Jump to content


Photo

Create A Creation Theory Chart Explaination

Creation Evolution Chart Diagram

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
3 replies to this topic

#1 Clice

Clice

    Newcomer

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Age: 30
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • 62°N

Posted 18 August 2012 - 02:23 PM

Hey I was wondering if anyone cared to do a creation equal to this chart, it is suppose to explain evolution.
I could do the graphic part if I got some good ideas about what to write?

http://sdrv.ms/NbBOBG

#2 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 22 August 2012 - 12:21 PM

The problem is that the chart is not only circular, but it was also not predicted by the theory. You notice how Darwin's idea had to be replaced by the New Synthesis and convergent evolution had to be added because it falsified the descent of homologous structures from a common ancestor.

There are many independent data charts that do confirm the predictions of creation.

Helium diffusivity rates were predicted two years before they were measured.

Posted Image

The magnetic fields of Neptune and Uranus were predicted before they were measured.

http://www.creationr.../21_3/21_3.html

Creation predicted genetic entropy before it was tested against the ages of the patriarchs in the bible.

Posted Image

Creation predicted the age of MtDna Eve before the empirical mutation rates were measured.

http://evolutionfair...indpost&p=52826

Creation predicted that dinosaurs were thousands of years old before proteins in them were found that have half lives of no more than 500 years.

I honestly don't think that any hypothesis should be considered if it doesn't make accurate predictions. But the evolutionists will continue to reason in circles anyway.



Enjoy.

#3 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 15 September 2012 - 08:08 AM

The problem is that the chart is not only circular, but it was also not predicted by the theory. You notice how Darwin's idea had to be replaced by the New Synthesis and convergent evolution had to be added because it falsified the descent of homologous structures from a common ancestor.

There are many independent data charts that do confirm the predictions of creation.

Helium diffusivity rates were predicted two years before they were measured.

Posted Image

The magnetic fields of Neptune and Uranus were predicted before they were measured.

http://www.creationr.../21_3/21_3.html

Creation predicted genetic entropy before it was tested against the ages of the patriarchs in the bible.

Posted Image

Creation predicted the age of MtDna Eve before the empirical mutation rates were measured.

http://evolutionfair...indpost&p=52826

Creation predicted that dinosaurs were thousands of years old before proteins in them were found that have half lives of no more than 500 years.

I honestly don't think that any hypothesis should be considered if it doesn't make accurate predictions. But the evolutionists will continue to reason in circles anyway.



Enjoy.



Totally agree! Its what annoys me a fair bit since science is based on making a prediction and then testing that prediction via empirical experimentation... Whereas it seems the evolutionists version of "science" is to look at the conclusion and then make their hypothesis fit it.

I have yet to be told of an evolutionist prediction made before the evidence was found, its always ad hoc, which isn't empirical science at all, its more like history.

#4 JayShel

JayShel

    Former Atheist

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPip
  • 777 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Age: 36
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Saved July 12, 2007

Posted 15 September 2012 - 10:37 AM

Totally agree! Its what annoys me a fair bit since science is based on making a prediction and then testing that prediction via empirical experimentation... Whereas it seems the evolutionists version of "science" is to look at the conclusion and then make their hypothesis fit it.

I have yet to be told of an evolutionist prediction made before the evidence was found, its always ad hoc, which isn't empirical science at all, its more like history.


Right that's just how dark matter was thought of, an ad hoc theory to explain a phenomena that we observed, yet we have been searching for 80 years and likely trillions of dollars and no luck finding it yet. Now there are other theories that explain the phenomena without invoking dark matter AND there have been no fulfilled predictions using dark matter as a theory. It takes awhile to redirect our momentum away from a popular scientific once people buy into them.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Creation, Evolution, Chart, Diagram

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users