icr.org
Posted on: December 25, 2009 - 5:31am
Offline
icr.org
Hey everybody, I am pretty much new to the forum and I have tried to show some theistic friends of mine this site. They in turn showed my icr.org, a creationist site that presents scientific evidence for creation. It seems pretty legit, but I'm not as educated as many of you and can't debate any of their claims on the scientific level I know many of you can. I would appreciate if you checked out the site and presented some arguments to things such as "Where Did Apple Trees Come From?" and "New Dinosaur Causes New Confusion" - or any other topic that piques your interests!
PS - I do hope i posted this on the proper forum. If not, holler at me, delete this and start a new one, or whatever is necessary.
- Login to post comments
Dude, just be honest.
If you feel as if there should be a God in your life, go out and find one! Worship at the temple! Do whatever you need to do in order to feel right about yourself and your life in this world. Atheists don't care. We mind our own business. We refuse to "believe" - but then again, we might be wrong. There's no way to know that. You should do whatever your heart tells you is right. No more and no less.
"The idea of God is the sole wrong for which I cannot forgive mankind." (Alphonse Donatien De Sade)
http://www.kinkspace.com
Welcome to the forums.
ICR is one of the organizations funded by fundimentalists to confuse people with crap. They specifically look for information that they can misrepresent in order to confuse people and discredit science. They know that knowledge is bad for religion.
Look at it for mild amusement and go look for real info.
Zen-atheist wielding Occam's katana.
Jesus said, "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division." - Luke 12:51
Some problems:
The great flood did not happen. There were other civilizations around the world at the time that certainly did not notice being drowned, and that's the most obvious evidence.
Anytime someone quotes the bible as evidence you are allowed to laugh at them. It is definitley not a historical text. It is a work of fiction. They may as well be quoting Tolkein.
Older varieties of a species having less genetic diversity and more genetic "strength" is bullshit. That is not scientifically true. Some modern varieties are weak to some diseases because we have selectively bred them for other properties. This is due to human interference.
Zen-atheist wielding Occam's katana.
Jesus said, "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division." - Luke 12:51
Once again, remember that these guys are liars and master manipulators.
Look at the references. Unfortunately there is no link to the Science article (the one I would like to read). The others are all from ICRs own people (!) apart from the one by Randy Irmis.
Look at this manipulation:
"The quarry penetrates Upper Triassic sediments that were formed, according to study co-author Randy Irmis, when fishes, crocodile-like animals, and dinosaurs were “swept into the river channel during flooding episodes.”2
Compare to the original article:
"The rock layers of the Hayden Quarry that preserve vertebrate specimens represent ancient river channel deposits. Thus, we find a variety of specimens, from isolated worn fragments to articulated skeletons. All of these were probably swept into the river channel during flooding episodes and subsequently buried."
See how they manipulate? They quote a small fragment and then change the meaning of it with their own wording. The entire article is about an excavation and has nothing to do with what ICR is saying, it was only quoted to give a credible reference.
Whenever I read about a new fossil from a credible source I never hearof such rubbish as ICR is spouting.
Irreversible genes:
Use the links to the actual articles from Nature and New Scientist, they do not actually say what ICR is saying.
Proteins are very complex and the interaction between them is complex too. The fact that scientists could not make (what they calculate to be) an earlier version of a protein work does not disprove evolution.
Don't trust anything you read on that site.
Zen-atheist wielding Occam's katana.
Jesus said, "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division." - Luke 12:51
Well, it was never described as "fresh".
Once again, read the original articles from UCD and the Royal Society (The other two quotes are from himself!!). The tissue was preserved in the same state as previously found tissue. The difference is that this tissue is not surrounded by bone or amber. Far from being defeated the scientists are excited that they might find similar samples in other fossils.
The author is good at manipulating words but he is otherwise an idiot. He notes that fresh meat goes off quickly in the sun (which has nothing to do with dried or otherwise preserved meat) and then says that this disproves carbon dating and the fact that the Earth is ancient. So according to him the fossil with the meat in it can only be a few hours old?
Zen-atheist wielding Occam's katana.
Jesus said, "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division." - Luke 12:51
The other two articles about the MRI (at least he believes in quantum mechanics) and What Defines an Organism? are basically meaningless.
Whether or not a creationist invented MRI means nothing about god.
Defining and organism is interesting philosophically, but says nothing about god. The is a current thread here about defining life...
Well, that's the first list. Reading the links to the real articles was interesting.
Zen-atheist wielding Occam's katana.
Jesus said, "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division." - Luke 12:51
Whenever theists point you at a fundy site, tell them all those allegations are answered here: http://www.talkorigins.org/.
Props to Ronin for diving into the stupid and smacking it.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
I realize the bible is bull shit.
I suppose I should of just checked out the references myself and I'm sure it would have been clear to me that they were manipulative.
About the whole find a god to worship, I am an atheist until it's been proven otherwise. I refuse to be irrational and blindly accept a deity because it makes me feel warm and fuzzy. I just wanted to see what some people had to say about the different articles they present.
Thanks for the TalkOrigins link, its a pretty cool site.
Thanks Ronin for your insight, it has helped me understand the true nature of icr.org. I made the mistake of trusting their referencing instead of really checking it all out, thanks for making up for my laziness.
Hey Infidelis,
It's all a learning curve. I'm a bit of a science geek so references are second nature to me.
I have what I call my bullshit filter. Basically it's the sum of my knowledge against whatever info is being given to me. If anything sticks in the filter, just doesn't seem quite right, I regard it with suspicion and check it out if I have the energy and care enough (
).
This goes for newspaper articles and even scientific claims. If its not my area of expertise I even sometimes posst the question here as you have done.
Zen-atheist wielding Occam's katana.
Jesus said, "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division." - Luke 12:51
Im still a young 'un, and need some guidance in the ways of bull shit detecting.
Infedelis,
Welcome to the site. The post you made is exactly the type of post our site is designed to handle, however the atheist vs theist forum would've been much better to put this in, so I moved it. Also posting it in the Irrational Precepts forum would've been fine.
I hope you've found the recent posts tray so you find this thread has been moved: http://www.rationalresponders.com/view/super_tracker
Vote for Democrats to save us all from the anti-American Republican party!
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
i myself, also i dont even need a source sometimes when fundies quote from the bible i just know what they are saying is wrong
i guess i evolved that sixth sense