Creationism is not a form of science.

GeraldtheGnome: Even if by some yet unknown means the theory of evolution some time in the future ends up being wrong then it still will not mean by default that creationism is true. Where is there even the possibility that the theory of evolution isn’t true at all ? So far there isn’t any even though we are supposed to believe otherwise. Anyone at least for now who thinks that everything about evolution is false is a fool. Even if for some yet unknown reason it ends up that the theory of evolution is not true then at least so far everything goes towards the theory of evolution is true.

The thing is that evolution is about how one life form over a very long period of time goes through gradual subtle changes where some of the descendants in the past, now and in the future did end up and/or will end up being so different that a new Species and/or a new Subspecies (in some cases) is the end result of evolution. Sometimes there was an evolutionary end, in other cases the process of evolution is an ongoing one.

GeraldtheGnome: You clearly do not understand what a scientific theory is, even doomsday science is what I consider to be science as much as I hate it. It's true that creationism is not a form of science, it is the claim that magic brought almost all about.

kittybobo34: I have heard so many versions of creationism. It has little to back itself up in the way of evidence.

GeraldtheGnome: True.

AretoNyx: Many will forever try to make such so even if supernatural or faith built beliefs is not a science based thing.

AretoNyx: I think the brain scan thing of believing things to science among how people know the earth is round will be forever misunderstood, or not cared to be understood by majority of humans. Facts are seen as boring... and it seems tribalism and religious political behavior in conformity seems more popular.

GeraldtheGnome: Exhibit A. The Bible. Just as what's in it and with Hebrew added as well. It's shown as it is on the site with the reference numbers and codes included.

Here is the site.

http://www.qbible.com/hebrew-old-testament/genesis/1.html

How is any of that true ? Can any of it be proven by science or by any other way ? That is Christian creationism. There are also creation theories worldwide that are not about any Hebrew or Hebrew based supernatural beings. Elohim and that of its variations actually is the plural of the word god even though at times it has been used as the name of a god too. It's the plural of eloah or Eloah in Hebrew, eloah or Eloah of course refers to any god, many times it was used as the name for a specific god as well.

I originally put on the complete chapter onto this forum, it was so long that it looked like something that someone else on this site would do. With that I deleted the entire content. Look at it for yourself and tell me what you think about any of it.

kittybobo34: Interesting,, Should they ever invent a time machine, that part of the past would be the first thing I would like to investigate.

GeraldtheGnome: Now in The Book of Genesis, chapter one there are various problems with it. Once again I am referring to the site I last mentioned.

Whether you replace the Hebrew name of the main god with the Spanish name, with which most Christians use as their first language or that of Latin or English or whatever does not matter, I will explain why in a minute. For now though I will use what was used on the site, so élohiym and ´Élöhîm. 'In the beginning ´Élöhîm created the heaven and the earth.'

That is the first verse of the book. It's a claim, various English speaking, Afrikaans speaking, Frisian speaking and and Dutch speaking creationists of some religions think that because the word God is used in the modern version of their language then that means that it is about one god only, that it's a title instead of a name and that it is evidence that proves that the god had no origin, that he was around before anything that he created, also that he is still around either in one place or in more than one place at once or everywhere right now. Well it means none of that, the more delusional the creationist is the more outlandish the claim is by the creationist. For a start if there even is a god or goddess around somewhere right now then he or she has an origin and is made up of material somehow. The verse literally never tells anyone of any claim that even one god or goddess has an origin. The claim by Christian creationists and the like is that there was a beginning and that everything was created from nothing. Unfortunately the hypocrites have noticed that some people that are for The Big Bang Theory believe that the universe was formed from nothing and that is how The Singularity formed.

There is a major problem with The Big Bang Theory, I will mention what is wrong with it later, I am no longer for The Big Bang Theory, the singularity and The Red Shift.

There was no beginning, nothing is either created or destroyed. All that was became the material for all that now makes up all within the Cosmos. The Cosmos never had a beginning and it will never have an end, there never were any boundaries, there still aren't. The Cosmos has no limits. Did the current universe ever have an origin ? Did it ever have any limits ? Does it have any limits and will it ever have an end ?

https://chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Introductory_Chemistry/Introductory_Chemistry/03%3A_Matter_and_Energy/3.07%3A_Conservation_of_Mass_-_There_is_No_New_Matter

The fact that there are experiments that basically disprove that all that is was never created, that nothing is being created right now and nothing ever will be created disproves every creationist theory by every creationists of every religion. Now the argument will be that it does not disprove any creation claim that has that life was created to bring about the likes of Adam and Eve. Well already any claim that any god or goddess can be proven to be around somehow is not true and it never will be proven. I will look at if an Adam and Eve ever existed some other time.

If you go off the claims that all was created from nothing then none of us should be alive because what was claimed is impossible and has been disproven. Elohim also means gods and goddesses in the full context of The Tanakh and The Bible no matter how many claim otherwise, it's also oddly and mistakenly used as a name too, this also was so in the past. Heaven, the heavens and so on about that just means the Earth's atmosphere. Light upon the Earth also only came from The Sun. Distant stars that were around before that would have either not had light reach Earth or were too dim to make a difference. The Sun was around before Earth formed. I'm referring to verse three with this bit. Why do the the verses have that the evening and the morning was the first day, second day and so on ? Why is morning mentioned after the evening ? It doesn't make sense that way. It's all false anyway, that means that I should not dwell on it.

The odd bit that the flood myth is completely based on originated from the sixth verse. Something that I forgot to mention was the claim of a flat Earth with a ocean held there with nothing on the sides. A lot of creationists do not think that there is a mention of that and others think because of that that the Earth is really flat.

I'll bring up verse six and so on of the first chapter next time. In the meantime look at the false claims in chapter two of The Book of Genesis.

http://www.qbible.com/hebrew-old-testament/genesis/2.html

kittybobo34: Gerald,, I think the Big Bang theory still works, we just have to change the paradigm to the Big Bang being the universe vs just another bang in a much bigger universe.

GeraldTheGnumbnut: What was there before the universe was created?

kittybobo34: as far as we know the universe is eternal, goes back in time beyond anything we can imagine

GeraldTheGnumbnut: Then it was never created so we can stop arguing and all get some sleep now!

KeithJ: The James West (space) Telescope has just found evidence that there was no big bang .

KeithJ: JWT has found another universe next to ours and any big bang would be 2 universes rubbing or bumping into each other creating a bang of new stars in the process rather from nothing or a super super super dense black hole of expansion and retraction to another start .

KeithJ: rather a multiverse like bubbles next to each other rubbing occasionally .

kittybobo34: This is a competing theory that our big bang is one of many in a much much bigger universe than we can imagine.. What the JW telescope saw is an older galaxy at the leading edge of our universe. This actually resolves a lot of things and eliminates the need for dark energy and dark matter to explain what we see in our universe.

GeraldtheGnome: I don’t even think that there is more than one universe, just what was in The Cosmos is no longer around and what once was in it just became other things that are now around. It repeatedly happened in the past. There was no beginning, it had no origin in other words. There is no limit to it, there never was. To me The Cosmos is also all of The Universe, it always was and always will be. There are even science experiments that can be carried out that prove that all that is can not be created or destroyed, it only all gets transformed/changed into other things when any of it does change.

Creationists and fake creationists think that magic, supernatural events and supernatural beings (which by the way is what all gods and goddesses are, it includes angels and so on) created all that was around back in whatever time period the story is set. This, depending on which religion it is, will include the disproven creation from nothing or the equally disproven spontaneous generation theory or both. With examples of some of religions there is not even one god or goddess included in the spontaneous generation story. Then of course there were those who were not religious in the past that thought that life could be spontaneously generated, that was ruled out when spontaneous generation was disproven by scientists. A religious like belief that even I had for a a bit was that the singularity and The Big Bang was what started all that is, I don’t believe in either of those things at all now.

There also is no such thing as an expert of abiogenesis. It can neither be proven or disproven and it most likely never occurred as well.

GeraldtheGnome: What did it all look like before what is known about ? Well no one knows, that is the point and it is obvious. Most of what was around prior to when Earth formed is guessed about, that though is me stating the obvious. Even when exactly the Earth, The Sun, Earth’s Moon and so on was formed is guessed about. Even how life ended up on Earth and why it did will never be known. It’s all guessed about and I will not lose any sleep thinking about all of it either. What is possibly true should be considered and what is certainly true should not be overlooked and disregarded. All of the creationist crap, scientific crap and philosophical nonsense that some like to factor into things should be disregarded. What is impossible is only what is proven to be impossible, not what is guessed by some to be impossible.

Some people just like to be critical without coming up with any better alternative to what is currently around now.

Any creationist or fake creationist claim of some magic act can not be taken seriously, nor can any philosophical nonsense, nor from anyone else who does not know enough about science or a particular form of it.

KeithJ: Yes Gerald even the Romans they made up Gods and creation "stories" but creationist think the devil put them sub species of hominids in the ground along with dinosaur bones too and DNA i guess is fake to them .

KeithJ: Even I have a fossilized baby hip bone identified for me by a anthropologist as being at least a million years old .

GeraldtheGnome: Are there more than just one form of creationism around even now ? I also have never come across this Devil theory before, nor do I believe it. I have never come across even one creationist of any kind who does believe that. As for the dating of any bones, well a rough idea of how long ago can be worked out, not exactly when. I find it odd for example when the likes of those fake creationists who think that they are against anything to do with evolution use the below video.



There is are things that are wrong about the video as well as there are things that are wrong about someone who claims to be against such a thing presents that video in defence of his stance against what that video is about that he (as in Blackshoes/Bob) clearly doesn't understand what the video is about. A true creationist will after all not support such a thing and will not show that to prove a point to support creationism.

I will give credit to someone where credit is due and because of that, where I have a feeling that I went too far, I will dit my last message. Fair is fair and I will give credit to that one where credit is due after all.

kittybobo34: I thought the video above was pretty accurate. What should be pointed out though is that the chimps have been evolving too, so there are changes to both our lineages over the last 6-8 million years.