school system for putting it forward as fact when it is still a theory. That lie is repeated often enough that people believe it on faith. Then I get to sit back and laugh at people going on and on about how science works, and religion is just about faith, while they ignore their own explanations and definitions of both. They have made evolution a religion. It may be backed up by a few more actual facts than creationism, but they still have to take it on faith in the end.


Nobody has "faith" in evolution, the scientific community dissects and examines the minutia of the development of life on a daily basis. We all observe the process happening time and time again, mutations, adaptations, and extinctions. Scientists all over the world have devoted themselves to disproving relativity, natural selection, the big bang. Has a clergyman ever once devoted himself to disproving the existence of God?

You don't understand even the first iota about the scientific process and it shows.

Science is all questions, questions that are only answered with more complex and specific questions.

Faith is an answer you must never question.
 
Gravity is a theory, but would you like to try and jump off a height and claim it not to be true?


I don't see a church for evolution or a bible for it. Thing about science is if someone proves it wrong, then we change it. We're not going to hold onto something forever just because. That's science.

If I do as you say, I might break my leg. I will not need to rely on faith.
If I stare at a butterfly I will simply watch it die. I will never see it evolve. I will need to rly on faith.

Nobody has "faith" in evolution, the scientific community dissects and examines the minutia of the development of life on a daily basis. We all observe the process happening time and time again, mutations, adaptations, and extinctions. Scientists all over the world have devoted themselves to disproving relativity, natural selection, the big bang. Has a clergyman ever once devoted himself to disproving the existence of God?

You don't understand even the first iota about the scientific process and it shows.

Science is all questions, questions that are only answered with more complex and specific questions.

Faith is an answer you must never question.

Is evolution proven, or a theory? If you say it is a theory, then what do we have to argue about? If you say it is proven, then you are taking it on faith, again, what do we have to argue about?

When it comes to both sides of the evolution debate, I think the politics and religion have become so caught up in the process, that the science is taking a back seat to the various agendas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top