Jump to content


Photo

Creation Vs Evolution Resources Submitted By Members

CvsE Resources

  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 Bonedigger

Bonedigger

    Admin Team

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,424 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Creation, Vertebrate Paleontology-particularly mammals and especially Perissodactyls & Carnivores, Hunting, Shooting, Handloading, Weaving Chainmaille, Hebrew and other Biblically relevant languages, Astronomy
  • Age: 52
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Colorado

Posted 30 August 2013 - 10:16 PM

Per Sammy's request, here is a pinned thread where members can share and post links to resources such as books or other that they have found useful and informative for the Creation vs. Evolution debate. If possible, please give a brief summary of what the resource covers and what particular issues it addresses.

This is not, however, an advertising/book promotion thread, fishing.gif  and if it turns into such, it will be locked and/or trashed.

 

Also, this is not a debate thread. If you want to debate the usefulness or reliability of a resource posted here, start a thread linking back to the relevant post here.

 

Bonedigger



#2 Bonedigger

Bonedigger

    Admin Team

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,424 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Creation, Vertebrate Paleontology-particularly mammals and especially Perissodactyls & Carnivores, Hunting, Shooting, Handloading, Weaving Chainmaille, Hebrew and other Biblically relevant languages, Astronomy
  • Age: 52
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Colorado

Posted 30 August 2013 - 10:53 PM

As an example, I would suggest "Origin Science" by Norman L. Geisler and J. Kerby Anderson. I "cut my teeth", so to speak, on that book for understanding the philosophical basis for the current debate. They review the history of science from Francis Bacon and Immanuel Kant, through David Hume and William Paley, all the way to current Big Bang cosmology (cosmogony). Ultimately they conclude that the only way creationists and evolutionists can hold a rational discussion is by recognizing the distinction between operational science (i.e. what I usually refer to as empirical science) and origin science (what I would usually refer to as historical science). It's a good read, and deserves to be in the library of any CvE aficionado.



#3 Bond007

Bond007

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 511 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Reading.
  • Age: 20
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 30 August 2013 - 11:16 PM

http://austore.creat...pack-p-504.html         

 

General all round utter demolition of evo, covers natural selection, speciation ,mutations, created kinds, Noahs Ark, stuff Darwin said, stuff Dawkins says, stuff Eugenie Scott says, big bang, radiometric dating, fossils. (Note the cover, it is a sledge hammer with 'science' written on it smashing glass with 'evolution' written on it).

 

http://austore.creat...arth-p-520.html

 

Specific utter demolition of Dawkins book 'The greatest show on earth' Covers all of the above+ more specific Dawkins claims. 

 

http://austore.creat...ome-p-1003.html

 

What can be said, Dr Sanfords compilation of genetics data showing decline in fitness from germ line cell mutations. Neoadarwinian paradigm=falsified.

 

http://austore.creat...sign-p-172.html


Dr Danny Faulkner Phd astronomer/physicists runs through astronomy/astrophysics and compares YEC cosmology vs the big bang.

 

http://austore.creat...ance-p-235.html


Analysis of mutations (not mutation rate) from the information theory perspective. To quote Dr Spetner "We see then that the mutation reduces the specificity of the ribosome protein and that means a loss of genetic information. ... Rather than saying the bacterium gained resistance to the antibiotic, it is more correct to say that is lost sensitivity to it. ... All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not increase it."

 

http://austore.creat...ted-p-1002.html

 

Dr John Hartnett builds on Dr Russel Humphreys YEC cosmology. Brief mention of the big bang.

 

http://austore.creat...ion-p-1004.html

 

Quantifying information content of life. (Dr Gitt has a newer book out ' Without excuse').

 

http://austore.creat...ion-p-1181.html

 

Lovely colour big size book with pictures. Starts at Genesis and runs through history contrasting evo with YEC. Covers biology, geology, astronomy and other relevant fields. Great all round coverage of the topic.



#4 Bond007

Bond007

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 511 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Reading.
  • Age: 20
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 04 September 2013 - 02:44 AM

Youtube channels cre/evo videos.

 

http://www.youtube.c...r/slaves4christ

 

http://www.youtube.c...r/askjohnmackay

 

http://www.youtube.c...r/askjohnmackay

 

http://www.youtube.c...eature=g-subs-u

 

http://www.youtube.c...eature=g-subs-u

 

http://www.youtube.c...eature=g-subs-u

 

http://www.youtube.c...eature=g-subs-u

 

http://www.youtube.c...eature=g-subs-u

 

http://www.youtube.c...LostChildren777

 

http://www.youtube.c...nstation/videos

 

http://www.youtube.c...8lcz5ZfylXz-F2A

 

http://www.youtube.c...2WlesiW_yDNwnoA

 

http://www.youtube.c...3QmzQXv1WPqyoEg

 

http://www.youtube.c...smantled/videos

 

http://www.youtube.c...fZ6VoOjGpF5Gy0g

 

http://www.youtube.c...nScience/videos

 

Just to summarize one of the best overviews of the start of the lie:evolutionism i have ever seen.

 


  • Mike Summers likes this

#5 lifepsyop

lifepsyop

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 656 posts
  • Age: 30
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Maine

Posted 01 November 2013 - 04:45 PM

Geneticist Jeffrey Tomkins thoroughly debunks Chromosome #2

 

OCT 2013

Alleged Human Chromosome 2 “Fusion Site” Encodes an Active DNA Binding Domain Inside a Complex and Highly Expressed Gene—Negating Fusion

 

http://www.answersin...romosome-fusion

 

A major argument supposedly supporting human evolution from a common ancestor with chimpanzees is the “chromosome 2 fusion model” in which ape chromosomes 2A and 2B purportedly fused end-to-end, forming human chromosome 2. This idea is postulated despite the fact that all known fusions in extant mammals involve satellite DNA and breaks at or near centromeres. In addition, researchers have noted that the hypothetical telomeric end-to-end signature of the fusion is very small (~800 bases) and highly degenerate (ambiguous) given the supposed 3 to 6 million years of divergence from a common ancestor. In this report, it is also shown that the purported fusion site (read in the minus strand orientation) is a functional DNA binding domain inside the first intron of the DDX11L2 regulatory RNA helicase gene, which encodes several transcript variants expressed in at least 255 different cell and/or tissue types. Specifically, the purported fusion site encodes the second active transcription factor binding domain in the DDX11L2 gene that coincides with transcriptionally active histone marks and open active chromatin. Annotated DDX11L2 gene transcripts suggest complex post-transcriptional regulation through a variety of microRNA binding sites. Chromosome fusions would not be expected to form complex multi-exon, alternatively spliced functional genes. This clear genetic evidence, combined with the fact that a previously documented 614 Kb genomic region surrounding the purported fusion site lacks synteny (gene correspondence) with chimpanzee on chromosomes 2A and 2B (supposed fusion sites of origin), thoroughly refutes the claim that human chromosome 2 is the result of an ancestral telomeric end-to-end fusion.

 

Now watch the evolutionists go into equivocation overdrive in order to downplay the findings. 



#6 lifepsyop

lifepsyop

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 656 posts
  • Age: 30
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Maine

Posted 11 January 2014 - 04:16 PM

Some compelling hypotheses concerning the fossil record from a YEC point of view.

 

 

http://creationwiki.org/Fossil_sorting

 

Fossil sorting is an observable characteristic of the fossil record wherein organisms present during the antediluvian period are commonly found only within a limited span of strata (layers of rock), and frequently above or below other specific fossils. Young earth creationists assert that fossiliferous rock is almost entirely the result of the Biblical flood described in Genesis 6-9, and the sorting explained by flood geologists as the result of several factors present during the flood, including ecological zonation, hydrological sorting and liquefaction, differential escape, biogeographic zonation, and tectonic activity.



#7 Genesis6:4

Genesis6:4

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 119 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Arizona
  • Interests:Paranormal, OOPARTS, Microbiology, Anatomy and Physiology, Prophecy.
  • Age: 32
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Scottsdale Arizona

Posted 11 January 2014 - 11:00 PM

anything from creation.com



#8 want the truth

want the truth

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 86 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 27
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • n/a

Posted 11 January 2014 - 11:18 PM

http://www.amazon.co... the dissidents

 

 

Slaughter of the Dissidents, by Jerry Bergman

 

Volume 1 of a trilogy, the disturbing premise of this book documents widespread discrimination by Darwin loyalists against Darwin skeptics in academia and within the scientific community. Multiple case studies expose the tactics used to destroy the careers of Darwin skeptics, denying them earned degrees and awards, tenure, and other career benefits offered to non-skeptics. The book exposes how freedom of speech and freedom of expression are widely promoted as not applicable to Darwin doubters, and reveals the depth and extent of hostility and bigotry exhibited towards those who would dare to question Darwinism. The book also shows how even the slightest hint of sympathy for Darwin Doubters often results in a vigorous and rabid response from those who believe such sumpathies represent an attack on science itself.



#9 lifepsyop

lifepsyop

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 656 posts
  • Age: 30
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Maine

Posted 15 January 2014 - 06:22 PM

Youtube user: GreenSlugg

 

Has a lot of great talks on the Evolution - Creation debate, with a convenient playlist.

 

Do Similarities Between Species Prove Evolution?



#10 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 16 January 2014 - 02:37 AM

Good link, Lifepsyop!

#11 lifepsyop

lifepsyop

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 656 posts
  • Age: 30
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Maine

Posted 22 January 2014 - 04:39 PM

If anyone has lots of time on their hand and is interested in a detailed and candid description of fossil finds,  these PDF's are available from Palaeos.com   Lots and lots of info.  I'm not sure how well this site is maintained though so they might not be there forever!

 

http://palaeos.com/pdf/

 

They are funny and informative to read with lots of images.  And they are pretty straightforward about discoveries that contradict evolutionary thinking.  For example, from "Mammalia 1" some placental molars discovered in Cretaceous Australia, that were not supposed to be there.  After reading awhile you get a feeling about how confused and arbitrary a lot of phylogeny is... how strange stuff just appears in the fossil record, and disappears just as strangely...

 

A few years ago, Dr. Thomas H. Rich described an
Australian mammal named Ausktribosphenos from the
Middle Cretaceous of Victoria. The description caused
a bit of a stir: not just because it was impossible to
pronounce, but because Dr. Rich asserted that the
critter was a placental mammal. Middle Cretaceous placentals are a bit thin on the ground in any part of the world,
and they weren't supposed to be on Gondwanan soil at all
. Placentals, like so many Ivy League scholars, are supposed
to originate only from select Northern localities, from which they spread out to enlighten the rest of the Earth. So, the
announcement of an early Australian placental did not -- to say the least -- meet with universal acceptance. Most
significantly, a coalition of well-known mammalogists suggested that Dr. Rich's discovery wasn't a placental, and
wasn't a tribosphenic mammal at all, but was rather some failed monotreme cousin which had independently and
accidentally evolved a (probably inferior) copy of the classic Northern tribosphenic molar.



#12 Richard

Richard

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 53 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pensacola, Florida
  • Interests:Family, Theology, Philosophy, Politics, Creation/Evolution Debate, Scuba Diving, Fishing,
  • Age: 56
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Pensacola

Posted 15 February 2014 - 08:10 AM

I read Creation/Evolution Headlines almost everyday and find it a valuable source of information. It is run by David Coppedge, the NASA engineer who was fired for talking about Intelligent Design. 

 

 

 

http://crev.info



#13 Adam Nagy

Adam Nagy

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,053 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Posted 15 February 2014 - 08:16 AM

Thanks, Richard. That site reminded me that we forgot to celebrate Darwin's birthday.

#14 FaithfulCenturion

FaithfulCenturion

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 883 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 32
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • New York

Posted 26 February 2014 - 04:06 PM

Great video discussing "astrological" evolution.


#15 Bonedigger

Bonedigger

    Admin Team

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,424 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Creation, Vertebrate Paleontology-particularly mammals and especially Perissodactyls & Carnivores, Hunting, Shooting, Handloading, Weaving Chainmaille, Hebrew and other Biblically relevant languages, Astronomy
  • Age: 52
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Colorado

Posted 26 February 2014 - 05:33 PM

Great video discussing "astrological" evolution.
 

 

"Astrological"?? gaah.gif Tell me you meant astronomical, or, at least that you were just jokingly trying to imply that astronomical evolution has the same level of credibility as astrology.



#16 FaithfulCenturion

FaithfulCenturion

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 883 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 32
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • New York

Posted 26 February 2014 - 05:40 PM

 
"Astrological"?? gaah.gif Tell me you meant astronomical, or, at least that you were just jokingly trying to imply that astronomical evolution has the same level of credibility as astrology.

^_^ I was hoping my joke wasn't wasted! :D Good catch Bonedigger!

#17 rico

rico

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 669 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Jesus, computers, physics, video games, philosophy, epistomology
  • Age: 34
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • USA

Posted 22 April 2014 - 06:03 PM

Climate Change from a creation perspective entitled: Global Warming and the Creator's Plan by Jay A. Auxt and Dr. William M. Curtis III., published 2009 by master books publishing.  I read some of it, and discusses the issue and covered the breif :-) history.



#18 EQuestions

EQuestions

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 222 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 43
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • North America

Posted 22 July 2014 - 09:37 AM

I'll add one since it really does vindicate Behe and what he said in his book 'The Edge of Evolution'. Really good stuff. Along with the dismissal of junk DNA by the ENCODE project this is yet another shining example of how modern science is quickly destroying darwinian evolution. 

 

http://www.evolution...behe087901.html

 

It'll be interesting to see how the critics try and weasel their way out of this finding. 



#19 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,727 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 22 July 2014 - 09:55 AM

This one isn't about creation v. evolution so much as it is an archive of really great images from space.  Yes, it's from NASA, so the captions are written from an evolutionary perspective....  but the pics are just so neat.

 

I give you, the Astronomy Picture of the Day archive:  http://apod.nasa.gov...archivepix.html

:

 

Here's one from just yesterday.... it's the nucleus of a comet rotating in space.... looks like a double nucleus:

2014 July 21
cometCGrotating_rosetta.gif

Explanation: Why does this comet's nucleus have two components? The surprising discovery that Comet 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko has a double nucleus came late last week as ESA's robotic interplanetary spacecraft Rosetta continued its approach toward the ancient comet's core. Speculative ideas on how the double core was created include, currently, that Comet Churyumov–Gerasimenko is actually the result of the merger of two comets, that the comet is a loose pile of rubble pulled apart by tidal forces, that ice evaporation on the comet has been asymmetric, or that the comet has undergone some sort of explosive event. Pictured above, the comet's unusual 5-km sized comet nucleus is seen rotating over the course of a few hours, with each frame taken 20-minutes apart. Better images -- and hopefully more refined theories -- are expected as Rosetta is on track to enter orbit around Comet Churyumov–Gerasimenko's nucleus early next month, and by the end of the year, if possible, land a probe on it.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users