Why people laugh at Creationists

[Dave Lane]

Taking a lead from Killer Clown I thought I'd create a alternative thread to post some videos I like...

[EDIT New video here]

So on with the show:

Here's the Kent Hovind Theory:



"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it.
Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many.
Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books.
Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.
Do not believe in traditions simply because they have been handed down for many generations.
But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it."

[KILLER_CLOWN]

Originally Posted by Fish

That website is complete and utter bullshit. Pseudo science at its worst....

[go bowe]

Originally Posted by KILLER_CLOWN

hmmmm, I can guarantee it wasn't by chance. Please don't forget my last message to you...Tick..Tock...Tick...Tock....

you know what?

you can take your messages and your arrogant attitude and shove them up your ass...

**** you and **** your ****ing bullshit religiosity...

seriously, go to hell!!!

[go bowe]

Originally Posted by KILLER_CLOWN

yeah, laugh at your own bullshit...

****ing ignoramus...

why don't you fly away with your little peaked head twirling like a top?

killer clown my ass...

you give clowns a bad name...

[go bowe]

Originally Posted by KILLER_CLOWN

Nonsense that would mean the creator might have created some rules for us to follow and most wouldn't like that.

one thing is for sure, your version of the creator doesn't exist...

you've gone beyond weird nutcase, you've become a real abortion of a poster...

congratulations, you're now the most famous nut case on chiefs planet...

trouble is you actually believe all the crap you spew... smh...

speaking of nonsense, you're quite the expert aren't you?

**** you and the horse you screwed to get here...

[KILLER_CLOWN]

Originally Posted by go bowe

one thing is for sure, your version of the creator doesn't exist...

you've gone beyond weird nutcase, you've become a real abortion of a poster...

congratulations, you're now the most famous nut case on chiefs planet...

trouble is you actually believe all the crap you spew... smh...

speaking of nonsense, you're quite the expert aren't you?

**** you and the horse you screwed to get here...

Hmmmm...that's unhealthy. You should seek help man.

[listopencil]

Here's a fun little video from YouTube:



The text added to the video:
In this video I deconstruct the broken watch straw man argument used by creationist / ID supporters to attack evolution. I had to pack a ton of information into this video so you WILL need to pause it periodically.

The basic premise of the argument is that a bunch of parts will never randomly assemble into the correct arrangement to form a properly functioning complex. Once again, creationists / ID supporters miss the basic concept of evolution entirely. No biologists believes, nor is there any evidence that complex systems form spontaneously in one fell swoop. That would be creation. Systems evolve through many intermediates, one step at a time, slowly building up the complexity.

Here I deconstruct their straw man argument. Basically, I simulate clocks as living organisms. Selective pressure is focused on their ability to accurately tell time. NO goal is imposed on the design (you can tell this because every simulation ends with a differently constructed clock). And it works. Clocks evolve through a series of transitional forms: Pendulum, Proto-clock, 1-handed Clock, 2-handed Clock, 3-handed Clock, and 4-handed Clock. Gradually the complexity is built up.

These labels I have assigned to the transitional forms have nothing to do with the simulation itself. They are names I assigned so that we could analyze what the population was doing. The clocks are just clocks, living in their world, trying to tell time as accurately as possible.

One thing I wanted to address but didn't have time in the video is how rapid the transitional period can be. In some simulations the population goes from pendulums to 3-handed Clocks in a hundred or so generations. And the transitions between the transitional forms are even more rapid, happening in about ten generations. Chances are none or a very limited representation of that transition will be preserved in the fossil record.

One thing I should add. The program does not draw the clocks. It maintains, mates, and simulates them, but the drawing must be done manually from the genome matrix.

The program is written in MatLab.

The hand rotations that begin with 86 are 86,000 not 86.000. When YouTube compressed the video it becam hard to tell a comma from a period.

[WhiteWhale]

Originally Posted by listopencil

Here's a fun little video from YouTube:



The text added to the video:
In this video I deconstruct the broken watch straw man argument used by creationist / ID supporters to attack evolution. I had to pack a ton of information into this video so you WILL need to pause it periodically.

The basic premise of the argument is that a bunch of parts will never randomly assemble into the correct arrangement to form a properly functioning complex. Once again, creationists / ID supporters miss the basic concept of evolution entirely. No biologists believes, nor is there any evidence that complex systems form spontaneously in one fell swoop. That would be creation. Systems evolve through many intermediates, one step at a time, slowly building up the complexity.

Here I deconstruct their straw man argument. Basically, I simulate clocks as living organisms. Selective pressure is focused on their ability to accurately tell time. NO goal is imposed on the design (you can tell this because every simulation ends with a differently constructed clock). And it works. Clocks evolve through a series of transitional forms: Pendulum, Proto-clock, 1-handed Clock, 2-handed Clock, 3-handed Clock, and 4-handed Clock. Gradually the complexity is built up.

These labels I have assigned to the transitional forms have nothing to do with the simulation itself. They are names I assigned so that we could analyze what the population was doing. The clocks are just clocks, living in their world, trying to tell time as accurately as possible.

One thing I wanted to address but didn't have time in the video is how rapid the transitional period can be. In some simulations the population goes from pendulums to 3-handed Clocks in a hundred or so generations. And the transitions between the transitional forms are even more rapid, happening in about ten generations. Chances are none or a very limited representation of that transition will be preserved in the fossil record.

One thing I should add. The program does not draw the clocks. It maintains, mates, and simulates them, but the drawing must be done manually from the genome matrix.

The program is written in MatLab.

The hand rotations that begin with 86 are 86,000 not 86.000. When YouTube compressed the video it becam hard to tell a comma from a period.

I find it astounding that people even humor creationists.

It's like arguing with a 4 year old that fairies don't exist. By arguing with them, and even mocking them, you're validating them. They don't deserve it.

They don't understand how empiricism works.

[King_Chief_Fan]

I know you all aren't done having your fun yet and a lot more to come from you.

However, I will tell you that I find your humor offensive.
To me God is real. I do believe that my sins were paid for when Christ was Crucified. I do believe in life after death.

I also know my job is to be a better witness for Him. I have failed at that as my actions and my words don't always profess my love to Him and or my love for you as my brothers and sisters. I hope that sometime in your life you will come to know Him as I have and experience the peace about what happens after this life is over and be my brothers and sisters in Christ.

It isn't my place to sit and banter with you on your beliefs vs. mine.
I understand where you are and hopefully you understand where I am.

Thanks for reading.
KCF

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by King_Chief_Fan

I know you all aren't done having your fun yet and a lot more to come from you.

However, I will tell you that I find your humor offensive.
To me God is real. I do believe that my sins were paid for when Christ was Crucified. I do believe in life after death.

I also know my job is to be a better witness for Him. I have failed at that as my actions and my words don't always profess my love to Him and or my love for you as my brothers and sisters. I hope that sometime in your life you will come to know Him as I have and experience the peace about what happens after this life is over and be my brothers and sisters in Christ.

It isn't my place to sit and banter with you on your beliefs vs. mine.
I understand where you are and hopefully you understand where I am.

Thanks for reading.
KCF

Well, speaking only for myself, the humor was not meant to offend and I do offer an apology if mine did. I have attempted to keep my comments and whatnot focused on creationism versus evolution but this conversation has gone on for quite some time. There are the occasional potshots made by both "sides." I do think that a person can believe in Christ and the existence of a Christian God (or any "god" for that matter) and still observe the effects of evolution, and that this belief and observation are not mutually exclusive. What is offensive to me is the blind faith I have seen in regards to the infallibility of the Bible (and other sacred texts) as the literal word of God, the refusal of some to apply rational/critical thinking skills to spiritual issues and the rejection of accomplishments made (or knowledge gleaned) by man as inferior to religious beliefs. Still, it's all good. We don't have a right not to be offended.

[King_Chief_Fan]

Listopencil
I appreciate your response and respect your position
On the matter.

Neither of us will agree to the others position.
But that is ok. We can agree to disagree

[RNR]

Originally Posted by go bowe

one thing is for sure, your version of the creator doesn't exist...

you've gone beyond weird nutcase, you've become a real abortion of a poster...

congratulations, you're now the most famous nut case on chiefs planet...

trouble is you actually believe all the crap you spew... smh...

speaking of nonsense, you're quite the expert aren't you?

**** you and the horse you screwed to get here...

All kidding aside this is the first time I have ever seen this poster angry~

[KILLER_CLOWN]

Originally Posted by RNR

All kidding aside this is the first time I have ever seen this poster angry~

What can I say? I bring out the best/worst in people.

[Dave]

For me, the biggest issue about Creationism is the arrogance of it.

[KILLER_CLOWN]

Originally Posted by Dave

For me, the biggest issue about Creationism is the arrogance of it.

Conversely I have zero problems with creationism.

[mr. tegu]

Originally Posted by King_Chief_Fan

I know you all aren't done having your fun yet and a lot more to come from you.

However, I will tell you that I find your humor offensive.
To me God is real. I do believe that my sins were paid for when Christ was Crucified. I do believe in life after death.

I also know my job is to be a better witness for Him. I have failed at that as my actions and my words don't always profess my love to Him and or my love for you as my brothers and sisters. I hope that sometime in your life you will come to know Him as I have and experience the peace about what happens after this life is over and be my brothers and sisters in Christ.

It isn't my place to sit and banter with you on your beliefs vs. mine.
I understand where you are and hopefully you understand where I am.

Thanks for reading.
KCF

The majority of this thread evolved (pun intended) more into one that points out the refusal of certain religious beliefs to accept evolution. Evolution doesn't have to conflict with religion or a belief in creation and it is maddening the way certain people try to "disprove" evolution with outright lies and intentional or unintentional misrepresentations of what evolution actually is in order to fit into their beliefs.