2
POPSNessie Gives Creationism a Boost more at source... "Could a fish have developed into a dinosaur? As astonishing as it may seem, many evolutionists theorize that fish evolved into amphibians and amphibians into reptiles. This gradual change from fish to reptiles has no scientific basis. No transitional fossils have been or ever will be discovered because God created each type of fish, amphibian, and reptile as separate, unique animals. Any similarities that exist among them are due to the fact that one Master Craftsmen fashioned them all."..."Teenagers studying for the certificate, which is taught in about 50 private Christian schools in the UK, spend half their time learning from evangelical US textbooks. The curriculum is based on the Accelerated Christian Education (ACE) programme, which describes its ideology as "Christian fundamentalist"...
27
POPSSex is the ultimate absurdity Isn't it ironic that we all suffer today the consequences of how single celled organisms that lived a billion years ago choose to procreate? :-)
7
POPSYeah! Let the Students Decide I, for one, totally applaud the actions of the Texas Board of Education in their wise decision that let's the students of Texas participate in the ongoing dialogs. In fact, they should be expanded! Teach Tantric sex alongside abstinence and let the students decide. Teach Alchemy alongside Chemistry and let the students decide. Teach Astrology with Astronomy and let the students decide. Gravity is just a theory; in actuality the earth sucks! Earth's round! How absurd. Teach the flat earth theory as well. It seems fair to me.
16
POPSWe're all going to be rich! Afterwards, they can accept the check from Mr Oktar, run down to the local bank and cash it, and use one trillion dollars to resolve the current financial crisis, seven trillion can be sunk immediately into the American educational system, and they can send the change left over to me as a reward for coming up with this brilliant plan.
14
POPSEvolutionists Flock to Darwin-Shaped Wall Stain Since witnesses first reported the unexplained marking—which appears to resemble a 19th-century male figure with a high forehead and large beard—this normally quiet town has become a hotbed of biological zealotry. Thousands of pilgrims from as far away as Berkeley's paleoanthropology department have flocked to the site to lay wreaths of flowers, light devotional candles, read aloud from Darwin's works, and otherwise pay homage to the mysterious blue-green stain.
9
POPSOver the Top When I first saw this piece I was sure it was a parody, possibly from The Onion. But no! This guy seems to be for real. He's associated with the Creation Science Association of Mid-America and this was published in the CSA News. Hmmm, I wonder if their secessionists too?
10
POPSTheistic Sanity It's not often that I agree with religious leaders but when I do it deserves to be pointed out. The point that Benedict makes of refuting the claim that evolution promotes atheism is of course correct. Although many, particularly in the States, believe otherwise. Unfortunately, the persons that fall into this category are also people that are the least informed on the subject.
0
POPSCreationist Shows His Stuff Here's a pretty typical tirade by a fundamentalist Creationist that pretty much touches on all the points that Creationists get wrong all the time. About the only point he makes is that he's pretty ignorant about science and adheres to the talking points of the conservative right. My question is how many of these proselytizers will have to be proven wrong before they're eventually shamed into admitting that they've been lied to. The sad part is that many certainly have children who are also subjected to these ignorant views thus the ignorance is allowed to be passed along generational lines.
4
POPSSome Flaws In Evolutionary Theory "One of the classic arguments in favor of the evolutionist claim that all species have a common origin is that species show all sorts of similarities which can't be due to chance. Indeed, the enormous mass of odd similarities that he found in his studies of nature around the world is what convinced Darwin of the common origin of all species, and he didn't know half of the similarities that we know today. Thus, the standard evolutionist argument is: If all those species are much more similar than mere chance would allow, then they must be related. However, a greater than chance similarity between organisms only proves precisely that: greater than chance similarity between organisms. There exist other possible non-evolutionist explanations for the same facts, the most popular of which is that species were designed by some kind of ultra-powerful being. However, we don't need to go to such extremes to put the argument under stress."
2
POPSAncients and modern evolutionists still pondering the same questions. It would appear that for over 1500 years the debate has raged over the origin of life. Natural Theology, published in 1802 by William Paley, discussed the evidence for design using the "inferred watchmaker" analogy. The majority of scientists at that time professed belief in a Creator, in one way or another. This was reflected in their studies. To some extent, design was assumed. Evolution lacked a reasonable engine to drive biological change. When Charles Darwin published "The Origin of Species" in 1859, those who preferred evolution had a seemingly plausible mechanism to explain it - natural selection. Almost 150 years later, the scientific community at large speaks of the "facts" of evolution. Those who propose non-natural causes for biologic effects are soon branded as "ignorant," "superstitious," or "closed-minded." Some things never change...
4
POPSQuestions Requiring Anwers of Evolutionists Thoughtful scientists ponder questions such as these and arrive at their hypotheses and then experiment to prove or disprove those hypotheses. Therefore I am calling on all evolutionists to ponder these points of fact and offer us some answers. Care to tackle this experiment?
9
POPSThe Collapse of "Irreducible Complexity" Against such a backdrop, the struggles of the intelligent design movement are best understood as clamorous and disappointing double failures – rejected by science because they do not fit the facts, and having failed religion because they think too little of God. As an icon of anti-evolution, the flagellum has fallen. This is not news. Irreducible complexity as an argument for íntelligent design has been debunked for quite some time, but some fanatical anti-evolutionists are apparently still desperate for this to be "proof" of the existance of God. It isn't. The article will explain why.
1
POPSEvolution from sea to land or vice-versa? I couldn't help but laugh. One minute we're being told that life evolved from the sea to the land, and here we are being told it happen/ed/s the other way around. Geez evolutionists, make your mind up already!
0
POPSEvolution is not a law. The laws of science can NEVER change. If nature contradicts a scientific law, then the law is wrong and must be scraped and written anew. ~* {FS} *~
0
POPSEvolution and the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The Second Law of Thermodynamics states that things fall apart over time rather than becoming more organized, unless there is already a mechanism in place to build things up. If all you need is an open system, then you could just stand right behind a jet engine as the aircraft prepares for takeoff, absorb the blast of energy, and evolve to a higher life form. In reality, of course, you would be incinerated because absorbing energy without a mechanism to convert it to a useful form is destructive or useless. ~* {FS} *~
1
Pops
Newest Clips
Latest Comments
Most Pops
Print
Save
Turn on live update