greekredemption Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Okay, we're through the looking glass now. Someone else can pick this up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainbow Dash Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 How do either of those things even explain the first thing on the list from the link which states: "The bone is like no other bone on Earth. Its biochemical signature is much richer in collagen than regular bone."? Can you give an answer to my question? or did you just say Hydrocephalus and Progeria without checking if they can actually explain all of the anomalies of the Starchild skull? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Livemike Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 This guy wants $10 for a book "disproving" Darwin. Now if he could actually do that he'd get the Nobel prize worth $1M. His name would be internationally known. There would be TENS OF THOUSANDS of preachers urging their followers to buy his book, each convincing dozens of followers to buy his book. Yet he's not on any bestseller lists. Not even the ludicrously non-credible creationists have praised him have they? And yet you expect us to believe that a theory that has withstood criticism for over 150 years is destroyed by your little text? Note that he claims that these criticisms were known from the start, so they've clearly been discredited for over 100 years. Stop wasting our time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainbow Dash Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 People won't buy the book because they would assume it is propaganda. He wouldn't get a Nobel prize. The Nobel prize doesn't go to the most deserving because it is politically biased, that is how Obama got the Nobel peace prize. Preachers won't pay for people to buy his book disproving evolution if the book claims the alternative to evolution is alien creation. Besides, Christianity is starting to accept evolution, and they are not considering it as much as a threat. As for evolution withstanding 150 years of criticism, Christianity withstood 2000 years of criticism, and it is today the world's most popular religion. So withstanding criticism means nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProfessionalTeabagger Posted April 6, 2014 Share Posted April 6, 2014 People won't buy the book because they would assume it is propaganda. He wouldn't get a Nobel prize. The Nobel prize doesn't go to the most deserving because it is politically biased, that is how Obama got the Nobel peace prize. Preachers won't pay for people to buy his book disproving evolution if the book claims the alternative to evolution is alien creation. Besides, Christianity is starting to accept evolution, and they are not considering it as much as a threat. As for evolution withstanding 150 years of criticism, Christianity withstood 2000 years of criticism, and it is today the world's most popular religion. So withstanding criticism means nothing. People would buy the book. He could get a Nobel prize. The Nobel peace prize is different from the Scientific prizes. Preachers would pay for a book that disproves evolution even if the alternative is alien creation. Evolution withstood 150 years of scientific criticism. Christianity did not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainbow Dash Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 People would buy the book. He could get a Nobel prize. The Nobel peace prize is different from the Scientific prizes. Preachers would pay for a book that disproves evolution even if the alternative is alien creation. Evolution withstood 150 years of scientific criticism. Christianity did not. Such a book is freely available here: http://dcrain.zftp.com/info/Intervention%20Theory.pdf and not enough people are reading it even though it can be obtained online for free and preachers aren't paying the book's author. In actuality, evolution withstood 150 years of pseudo-scientific criticism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wesley Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 Preface This eBook is designed to explain the essential aspects of Intervention Theory that anyone new to it, or interested in learning more about it, will need to know. It is grounded in solid, reliable academic research, though it is not footnoted or annotated because there is no point in doing so. Statements made by alternative researchers like me are automatically contradicted by scientists insisting we are not simply wrong, but stupidly wrong. They further insist we have no right to challenge their cherished beliefs because our only “credentials” are an unwarranted faith in our ability to discern truth from nonsense. [This doesn’t refer to all scientists. Some still willingly risk reputation and security to explore topics that defy dogma. However, they are few .] Every point I discuss is supported by facts in available research, but I am often criticized by skeptics. Why? Because the issues I discuss are long-lived sacred cows to mainstream sciences. They protect their herd with admirable tenacity, as I would if I had somehow joined their ranks. Looking back, I’m delighted I managed to find a different herd to look after, because I’m sure those areas of study will lead to our true future. Also, this eBook contains a small amount of repetition. The best way to learn anything, to make it stick in memory like velcro, is to use a technique known as Programmed Learning . Years ago, school workbooks had sentences containing blank segments to be filled in by students. They were in termittently repetitive, which subtly enhanced memory. Workbooks are no longer used as much, but intermittent repetition remains a useful learning tool. This eBook’s purpose is to introduce readers to highly controversial concepts they should easily absorb and, more importantly, recall with some detail for later discussion and, if needed, debate with friends and family not yet familiar with the basic evidence supporting Intervention Theory. So I read the preface and I have decided this book is silly. It says there is evidence, but it is not provided through link or source or otherwise. After all, evidence need not be provided. Then it plays the persecution for beliefs card as they are not respected because they do not provide hard and consistent evidence and ignore contradictory evidence. Of course, this is because they are die-hard scientists out to get these theoreticians. Then the book proclaims that the best way to indoctrinate is through steady repetition and so facts and evidence are non-existent in the book, but they will repeat non-sense that is unproven over and over so that you will be programmed to repeat it to others. I think that there are better uses of my time to say the least. Logic can't even be pretended to be put forward in the preface then the book is not even worth the effort to read it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rainbow Dash Posted April 7, 2014 Share Posted April 7, 2014 So I read the preface and I have decided this book is silly. It says there is evidence, but it is not provided through link or source or otherwise. After all, evidence need not be provided. Then it plays the persecution for beliefs card as they are not respected because they do not provide hard and consistent evidence and ignore contradictory evidence. Of course, this is because they are die-hard scientists out to get these theoreticians. "Every point I discuss is supported by facts in available research" You have the ability to check the validity of the points made by doing your own research. You are complaining that he is making you use Google searches the validate his claims. I don't see why he has to spoon feed you sources. Then the book proclaims that the best way to indoctrinate is through steady repetition and so facts and evidence are non-existent in the book, but they will repeat non-sense that is unproven over and over so that you will be programmed to repeat it to others. You don't know if he repeats unproven nonsense, because you did not read past the preface. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Think Free Posted April 13, 2014 Share Posted April 13, 2014 So, this discussion has been going on for a while now, and I'm just curious: Have any of those disagreeing with Rainbow Dash actually read the book he's suggesting you read? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greekredemption Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 So, this discussion has been going on for a while now, and I'm just curious: Have any of those disagreeing with Rainbow Dash actually read the book he's suggesting you read? Which book? And no. For my part, I was more interested in addressing Rainbow Dash's misunderstandings around evolution than discussing the starchild a deformed human skull (which only really became a topic of discussion in the last page or so). edit: a word Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts