Grrrrrrrrrrrrr.... I really dont have time for this nonsense, but your post is chock full of SO many errors, it drives me nutz.
"Got back from my hunting gathering.
Way back when we started the computer creation discussion my underlying point was that the computer is a very complex mechanism and definitely was created (it did not evolve on its' own, spontaneously). On this we can agree. I would say the same for all of the things that science has provided for us. Medicines, space craft, fine cars, artificial body parts, and the list goes on and on. But all of these inventions were made through the design process and there was external intelligence applied to their discovery, planning, and production. In fact maybe all of the things that have appeared in the last several years were created by intelligent design. Science has shown us this pattern of creation for over 100 years. So far so good. We believe this because it is obvious. "
Error #1 - we do NOT believe it because it is obvious. We believe it because we have incredibly strong evidence that these things were in fact created.
We can divide things into 2 classes here.
Things which ARE created, and things which are NOT created.
CLEARLY.... computers ARE created and belong in that CLASS BECAUSE of the mound of evidence backing this assertion, NOT because its simply "obvious".
"Now on the other hand we are asked to accept the assertion that everything else was developed in a different way. Evolution."
Error #2 - evolution does not assert that EVERYTHING else was developed in a different way.
"In other words everything changes at the point of proof of development."
Error #3 - No one claimed this.
" But at this point nothing can really be proven on either side and both sides are saying accept our position on the basis of faith."
Error #4 - a VASTLY empty assertion. Evolutions certainly do NOT ask you to accept anything on faith. They ask you to accept on the MASSIVE PILES OF AVAILABLE evidence which you seem to be totally ignorant of.
" There is some claimed evidence for evolution and some claimed for creation. "
Error #5 - There *IS* evidence of evolution, not just claimed evidence like creationism. To dispute this would be like claiming that you cant breed dogs to be smaller or larger. Nature has the same effect on animals when the environment changes
"If you scrape away all of the psuedo reasoning on either side it all boils down to whether you believe in or reject God and nothing more."
Error #6 - Another hugely unsupported assertion.
"Some totally reject the bible as untrustworthy and just babbel but then they would have to claim the Jews don't exist because there is some in the bible about them and yet they claim the bible is completely erroneous."
Error #7 - this is the fallacy of the excluded middle. Its absolutely possible that jews exist AND that jesus was not god. They are not mutually exclusive.
" I could go on with many many irrefutable facts and statements in the bible ,"
You could go on with many more ERRORS, and thats about it
" like the Jew example to start with. Obviously those making these claims are a bit off base, at least to reasonable people. Actually there are mountains of evidence that the bible is very accurate and reliable but those rejecting God make fools of themselves by rejecting everything in the book."
Error #8 - You cant claim that people who reject god reject everything in the bible. Even I dont reject everything in the bible, just the fairy tale parts.
Error #9 - The bible being accurate in some parts does not make it accurate in all parts.
"Theists are often asked "who created God?". I now ask. Whatever blew up in the big bang must have been very large and how long do you figure it took for that massive mass to evolve or was it created?"
Error #10 - Fallacy, argument from ignorance. You need to study big bang theory. This does not gell with Big Bang theory at all.
" Does decay dating go back beyond the mass that blew up to tell us when it started to evolve or did decay dating change at the time of the explosion? They try to tell us decay dating hasn't changed in 3-14 billion years but where is the proof for that. "
Error #11 - Arguing from ignorance. Get the facts on decay dating.
"As you can see the evolutionists want you to exhibit a massive amount of faith on very little proof.""
Error #12 - Another hugely unsupported assertions. You purposefully IGNORE the massive amounts of evolutionary evidence. A dump truck full of the collected data would probably be large enough to squash you to bits if it were dumped on your physical body, and yet you have the nerve to claim its "very little proof". More ignorance of science. Evolution is the CORNER STONE of all biological sciences and our medicine.
"Non-life to life, nothing to something, something out of nothing all sound like miracles to me so why not just believe in the King of miracles."
Error #13 - This one is funny. It translates to: Since the complexities of the universe confuse me, I might as well believe in the biggest fable of all time.
OK... im REALLY going to try and stay away because I should NOT even have to address posts like this full of so many false assumptions, errors, blatant ignorance of scientific theory. and empty assertions.
13 errors in a single post, and I could probably find more If I took my time.
Why do I bother? I really shouldn't. Going to get some work done instead.
peace
axeman
