(from a WorldNetDaily article)
"It's a good example of the fact that evolutionary ideas change all the time. They are reinterpreting their ideas as they look at the evidence," he told WND. "The result is that there's no real knowledge there."
He said such articles base their many assumptions on such concepts as the fossil layers that are discovered.
"If they find animals and plants in the fossil record together, they assume they were living together," he told WND. "That's not necessarily so. They could have been transported and dumped together."
(later in the article)
"The Bible – the 'history book of the universe' – provides a reliable, eye-witness account of the beginning of all things, and can be trusted to tell the truth in all areas it touches. Therefore, we are able to use it to help us make sense of this present world."
32 comments
Sometimes clues and pieces of evidence cause first impressions to be incorrect. That is why scientific discovery is an ongoing process. When "The Bible the 'history book of the universe'" was written, the primitive desert tribesmen knew little or nothing about what few scientific discoveries had been made at that time. And it should be very evident to most everybody living today that science has pretty much disproven everything "The Bible the 'history book of the universe'" has said about damn near everything.
Okay, when will this guy just die so someone can yell "Oh my God! God (Or, if he was murdered, the murderers name) killed Kenny! That bastard!"?
"It's a good example of the fact that evolutionary ideas change all the time. They are reinterpreting their ideas as they look at the evidence,"Yes, that's one of the great aspects of science, data can be reinterpreted and, as better data becomes available, new data can be added. This new data and/or new interpretation is then peer reviewed to assess it's validity.
""The Bible the 'history book of the universe' provides a reliable, eye-witness account of the beginning of all things, and can be trusted to tell the truth in all areas it touches. Therefore, we are able to use it to help us make sense of this present world."
The Bible is patently UNRELIABLE as source material. The Bible claims it is an eye-witness account of the beginning of all things, but the witness is unknown, untestable, and provably wrong on many points.
Ken Ham is an idiot and an asshole.
"It's a good example of the fact that evolutionary ideas change all the time. They are reinterpreting their ideas as they look at the evidence," he told WND. "The result is that there's no real knowledge there." is real knowledge in holding fast to your initial interpretation in light of mounds of conflicting evidence?
Gah, and when they "reinterpret their ideas", it's not like they're totally rewriting them from scratch every time, they're honing them to a greater detail.
The Bible the 'history book of the universe' provides a reliable, eye-witness account of the beginning of all things...
"They are reinterpreting their ideas as they look at the evidence,"
"If they find animals and plants in the fossil record together, they assume they were living together," he told WND. "That's not necessarily so. They could have been transported and dumped together." always the result of being "transported and dumped together", which is what Noah's Flood requires. Remember that finding a few examples doesn't prove your point - fossils can erode out of rocks and be transported elsewhere, something that can usually be recognized by analysis of the minerals.
"It's a good example of the fact that evolutionary ideas change all the time. They are reinterpreting their ideas as they look at the evidence,"
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
