Creationism/Evolution
See other Creationism/Evolution Articles
Title: Creationist stakes $10,000 on contest between Bible and evolution
Source:
The Guardian
URL Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/201 ... -trial-bible-genesis-evolution
Published: Mar 27, 2013
Author: Amanda Holepunch
Post Date: 2013-03-27 15:33:40 by Thunderbird
Keywords: Creation, Evolution, Trial
Views: 74109
Comments: 104
A California creationist is offering a $10,000 challenge to anyone who can prove in front of a judge that science contradicts the literal interpretation of the book of Genesis.
Dr Joseph Mastropaolo, who says he has set up the contest, the Literal Genesis Trial, in the hope of improving the quality of arguments between creationists and evolutionists, has pledged to put $10,000 of his own money into an escrow account before the debate. His competitor would be expected to do the same. The winner would take the $20,000 balance.
The argument would not be made in a formal court, but under an alternative dispute resolution model known as a minitrial. Mastropaolo said he would present the argument in favor of a literal interpretation of the creation story once he had found a willing scientist to argue that a non-literal interpretation of Genesis is more scientific.
News World news Creationism
Creationist stakes $10,000 on contest between Bible and evolution
Creator of Literal Genesis Trial believes people who argue in favor of evolution are at a scientific disadvantage
Share Tweet this Email
Amanda Holpuch guardian.co.uk, Monday 25 March 2013 15.46 EDT Jump to comments (437)
creationism A scene from the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky. Photograph: Jeff Haynes/AFP/Getty Images
A California creationist is offering a $10,000 challenge to anyone who can prove in front of a judge that science contradicts the literal interpretation of the book of Genesis.
Dr Joseph Mastropaolo, who says he has set up the contest, the Literal Genesis Trial, in the hope of improving the quality of arguments between creationists and evolutionists, has pledged to put $10,000 of his own money into an escrow account before the debate. His competitor would be expected to do the same. The winner would take the $20,000 balance.
The argument would not be made in a formal court, but under an alternative dispute resolution model known as a minitrial. Mastropaolo said he would present the argument in favor of a literal interpretation of the creation story once he had found a willing scientist to argue that a non-literal interpretation of Genesis is more scientific.
"They [evolutionists] are not stupid people, they are bright, but they are bright enough to know there is no scientific evidence they can give in a minitrial," Mastropaolo said.
A minitrial differs from a regular trial because it does not need to be held in a courthouse and does not require the presence of traditional court figures. Mastropaolo plans to have a bailiff and court reporter in attendance, along with the judge. Contest rules state that evidence must be scientific, which means it is "objective, valid, reliable and calibrated".
--snip--
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-64) not displayed.
.
.
.
#65. To: redleghunter, A K A Stone (#16)
("Just like God said. His word is accurate.")And God declares it in Isaiah 42:
5 Thus says God the Lord,
Who created the heavens and stretched them out, Who spread out the earth and its [d]offspring, Who gives breath to the people on it And spirit to those who walk in it,
6 “I am the Lord, I have called You in righteousness, I will also hold You by the hand and watch over You, And I will appoint You as a covenant to the people, As a light to the nations,
7 To open blind eyes, To bring out prisoners from the dungeon And those who dwell in darkness from the prison.
8 “I am the Lord, that is My name; I will not give My glory to another, Nor My praise to [e]graven images.
9 “Behold, the former things have come to pass, Now I declare new things; Before they spring forth I proclaim them to you.”
Amen, brutha!
#66. To: mininggold (#17)
He created such a defective world according to conservatives and the Bible.
Not at first...
And then there were Democrats, MSNBC....and Zombies (do you hear a bell?)
#67. To: CZ82 (#19)
And then Leftards went and ruined everything...
LOL...they're not happy unless EVERYONE and EVERYTHING is miserable or a victim.
#68. To: A K A Stone, jwpegler (#24)
You call this [cosmic background radiation] proof? This isn't science. This is presupposition circular reasoning circle jerk."This is Science" lol. Not even close.
Couple of points: MUCH of what is claimed by "science" in the book, 'The Evolution Handbook' is described as you said: "circular reasoning."
Secondly, the book refutes abd debunks pegler's supposed ace in the hole -- "cosmic background radiation." Nope. Proves zilch.
If you thought the "Global Climate" bone was hard to take away from "science", choking off their supposed age of the earth and universe theory will make Charlton Heston's "cold dead hands" seem like he was an infant clasping a rattle.
#69. To: A K A Stone, jwpegler (#25)
Fact there are billions of dead things buried im mud laid down by water all over the earth.The Bible says there was a worldwide flood. If that really happened you would expect to see billions of dead things laid down by water all over the earth.
Here is some more facts.
Go to the badlands and you can see the shore lines where the water eroded all over the place.
You know your stuff.
#70. To: jwpegler (#54)
Physics is a different story. Physics is proven wrong all of the time. Unlike evolutionists, physicists are willing to be proven wrong.
Look, again, I'm not going to argue this. I appreciate you viewpoint, and I thank you for presenting it.
However, I don't know what a "physicist" is. I look on Monster, etc, and I'll be damned if i can find a listing for that.
Other views? The name Safarti (SIC?) comes to mind.
Obama has played at being a president while enjoying the perks … golf, insanely expensive vacations at tax-payer expense. He has ignored the responsibilities of the job; no plans, no budgets, no alternatives … just finger pointing; making him a complete failure as a president
#71. To: Liberator (#55)
http://evolutionfacts.com/Downloads.htm
Low budget comedy, written by someone who has most of the basic facts wrong.
I don't have time to debunk the entire book, but here are a few tidbits that demonstrate how wrong on the basic facts this guy really is.
Chapter 4 - THE AGE OF THE EARTH
There are many star clusters in the universe. Each one is a circular ball composed of billions upon billions of stars.
He apparently doesn't know the term "galaxy". LOL.
Galaxies are not circular balls. Galaxies come in many shapes, but none of them are balls.
some of these clusters—with their stars—are moving so rapidly, together, in a certain direction that it should be impossible for them to remain together if the universe were very old.
Completely untrue. Galaxies are held together by a type of matter (dark matter) that our current technology has not been able to detect yet.
Physics predicted the cosmic background radiation, which was later discovered in the 1960s. Physics predicted the Higgs boson, which was almost certainly detected by the Large Hadron Collider a couple months ago. At some point, we'll have the technology to figure out what dark matter really is.
Some stars are so enormous in diameter that it is thought that they could not have existed for even a few million years, otherwise their initial larger mass would have been impossibly large
A basic misconception in how stars work. Stars do not shrink much as they burn through their hydrogen. The Sun's mass at the end of its lifetime (in another 4 billion years) will be 99.966% of its current mass (simple math, which you know little about). Depending upon the size of the star, when the hydrogen is gone, the star will either puff up into a red giant and then collapse into a white dwarf, or the star will explode into a super nova and collapse into a black hole.
Very large stars burn their fuel in as little as 10 million years. Stars like our sun will burn their fuel in 8 to 10 billion years. Red dwarfs could take up to a trillion years to burn their fuel.
in 1967, that the trillions of particles in the rings circling the planet Saturn are primarily composed of solid ammonia. Since solidified ammonia has a much higher vapor pressure than even ice, reputable scientists recognize that it could not survive long without vaporizing off into space
No. Saturn's Rings are made of water ice with a trace amount of rocky material. The 60s are long gone. It's time to get over it.
Meteoroids bombarding Saturn’s rings would have destroyed them in far less than 20,000 years.
No. Saturn's rings are not solid. Something striking one small area won't disrupt the entire thing. Saturn's gravity will quickly align the small disrupted area back in place.
Io is the innermost of the four original “Galilean moons,” and was found to have over sixty active volcanoes! These volcanoes spew plumes of ejecta from 60 to 160 miles [97 to 257 km] above Io’s surface. This is astounding. Nothing on our planet can match this continuous stream of material being shot out by Io’s volcanoes at a velocity of 2000 miles per hour [3218 km per hour]! The usual evolutionary model portrays all the planets and moons as being molten 5 billion years ago. During the next billion years they are said to have had active volcanoes. Then, 4 billion years ago, the volcanism stopped as they cooled. Io is quite small; yet it has the most active volcanoes we know133 of. Obviously, it is quite young and its internal heat has not had time to cool.
Wrong again. Io's extreme geologic activity is the result of tidal heating from friction generated within Io's interior as it is pulled between Jupiter and the other Galilean satellites—Europa, Ganymede and Callisto. Io's interior will never cool because of the enormous gravitational forces it's subject to.
If all four moons of Jupiter’s “Galilean moons” evolved, they should be essentially alike in physical characteristics.
Just because he said so? LOL...
that earth’s magnetic field is gradually decaying
The earth's magnetic field goes through cycles and occasionally reverses (where magnetic north is at the south pole). We can see the magnetic field drifting today and magnetic north is no longer at the North Pole. Prior to such a magnetic field reversal, the magnetic field tends to get weaker. After the reversal, the field gets stronger. This is well documented in the geological record.
According to one theory of solar energy, hydrogen is constantly being converted into helium as stars shine. But hydrogen cannot be made by converting other elements into it. *Fred Hoyle, a leading astronomer, maintains that, if the universe were as old as Big Bang theorists contend, there should be little hydrogen in it. It would all have been transformed into helium by now. Yet stellar spectra reveal an abundance of hydrogen in the stars; therefore the universe must be youthful.
The answer is too long to post here. Google "star formation", "stellar nurseries", and "supernovas". Perhaps, you'll actually learn something.
Also, Fred Hoyle was a critic of the Big Bang in 1949, BEFORE we had the technology to observe that the universe actually is expanding.
Quoting things from the 1940s and 1960s is not helping your case.
I don't have to time to futz with this anymore. Any objective observer should realize that whomever wrote this book is largely ignorant of basic scientific facts. But of course, you take his uniformed nonsense as gospel, which is a real problem.
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
#72. To: no gnu taxes (#70)
However, I don't know what a "physicist" is
Of course you don't.
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
#73. To: Liberator (#67)
.!["Whatcha]("http://i48.tinypic.com/dgrzhs.jpg")
Say hi to your mom for me.
#74. To: Biff Tannen, Liberator (#73)
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
#75. To: A K A Stone, Biff Tannen, Liberator (#74)
Why did you delete my post and how do you know for certain that Libby doesn't reproduce asexually?
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
#76. To: no gnu taxes (#70) (Edited)
It's nice to see you learning the humility that a dumb, ignorant fuck like you should have had all along...
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
#77. To: no gnu taxes (#70)
Here's an example of a physicist.
Michio Kaku (pron.: /ÈmiÐtƒioŠ ÈkQÐkuÐ/) (加来 道雄 Kaku Michio, born January 24, 1947) is an American theoretical physicist, the Henry Semat Professor of Theoretical Physics in the City College of New York of City University of New York, a futurist, and a communicator and popularizer of science. He has written several books about physics and related topics; he has made frequent appearances on radio, television, and film; and he writes extensive online blogs and articles. He has written two New York Times Best Sellers, Physics of the Impossible (2008) and Physics of the Future (2011).
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
#78. To: mininggold (#75)
Stone is deleting posts again?
Sounds like someone else we both know...
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
#79. To: jwpegler (#54)
Again, the more we learn about evolution, the more we know that it's wrong. We have never found any intermediate species that the Darwinist's predicted we would.
"We've", in fact, found several..
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
#80. To: war (#78)
Stone is deleting posts again?Sounds like someone else we both know...
Yep off topic.
#81. To: war (#79)
"We've", in fact, found several..
Was your mother one? If not start naming them please.
#82. To: A K A Stone (#80)
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
#83. To: A K A Stone (#81) (Edited)
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
#84. To: A K A Stone (#81)
Was your mother one?
You effing a-hole. You should be boiled in oil.
#85. To: A K A Stone (#80)
Yep off topic.
Yet you only delete off topic posts that make you look stupid. And you were the first to go off topic.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
#86. To: Fred Mertz, war (#84)
Was your mother one?You effing a-hole. You should be boiled in oil.
Little war is the one who wsid there is a missing link. He said lots of them. Why couldn't it be his mom? Since there are no "missing links" and he couldn't name any.
#87. To: A K A Stone (#86)
Why couldn't it be his mom?
You really are a piece of shit, Stone.
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
#88. To: jwpegler (#50)
Are you retarded or what? Seriously.
You've insulted retarded people...
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
#89. To: Liberator (#87)
C'mon Libby...you old closet queen...just admit that you've bitten a pillow or three...
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
#90. To: A K A Stone (#86)
Little war is the one who wsid there is a missing link. He said lots of them. Why couldn't it be his mom? Since there are no "missing links" and he couldn't name any.
So...do you have your own 'mommy' problems?
Since you prefer to ban posters who defend theirs against those like yourself who are rude and disrepectful.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
#91. To: mininggold (#90)
Why argue with Stone when he's just part of the problem like old Pat Robertson here? He never listens and will never respond to reason.
Robertson: God gives less miracles to ‘too-educated Americans’ who learn science
Televangelist Pat Robertson on Monday explained to his viewers that “sophisticated” Americans received less miracles because they had learned “things that says God isn’t real” like evolution.
On Monday’s episode of CBN’s The 700 Club, Robertson responded to a viewer who wanted to know why “amazing miracles (people raised from the dead, blind eyes open, lame people walking) happen with great frequency in places like Africa, and not here in the USA?”
“People overseas didn’t go to Ivy League schools,” the TV preacher laughed. “We’re so sophisticated, we think we’ve got everything figured out. We know about evolution, we know about Darwin, we know about all these things that says God isn’t real.”
“We have been inundated with skepticism and secularism,” he conintued. “And overseas, they’re simple, humble. You tell ‘em God loves ‘em and they say, ‘Okay, he loves me.’ You say God will do miracles and they say, ‘Okay, we believe him.’”
“And that’s what God’s looking for. That’s why they have miracles.”
#92. To: war (#88)
Are you retarded or what? Seriously.You've insulted retarded people...
Thanx for letting us know you are offended.
#93. To: jwpegler (#72) (Edited)
However, I don't know what a "physicist" isOf course you don't.
You are so fucking smart, aren't you?
So what is it?
A person who knows Newtonian principles, and has put them into practice ?
Someone in a think tank analyzing the validity of Einsteinian thinking?
Go look for a job anywhere and see how much they want somebody who calls themselves a physicyst.
It's a label; it's not a sign of achievement, or any ability to achieve.
Hell, even think tanks would laugh at such a label, by itself.
Obama has played at being a president while enjoying the perks … golf, insanely expensive vacations at tax-payer expense. He has ignored the responsibilities of the job; no plans, no budgets, no alternatives … just finger pointing; making him a complete failure as a president
#94. To: Lenny (#92)
war like black men's cock
If you realize that about him, you should be fine with him after that.
Obama has played at being a president while enjoying the perks … golf, insanely expensive vacations at tax-payer expense. He has ignored the responsibilities of the job; no plans, no budgets, no alternatives … just finger pointing; making him a complete failure as a president
#95. To: no gnu taxes (#93) (Edited)
You are so fucking smart, aren't you?
Yes, I am. And you are a dimwitted moron.
Go look for a job anywhere and see how much they want somebody who calls themselves a physicyst.
IBM, SAIC, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, etc. don't agree with you...
Solid State Physicist
Senior Physicist
Theoretical Physicist
Research Scientist
Research Staff Member -- Superconducting Qubits
Reaserch Assistant -- Chemical Physics
Research Scientist in Computational Physics
I think that this is enough to prove the point.
Physics is how the universe works. There are plenty of jobs for people who understand physics.
Perhaps, if you had spelling physicist correctly, your job search wouldn't have come up empty.
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
#96. To: jwpegler (#95)
Until I got tired of looking, everyone of those jobs were about modern engineering.
Can you show me any interest in "Phyics" as you describred (i.e modeling the universe)?
Obama has played at being a president while enjoying the perks … golf, insanely expensive vacations at tax-payer expense. He has ignored the responsibilities of the job; no plans, no budgets, no alternatives … just finger pointing; making him a complete failure as a president
#97. To: no gnu taxes (#96) (Edited)
Can you show me any interest in "Phyics" as you describred (i.e modeling the universe)?
www.google.com
I've already done enough research for you. You can figure the rest out for yourself, dimwit.
"we must as a species go into a period of shrinkage that we have not experienced since the Dark Ages and the Black Plague" -- lucysmom
#98. To: jwpegler (#97)
www.google.com
a search engine?
I usually use Yahoo or Bing, but thanks for pointing what an idiot you are.
Obama has played at being a president while enjoying the perks … golf, insanely expensive vacations at tax-payer expense. He has ignored the responsibilities of the job; no plans, no budgets, no alternatives … just finger pointing; making him a complete failure as a president
#99. To: no gnu taxes (#96)
Can you show me any interest in "Phyics" as you describred (i.e modeling the universe)?
I'm sure there's a government job available for a *physicist*..after all the same government provides money to teach Chinese prostitutes how to drink responsibly.
#100. To: war (#88)
Are you retarded or what? Seriously.You've insulted retarded people...
Hey goofy. Did you dig up your mother yet to make sure she isn't the missing link?
#101. To: jwpegler (#27)
Revelation 13:And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns...
Do you believe that there will be a literal beast that rises from sea with 7 heads and 10 horns???
Or is this symbology meant to convey an underlying meaning???
You dispensationalists are very inconsistent. You read Genesis literally yet you Revelation figuratively.
You make no sense whatsoever. You are a tiny minority among the world's Christians.
Dreams and visions revealed in the Bible (OT and NT) are clear that they represent something concrete. It is clear in both the NT and OT when it is a vision or dream and in most cases the vision or dream is then interpreted. In Genesis there is no indication what is written is a dream or vision. In that case then the meaning is to be taken literal as in the account of the Gospel miracles.
Jesus Christ used parables to demonstrate a truth. That does not mean everything Jesus said is to be taken as a parable.
To put your post within context of the text, you would have to start out with the beginning of chapter 12. John identifies what he is seeing as a sign.
"A great sign appeared in heaven..." starts chapter 12.
5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; 6 In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct[a] your paths.(Proverbs 3:5-6)
#102. To: jwpegler, A K A Stone (#37)
God created man. He was lonely. (NOT a perfect world.) So God created animals, but man was still lonely (NOT a perfect world.) Finally, God creates woman.
Two points:
First there is no indication of imperfection when it is the Creator who provides the woman for the man. This is a perfect example of the Creator and created relationship. God provides all our needs and this is indicated by the text of chapter 2.
Second, I will ask. If this is all symbolism as you note to convey a meaning then what meaning do you get out of it? Perhaps the meaning you get out of Genesis chapters 1-2 is that God created everything? Or do you get a different meaning?
5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; 6 In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct[a] your paths.(Proverbs 3:5-6)
#103. To: mininggold (#44)
He created Adam and enabled Adam to create Eve. Sounds like He needs to learn to be responsible.
Spoken like a true clay pot that wants to be decorative bowl.
5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; 6 In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct[a] your paths.(Proverbs 3:5-6)
#104. To: f (#89)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]