Ever been in a class where the teacher is unable/unwilling to provide basic information to support what is being taught? I have asked on several occasions for a time line for the existence of the Neanderthals as a group. 6 days certainly thinks of them as a separate group of humans, he is quick to point out their bigger brains and greater robustness, for example. Yet he cannot or will not provide a time line.
Where did the races come from? Evolutiion, Creation or Other.
- Thread starter iamaberean
- Start date
Ever been in a class where the teacher is unable/unwilling to provide basic information to support what is being taught? I have asked on several occasions for a time line for the existence of the Neanderthals as a group. 6 days certainly thinks of them as a separate group of humans, he is quick to point out their bigger brains and greater robustness, for example. Yet he cannot or will not provide a time line.
So it wasn't 'evolutionists' who came up with what you consider to be the 'correct' facts about Neanderthals. Some other people discovered those.
The writers of Genesis, maybe.
Stuart
That is a good question. Must have been all those YECers doing research that determined the accurate facts. I'm sure 6 days can provide us with the names and appropriate papers for us to review.
An answer has been given numerous times. Learn to read. :up:
Why?
You would not read the resources anyway.
And, yes. There are authoritative works out there.
6days
New member
Exactly!
6days
New member
It was evolutionists who came up with all the false conclusions... was not science.Stuu said:
It was science which proved the evolutionary assumptions to be false. Scientists can be evolutionists or creationists. Sometimes...as in the case of Neandertals, evolutionists start with the wrong conclusion, and it takes awhile for science to correct things.*Stuu said:
So when were the evolutionists being scientists and when weren't they? Were they scientists when the information was being corrected, or only when it was being written in a way you didn't like?
Stuart
Indeed. I am particularly looking forward to reading the peer-reviewed paper that outlines the case for the universe being created 34,000 years after the extinction of the Neanderthals.
Stuart
6days
New member
Are you also anxious to read all the other things evolutionists were wrong sbout? You keep ignoring the long history of false claims and keep hoping their dates are correct. Pssst.... Neandertals are us. Christ knew them before they were even formed in their mothers womb...and He knows and loves you too.*Stuu said:
I'm not anxious about anything a creationist says. Unless the creationist is given access to children, which should never be allowed.
No matter how impressive a human Jesus was, I don't think the christ thing is very lovable at all. I have no reason to doubt Jesus's intentions, as far as we could possibly know them (which is not at all) but 'christ' is a cynical political invention.
Do you have a reference to the peer-reviewed paper that establishes that the creation of the universe happened 8,000 years after the domestication of the dog?
Stuart
6days
New member
Haha... Your*Stuu said:
impartiality towards eugenics is noted. *
Now...seriously, your attitude is not uncommon. Some evolutionists and atheists feel a need to try indoctrinate other peoples chdren into their belief system. Thats why Christians are urged to make sure their children understand evidence for both sides. Christian parents are encouraged to teach their kids how to think... not what to think.*
Science never changes as science is already the facts. Only false science changes along with time.
Science won't change because true science is confirmed by its predictability. Physics theories will bring you to the surface of moon/Mars without error (which is considered something predictable), because the theories remain truth all the times and will not subject to any new facts. They may not work only under the circumstance that they fall out of the scope of a paradigm. We failed to launch space craft to the surface of moon/Mars because of wrong calculations or unpredictable factors but not the physics theories themselves. That's why whenever a spacecraft exploded, you won't draw the conclusion that "the physics theories are wrong".
Well, let's define my belief system then, and see if that is what children should not be indoctrinated into:
* Suspend judgment until the evidence is in
* Even when you have good data, still remember that knowledge is only ever provisional
* Be very skeptical about people who can't provide physical evidence for their claims: don't dismiss them out of hand but expect high standards of probity
* Always try to disprove your own ideas, if you can: be prepared to change your mind in the face of contradictory evidence
* Read, read, read and find out as much about different viewpoints as you can
* Never stand up in a kayak
* If the Germans had played test cricket there would never have been World War originating in Europe
Do tell me if you can come up with anything you think I believe that should not be taught to children.
Meantime, here are some teachings that constitute child abuse:
*Teaching children that the history of the universe is only a few thousand years old
*Teaching children that if they do not love Jesus they will be punished in hell
*Telling young people who are still identifying their sexuality or religion or lack of religion what sexuality or religion they should be
Any objection to that?
Stuart
Evidence, remember? We know you hate it.
The evidence indicates that the Biblical account is accurate.
Sent from my SM-G9250 using TOL mobile app
wrong but you always are
Remember what Stuu said about listening and finding out about other viewpoints?
This is how Darwinists do it.
Sent from my SM-G9250 using TOL mobile app