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: 71636
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 (1-12) not displayed.
.
.
.
#13. To: A K A Stone (#12)
Neither, they originate from the same cells under the influence of differing levels of hormones.
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
You're using Science? Geez...that's cheating...
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
Don't tell Stone about asexual reproduction...he'll stroke out...
I'll believe that a corporation is a person 1 second after Texas executes one...
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.”
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)
On 2013-03-28 13:39:15, redleghunter wrote: To: A K A Stone 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.” He created such a defective world according to conservatives and the Bible.
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
You may want to start with Genesis chapter one and work from there. All was perfect when God created.
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)
And then Leftards went and ruined everything...
"Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it."
The cosmic microwave background radiation... In the 1940s, physicist George Gamow was the first to realize that, because the universe is all there is, the huge heat from a hot Big Bang could not dissipate in the same way as the heat from a regular explosion and therefore it must still be around today. In 1948, Gamow's research students, Ralph Alpher and Robert Herman argued that because the Big Bang effectively happened everywhere simultaneously, that energy should be equally spread as cosmic microwave background radiation. In 1965, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson, of Bell Telephone Laboratories, discovered exactly that. The mysterious microwave static they picked up on their microwave antenna seemed to be coming equally from every direction in the sky, and eventually they realized that this microwave radiation (which has a temperature of about -270°C, marginally above absolute zero) must indeed be the “afterglow” of the Big Bang. This discovery, perhaps the most important cosmological discovery since Edwin Hubble had shown that we live in an expanding universe, was powerful evidence that our universe had indeed begun in a hot, dense state and had been growing and cooling ever since. The Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) was launched in 2001 to measure the cosmic background radiation. Among other things, WMAP has determined the universe to be 13.77 billion years old to within a half percent. The universe is 13.77 billion years old, not 6,000 years old. This is called real science -- theory that has been proven by actual observation. Big bang made up no proof.
Bullshit. They are making this stuff up. There was no way of knowing this. How is it proven? Specifically.
SEEMED? Seemed isn't science. They are making a lot of assumptions here. First of which is the fairy tale religion of the "big bang".
The universe is 13.77 billion years old, not 6,000 years old. This is called real science -- theory that has been proven by actual observation. You call this proof? This isn't science. This is presupposition circular reasoning circle jerk. "This is Science" lol. Not even close.
Here is some science, some facts. 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.
And you still haven't answered what came first the penis or the vagina. For a person to be born it takes two parents. Tell me genius how was a baby born without two parents first. It is a scientific fact that it takes a male and a female person to produce a child. Prove to us now oh genius that it happened some other way. And throwing the virgin birth of Jesus out doesn't cut it either.
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.
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??? The Bible says that it isn't literal. It goes on to explain what it means. Why didn't you quote that part? Are you being disingenious? The Bible doesn't go on to explain Genesis as symbolic like it does your example of the beast. That was really lame Jwpegler.
I've already told you. But, your stubborn mind is already made up, so what's the point in beating my head against the wall with you on this? There is no point.
Also on the so called big bang. If it happened scientists have said the universe would be expanding at the same rate. Symmetrically. Well they found out it isn't. Big problem for your religion. Here is a source you can look at to see that it is not expanding symmetrically. I don't take their new conclusions they have to make up but it shows the universe is not expanding at the same rate everywhere.
I've already told you. Yeah you told me. But you didn't even come close to proving anything. You're biased and ignore the facts. You still can't answer how a kid was born without two parents. If we evolved tell me how the sex organs evolved? You can't. How did they eyes evolve and why? You can't. You have nothing but a bunch of people in white lab coats that you seem to trust but never verify.
For a person to be born it takes two parents. Tell me genius how was a baby born without two parents first. Asexual reproduction came first. Some species TODAY alternate between the sexual and asexual reproductive strategies. From WIKIPEDIA: Some species alternate between the sexual and asexual strategies, an ability known as heterogamy, depending on conditions. Alternation is observed in several rotifer species and a few types of insects, such as aphids which will, under certain conditions, produce eggs that have not gone through meiosis, thus cloning themselves. The cape bee Apis mellifera subsp. capensis can reproduce asexually through a process called thelytoky. A few species of amphibians, reptiles, and birds have a similar ability (see parthenogenesis for examples). For example, the freshwater crustacean Daphnia reproduces by parthenogenesis in the spring to rapidly populate ponds, then switches to sexual reproduction as the intensity of competition and predation increases. Another example are monogonont rotifers of the genus Brachionus, which reproduce via cyclical parthenogenesis: at low population densities females produce asexually and at higher densities a chemical cue accumulates and induces the transition to sexual reproduction. Many protists and fungi alternate between sexual and asexual reproduction. The world is stranger than you think Stone
Can you show me this in the lab? Show me a video of this happening in the lab. I'm talking about in humans. It is just made up speculation. That isn't science friend. You can't because it didn't. Well you can't.
Ok you say Asexual reproduction came first. Ok what did it produce first a penis or a vagina. Did two separate entities happen to evolve compatible parts? You know a vagina and a penis. You sound like the wizard of oz.
Yes, it is a proven, OBSERVED, fact that some species of insects, birds, reptiles, etc. switch between asexual reproduction and sexual reproduction. When there is a shortage of males, the females use asexual reproduction for survival. When is there an abundance of males, they switch to sexual reproduction to pass on the best genes. PROVEN. OBSERVED. FACT.
And you sound like Gomer Pyle -- SHAZAMMM!!!! God created the earth in 6 days. Why didn't he do it in 6 seconds?
That's not what the Bible says... 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. Also, if man was alone, why did he need a penis??? ROTFLMAO !!!!!! This is not supposed to be read literally. It's symbolism meant to convey a meaning. Genesis 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. Genesis 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. Genesis 2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. Genesis 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; Genesis 2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
It is also an observed fact that trees have leaves. Some reproduce asexually. Do you expect to see a person born with leaves for hair? No of course not. We produce after like kind. Here is another OBSERVED fact. The species that you mentioned were created a certain way. And they keep reproducing after like kind. Because some cell or plane can reproduce asexually doesn't mean people can. Here is another OBSERVABLE fact. Only humans can reproduce humans. We never evolve into something else. We have different characteristics but we always reproduce humans. Here is another OBSERVABLE fact. Cats always reproduce cats. They never turn into something else. Another OBSERVABLE fact. When I plant an apple tree I am sure that I will not get some new evolved tree. Do you worry about that when you buy a plant that it might evolve into something else? Why not? I'll tell you why because your subconscious is smarter then your conscious here.
That is nonsense. I can't believe you think that just because mininggold can't get any men that she can still reproduce. Did you read that in the National Enquirer? OBSERVABLE FACT. NO person has ever asexually reproduced.
Why didn't he do it in 6 seconds? Yes God created the Earth in 6 days, and the Heavens also. I don't know why he didn't do it in 6 seconds. I know that there is a book that claims to be from God. It tells a whole lot of interesting stuff about us humans. It says he created us. It says to test it and prove it. It is an like an anvil that has worn out many hammers. Like I said earlier it says there was a a worldwide flood. If that really happened I would expect to find the fossil record we have today. That is some proof that the Bible is true. One of many "proofs". The satanic religion of evolution has no explanation for the fossil record.
A couple of questions. Do you consider yourself a christian? Do you think that God is capable of giving us his word perfectly?
When is the creation complete. After of before Eve is created?
You're wrong. If it wasn't meant to be taken literally. It would finish with something like this "And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast." That is what it does when it is using symbolism.
He created Adam and enabled Adam to create Eve. Sounds like He needs to learn to be responsible.
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
It appears that none of the Bible is meant to be taken literally because it's a collection of myths and fables showing the evolution of God.
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
Actually, it appears that you offspring of the cult of Pasiphae aren't willing to ante up the scratch necessary to present scientific evidence of your evo-fundie beliefs in open court.
I never said they did. You are just making things up because you don't have any provable facts.
It appears that none of the Bible is meant to be taken literally because it's a collection of myths and fables showing the evolution of God. Actually, it appears that you offspring of the cult of Pasiphae aren't willing to ante up the scratch necessary to present scientific evidence of your evo-fundie beliefs in open court. God goes from the mean, vengeful god of the Jews to the sweet Christian one full of forgiveness and redemption, all in 2000 years. What other proof do you need but the Bible?
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
We're not talking about evolution. We're talking about physics -- the age of the universe. I agree that evolution has all kinds of problems. The more things we discover, the more problems evolution has. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE. We're talking about the age of the universe. Unlike evolution, the more we learn about the universe, the more the standard model of physics is PROVEN correct. The universe is 13.8 billion years old. The earth is 4.5 billion years old. There is NO question about this. Again Stone, you don't have any real evidence to support your views, so you change the subject to evolution, which has a growing number of issues. Pitiful.
Are you retarded or what? Seriously.
Why are you so obsessed with everyone's sex life here? I bet you've been arrested for peeping through your neighbor's bedroom windows.
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
I really don't want to get into this too much because it's mostly futile. However, your statement about this being PROVEN is a bit ignorant. Outside of mathematics, nothing is really proven in science ( and some of that is questionable). What you can say is there are a lot of mutually agreeable arguments for the age of the universe being billions of years. But if you think that that anyone who says God created the heavens and earth some 6000 years must be some inbred moron, you'd be wrong on this too. Many knowledgeable young earth creationists present sound backing for their ideas; they are just mostly ignored.
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
Comments (53 - 104) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestYou are already stumped. You don't even know what came first the penis or the vagina. Come on which was it?
#14. To: jwpegler (#8)
#15. To: mininggold (#13)
Neither, they originate from the same cells under the influence of differing levels of hormones.
#16. To: A K A Stone (#2)
Just like God said. His word is accurate.
#17. To: redleghunter (#16)
Post Comment Please cut and paste the portion of the text to which you are replying, if any, into the "Quote" box using your computer's editing features.
#18. To: mininggold (#17)
He created such a defective world according to conservatives and the Bible.
#19. To: redleghunter, mininggold (#18)
All was perfect when God created.
#20. To: A K A Stone (#10)
(Edited)
Now explain if you can how these things prove an old earth.
"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
#21. To: jwpegler (#20)
In the 1940s, physicist George Gamow was the first to realize that, because the universe is all there is, the huge heat from a hot Big Bang
#22. To: jwpegler (#20)
because the Big Bang effectively happened everywhere simultaneously
#23. To: jwpegler (#20)
In 1965, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson, of Bell Telephone Laboratories, discovered exactly that. The mysterious microwave static they picked up on their microwave antenna seemed to be coming equally from every direction in the sky, and eventually they realized that this microwave radiation (which has a temperature of about -270°C, marginally above absolute zero) must indeed be the “afterglow” of the Big Bang.
#24. To: jwpegler (#20)
The Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) was launched in 2001 to measure the cosmic background radiation. Among other things, WMAP has determined the universe to be 13.77 billion years old to within a half percent.
#25. To: jwpegler (#20)
#26. To: jwpegler (#20)
#27. To: redleghunter (#16)
And God declares it in Isaiah 42:
"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
#28. To: jwpegler (#27)
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...
#29. To: A K A Stone (#22)
How is it proven? Specifically.
"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
#30. To: jwpegler (#20)
(Edited)
#31. To: jwpegler (#29)
How is it proven? Specifically.
#32. To: A K A Stone (#26)
And you still haven't answered what came first the penis or the vagina.
"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
#33. To: jwpegler (#32)
Asexual reproduction came first.
#34. To: jwpegler (#32)
#35. To: A K A Stone (#33)
Can you show me this in the lab?
"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
#36. To: A K A Stone (#34)
(Edited)
You sound like the wizard of oz.
"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
#37. To: redleghunter, a k a stone (#18)
(Edited)
All was perfect when God created.
"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
#38. To: jwpegler (#35)
Yes, it is a proven, OBSERVED, fact that some species of insects, birds, reptiles, etc. switch between asexual reproduction and sexual reproduction.
#39. To: jwpegler, mininggold (#35)
When there is a shortage of males, the females use asexual reproduction for survival.
#40. To: jwpegler (#36)
God created the earth in 6 days.
#41. To: jwpegler (#36)
God created the earth in 6 days.
#42. To: jwpegler (#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.
#43. To: jwpegler (#37)
This is not supposed to be read literally. It's symbolism meant to convey a meaning.
#44. To: redleghunter (#18)
#45. To: A K A Stone (#43)
You're wrong. If it wasn't meant to be taken literally. It would finish with something like this
#46. To: mininggold (#45)
It appears that none of the Bible is meant to be taken literally because it's a collection of myths and fables showing the evolution of God.
#47. To: A K A Stone (#39)
(Edited)
NO person has ever asexually reproduced.
"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
#48. To: Thunderbird (#46)
To: mininggold
#49. To: A K A Stone (#40)
(Edited)
he satanic religion of evolution has no explanation for the fossil record.
"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
#50. To: A K A Stone (#38)
It is also an observed fact that trees have leaves. Some reproduce asexually. Do you expect to see a person born with leaves for hair?
"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
#51. To: A K A Stone (#39)
That is nonsense. I can't believe you think that just because mininggold can't get any men that she can still reproduce.
#52. To: jwpegler (#49)
Unlike evolution, the more we learn about the universe, the more the standard model of physics is PROVEN correct.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]