Creationism: Refute it if you can!
I don’t usually post during the day. I am doing so today because I was surprised this morning; almost shocked. On June 30th, I wrote a post on creation and sent a letter to the Journal Star in response to a letter to the editor. I didn’t think it would be published. It was this morning.
In it, I challenged anyone to refute what I had written about creationism/evolution in previous posts. Since the Peoria Journal Star printed it, the attitude of the editors has changed or they believe that what I have written can be and will be refuted. Good! This is one reason why creationism should be honestly taught in schools. Honest debate helps in the learning process.
To anyone who wants to refute what I have written. This post includes the letter I wrote as edited as well as my original post of June 30th which is at the end of this post. It lists all the other posts I have written about the subject. Read through this entire post. Refute what you like. However, don’t do it in the comment section of the original post. I don’t search back looking for comments from posts that far back.
Instead, mail any refutations to Don L. Vance, P.O. Box 481, Morton, Illinois, 61550. I promise I will post all comments as written (without obscenities). Because I try to limit each post to 4 or 5 pages of Word, Time New Roman, 12 point, it may be posted over several days. I also expect that I will comment on all such refutations. I don’t check my P.O. Box every day put I will post any information sent. I don’t know how to post pictures so please don’t bother.
To my regular readers: This is my post for today. Next one, hopefully, will be about Iraq again. Thank you. Let the debate begin!
I’m sorry! I do plan on answering the question on immigration asked recently. However, that will not happen immediately. I hope I will begin answering the question later this week. What I want to write about Iraq keeps expanding. I continue to apologize for the change in plans!
How many unborn toddlers were murdered today because of the humanistic, paganish decisions of the United States Supreme Court?
Stop the
Murder of
Unborn
Toddlers
“Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4: 17 (NIV)
http://www.kansasmeadowlark.com/2006/ShameOfKansas
www.childpredators.com
www.lifedynamics.com
www.aclj.org
www.libertylegal.org
www.alliancedefensefund.org
www.searchtv.org
“Discover the truth about creation
Re. June 27 Forum, ‘In support of real science’:
Letter writer Joshua Hinman wrote, ‘An explosion in a junk yard only produces smaller pieces, no matter how big the bang. But in the vacuum of space, the gravity exerted by the particles attracts them to one another. I’m only a junior in high school and I know that gravity is the attractive force that caused the formation of stellar and planetary objects in space.’
I’m sorry, but Joshua knows no such thing. He has been told that lie by others who do not know the truth. Tell us of the scientific studies that have been duplicated by other scientists that prove that statement to be a scientific fact.
Then tell us where all the mass in the universe came from.
In the last three years, I have written about 25 internet posts on evolution and creation at www.christiangunslinger.blogspot.com Read and refute them. This offer is open to anyone, including university professors and scientists.
Don L. Vance
Morton” (Peoria Journal Star, July 17, 2007, page A4)
Saturday, June 30, 2007 Creation and my response to a letter to the editor
I’m not going back to my immigration topic with this post. I sent a letter to the editor yesterday in response to a letter that was printed in the Peoria Journal Star that was a response to an earlier letter printed in the Journal Star. It is my practice to also post all letters I write to the editor because the letters tend to be edited in ways that alter the intended comments. By posting the letter, people in the Peoria area can read both the original and the edited version. Also, because of word limitations followed by the paper, I usually can not write as much as I’d like. On this post, I will post the letter, my response as sent to the paper, and then additional comments on the letter. The letter to the editor that I am responding to was published by the Peoria Journal Star on June 27, 2007 on page A4. The letter to the editor:
“Re. Al Matheny’s ‘Junk Science’ letter of June 25:
An explosion in a junk yard only produces smaller pieces, no matter how big the bang. But in the vacuum of space, the gravity exerted by the particles attracts them to one another. I’m only a junior in high school and I know that gravity is the attractive force that causes the formation of stellar and planetary objects in space.
It’s easy to take the information that supports one’s opinions and to ignore other scientific evidence. If that is how one views scientific data, then it certainly is ‘junk.’ But to truly gain an understanding of the universe surrounding us, one needs to analyze all of the data and then make a model that reflects everything, not just what supports his or her hypotheses.
There was a time that the Earth was flat and the sun wasn’t the center of the solar system. Since then, we have more accurate models. Just because one wants to believe that evolution and big bang theory are not true, that doesn’t mean that science should ignore the evidence that supports them.”
My response to the above letter:
Joshua Hinman wrote “An explosion in a junk yard only produces smaller pieces, no matter how big the bang. But in the vacuum of space, the gravity exerted by the particles attracts them to one another. I’m only a junior in high school and I know that gravity is the attractive force that caused the formation of stellar and planetary objects in space.”
I’m sorry Joshua but you KNOW no such thing. You have been told that lie by others who do NOT KNOW the truth.
Tell us the scientific studies that have been duplicated by other scientists that prove your statement to be a scientific fact. You can’t because there are no such studies. Then, tell us scientifically and factually, where did all the mass (particles) of the universe come from?
In the last three years, I have written approximately twenty-five posts on evolution/creation including sources at www.christiangunslinger.blogspot.com Read the posts and refute them. This offer is open to anyone including university professors and scientists. Send any and all responses to me at P.O. Box 481, Morton, Illinois 61550. I promise to post anything you send with my comments. Deal? Waiting for your response.
In September of 2005 I wrote: “When is the Journal Star editorial staff going to actually read the Constitution? A quote from an editorial on 9/7/05, ‘The wall between church and state is not as sturdy as once it was but it has not come tumbling down, either.’ The ‘wall between church and state’ is a fiction created by the Supreme Court.
I challenge the editorial board, any professors from any university, or anyone else to give the Article and Section or Amendment where that phrase is used in the Constitution. Then, quote that portion of the Constitution. It won’t happen because it is not in the Constitution!
I am anxiously waiting to be enlightened.” I was not enlightened! Will someone please enlighten me this time!
My continued response to the letter printed on June 27, 2007.
I’m a political scientist not a natural scientist. How do I know that there are no “scientific studies that have been duplicated by other scientists that prove your statement to be a scientific fact”? Very simply, if any such valid studies existed, the mass media would have trumpeted the results of the studies to prove to the world how wrong Christians are.
Furthermore, how are any such studies going to be scientifically accomplished? Scientists would have to create a tremendously large vacuum, blow something up within that vacuum, and then observe the result. That will not occur because even according to there own nonsensical concepts, it still takes years and years for the particles to form together to form new bodies.
Then, they still will have to explain how the mass used in the study came into existence. That they can not do now and never will be able to explain. Why? Because it is unexplainable by any scientific explanation. Scientifically, you can not get mass from nothing. Where did the mass come from? There is only one logical explanation—GOD. These atheistic scientists will never accept this logical explanation because they don’t believe in GOD—as if their not believing in God can some how change the truth that GOD is.
The letter writer also declares “It’s easy to take the information that supports one’s opinions and to ignore other scientific evidence. If that is how one views scientific data, then it certainly is ‘junk.’ But to truly gain an understanding of the universe surrounding us, one needs to analyze all of the data and then make a model that reflects everything, not just what supports his or her hypotheses.”
In writing the above, he destroys his own argument against the previous writer. The fact is that atheistic scientists refuse to accept the possibility that GOD CREATED. They are the ones who refuse to analyze all the data available!!! If they did analyze all the data available, their only rational, reasonable, valid conclusion would be that GOD created the universe because all other possible explanations are, in fact, impossible!!! Why? Because among other reasons, no one will ever be able to explain, without putting GOD in the middle of the equation, how nothing became all the mass of the universe.
He concluded his letter by writing “There was a time that the Earth was flat and the sun wasn’t the center of the solar system. Since then, we have more accurate models. Just because one wants to believe that evolution and big bang theory are not true, that doesn’t mean that science should ignore the evidence that supports them.” Again, he is destroying his own argument. The Earth was flat according to scientists!!! They were wrong!!! They are wrong now!!!
Just because some scientists BELIEVE that evolution and the “big bang” theory are true does not mean that they are true. In fact, his so called models are models that are crafted by people who have automatically rejected the possibility that GOD could have created the universe. They craft the models not on scientifically valid research but rather on their own believes on what may have happened in the unobservable past. Then, they declare their models to be true because to them that is the most credible explanation for what happened. It is not based upon scientifically observed experimentation. It is based upon their preconceived ideas on what happened in the past which they then declare to be scientific facts. How utterly unscientific!!!
Here’s my prediction of what portion of my letter, sent to the Journal Star, will be printed, if any. They will only print the first three paragraphs. They will not print my blog address nor will they print my challenge to Joshua or anyone else to prove my posts to be incorrect. Therefore, they will not print my comments that I had earlier challenged anyone to prove that there is a “wall of separation” between church and state. This is the typical Peoria Journal Star response to letters.
Here is a listing of my previous 25 posts on creation/evolution:
This may not be complete but it is probably close to all of them. A note of warning. The titles should be correct, although not all posts were titled, but the dates may not be totally accurate. I dated the posts based upon when I wrote them which is not necessarily the same day that they got posted. However, it should be approximately the correct date. From oldest to the newest posts on evolution and/or creation:
“Creation” Tuesday, August 9, 2005
“Teaching about Creation” Saturday, October 8, 2005
“Evolution or GOD” Saturday, October 29, 2005
“Evolution and GOD, part 2” Monday, October 31, 2005
“Evolution and GOD, part 3” Tuesday, November 1, 2005
“Untrue headline” Saturday, November 12, 2005 (This is not an actual column on creation. I had told someone that I would try to find some sources and this is a short listing of those sources dealing with evolution and/or creation. I believe mostly on creation.)
“The Case for a Creator” Wednesday, November 16, 2005
“References for GOD created the universe” Tuesday, April 25, 2006
“References for GOD created the universe, part 2” Wednesday, April 26, 2006
“Missing link found” Wednesday, June 21, 2006
“Evolution, today’s alchemy” Thursday, June 22, 2006
“Evolution vs. evolution” Thursday, July 27, 2006
“Ignorance: thy name is evolution” Friday, July 28, 2006
“Evolution and Presidential candidates” Monday, May 14, 2007
“Evolution and Presidential candidates, part 2” Tuesday, May 15, 2007
“Evolution and Presidential candidates, part 3” Thursday, May 17, 2007
* “Evolution and Presidential candidates, part 4” Friday, May 18, 2007
* “Evolution and Presidential candidates, part 5” Saturday, May 19, 2007
* “Evolution and Presidential candidates, part 6” Monday, May 21, 2007
* “Evolution and Presidential candidates, part 7” Tuesday, May 22, 2007
“Intelligent Design and Academic Freedom” Thursday, May 24, 2007
“Intelligent Design and Academic Freedom, part 2” Friday, May 25, 2007
“Intelligent Design and Academic Freedom, part 3” Thursday, May 31, 2007
“Updated References for Creation and Intelligent Design” Friday, June 1, 2007
“Updated References for Creation and Intelligent Design, part 2” Saturday, June 2, 2007
* quotes New Testament Scripture referencing creation
I don’t usually post during the day. I am doing so today because I was surprised this morning; almost shocked. On June 30th, I wrote a post on creation and sent a letter to the Journal Star in response to a letter to the editor. I didn’t think it would be published. It was this morning.
In it, I challenged anyone to refute what I had written about creationism/evolution in previous posts. Since the Peoria Journal Star printed it, the attitude of the editors has changed or they believe that what I have written can be and will be refuted. Good! This is one reason why creationism should be honestly taught in schools. Honest debate helps in the learning process.
To anyone who wants to refute what I have written. This post includes the letter I wrote as edited as well as my original post of June 30th which is at the end of this post. It lists all the other posts I have written about the subject. Read through this entire post. Refute what you like. However, don’t do it in the comment section of the original post. I don’t search back looking for comments from posts that far back.
Instead, mail any refutations to Don L. Vance, P.O. Box 481, Morton, Illinois, 61550. I promise I will post all comments as written (without obscenities). Because I try to limit each post to 4 or 5 pages of Word, Time New Roman, 12 point, it may be posted over several days. I also expect that I will comment on all such refutations. I don’t check my P.O. Box every day put I will post any information sent. I don’t know how to post pictures so please don’t bother.
To my regular readers: This is my post for today. Next one, hopefully, will be about Iraq again. Thank you. Let the debate begin!
I’m sorry! I do plan on answering the question on immigration asked recently. However, that will not happen immediately. I hope I will begin answering the question later this week. What I want to write about Iraq keeps expanding. I continue to apologize for the change in plans!
How many unborn toddlers were murdered today because of the humanistic, paganish decisions of the United States Supreme Court?
Stop the
Murder of
Unborn
Toddlers
“Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins.” James 4: 17 (NIV)
http://www.kansasmeadowlark.com/2006/ShameOfKansas
www.childpredators.com
www.lifedynamics.com
www.aclj.org
www.libertylegal.org
www.alliancedefensefund.org
www.searchtv.org
“Discover the truth about creation
Re. June 27 Forum, ‘In support of real science’:
Letter writer Joshua Hinman wrote, ‘An explosion in a junk yard only produces smaller pieces, no matter how big the bang. But in the vacuum of space, the gravity exerted by the particles attracts them to one another. I’m only a junior in high school and I know that gravity is the attractive force that caused the formation of stellar and planetary objects in space.’
I’m sorry, but Joshua knows no such thing. He has been told that lie by others who do not know the truth. Tell us of the scientific studies that have been duplicated by other scientists that prove that statement to be a scientific fact.
Then tell us where all the mass in the universe came from.
In the last three years, I have written about 25 internet posts on evolution and creation at www.christiangunslinger.blogspot.com Read and refute them. This offer is open to anyone, including university professors and scientists.
Don L. Vance
Morton” (Peoria Journal Star, July 17, 2007, page A4)
Saturday, June 30, 2007 Creation and my response to a letter to the editor
I’m not going back to my immigration topic with this post. I sent a letter to the editor yesterday in response to a letter that was printed in the Peoria Journal Star that was a response to an earlier letter printed in the Journal Star. It is my practice to also post all letters I write to the editor because the letters tend to be edited in ways that alter the intended comments. By posting the letter, people in the Peoria area can read both the original and the edited version. Also, because of word limitations followed by the paper, I usually can not write as much as I’d like. On this post, I will post the letter, my response as sent to the paper, and then additional comments on the letter. The letter to the editor that I am responding to was published by the Peoria Journal Star on June 27, 2007 on page A4. The letter to the editor:
“Re. Al Matheny’s ‘Junk Science’ letter of June 25:
An explosion in a junk yard only produces smaller pieces, no matter how big the bang. But in the vacuum of space, the gravity exerted by the particles attracts them to one another. I’m only a junior in high school and I know that gravity is the attractive force that causes the formation of stellar and planetary objects in space.
It’s easy to take the information that supports one’s opinions and to ignore other scientific evidence. If that is how one views scientific data, then it certainly is ‘junk.’ But to truly gain an understanding of the universe surrounding us, one needs to analyze all of the data and then make a model that reflects everything, not just what supports his or her hypotheses.
There was a time that the Earth was flat and the sun wasn’t the center of the solar system. Since then, we have more accurate models. Just because one wants to believe that evolution and big bang theory are not true, that doesn’t mean that science should ignore the evidence that supports them.”
My response to the above letter:
Joshua Hinman wrote “An explosion in a junk yard only produces smaller pieces, no matter how big the bang. But in the vacuum of space, the gravity exerted by the particles attracts them to one another. I’m only a junior in high school and I know that gravity is the attractive force that caused the formation of stellar and planetary objects in space.”
I’m sorry Joshua but you KNOW no such thing. You have been told that lie by others who do NOT KNOW the truth.
Tell us the scientific studies that have been duplicated by other scientists that prove your statement to be a scientific fact. You can’t because there are no such studies. Then, tell us scientifically and factually, where did all the mass (particles) of the universe come from?
In the last three years, I have written approximately twenty-five posts on evolution/creation including sources at www.christiangunslinger.blogspot.com Read the posts and refute them. This offer is open to anyone including university professors and scientists. Send any and all responses to me at P.O. Box 481, Morton, Illinois 61550. I promise to post anything you send with my comments. Deal? Waiting for your response.
In September of 2005 I wrote: “When is the Journal Star editorial staff going to actually read the Constitution? A quote from an editorial on 9/7/05, ‘The wall between church and state is not as sturdy as once it was but it has not come tumbling down, either.’ The ‘wall between church and state’ is a fiction created by the Supreme Court.
I challenge the editorial board, any professors from any university, or anyone else to give the Article and Section or Amendment where that phrase is used in the Constitution. Then, quote that portion of the Constitution. It won’t happen because it is not in the Constitution!
I am anxiously waiting to be enlightened.” I was not enlightened! Will someone please enlighten me this time!
My continued response to the letter printed on June 27, 2007.
I’m a political scientist not a natural scientist. How do I know that there are no “scientific studies that have been duplicated by other scientists that prove your statement to be a scientific fact”? Very simply, if any such valid studies existed, the mass media would have trumpeted the results of the studies to prove to the world how wrong Christians are.
Furthermore, how are any such studies going to be scientifically accomplished? Scientists would have to create a tremendously large vacuum, blow something up within that vacuum, and then observe the result. That will not occur because even according to there own nonsensical concepts, it still takes years and years for the particles to form together to form new bodies.
Then, they still will have to explain how the mass used in the study came into existence. That they can not do now and never will be able to explain. Why? Because it is unexplainable by any scientific explanation. Scientifically, you can not get mass from nothing. Where did the mass come from? There is only one logical explanation—GOD. These atheistic scientists will never accept this logical explanation because they don’t believe in GOD—as if their not believing in God can some how change the truth that GOD is.
The letter writer also declares “It’s easy to take the information that supports one’s opinions and to ignore other scientific evidence. If that is how one views scientific data, then it certainly is ‘junk.’ But to truly gain an understanding of the universe surrounding us, one needs to analyze all of the data and then make a model that reflects everything, not just what supports his or her hypotheses.”
In writing the above, he destroys his own argument against the previous writer. The fact is that atheistic scientists refuse to accept the possibility that GOD CREATED. They are the ones who refuse to analyze all the data available!!! If they did analyze all the data available, their only rational, reasonable, valid conclusion would be that GOD created the universe because all other possible explanations are, in fact, impossible!!! Why? Because among other reasons, no one will ever be able to explain, without putting GOD in the middle of the equation, how nothing became all the mass of the universe.
He concluded his letter by writing “There was a time that the Earth was flat and the sun wasn’t the center of the solar system. Since then, we have more accurate models. Just because one wants to believe that evolution and big bang theory are not true, that doesn’t mean that science should ignore the evidence that supports them.” Again, he is destroying his own argument. The Earth was flat according to scientists!!! They were wrong!!! They are wrong now!!!
Just because some scientists BELIEVE that evolution and the “big bang” theory are true does not mean that they are true. In fact, his so called models are models that are crafted by people who have automatically rejected the possibility that GOD could have created the universe. They craft the models not on scientifically valid research but rather on their own believes on what may have happened in the unobservable past. Then, they declare their models to be true because to them that is the most credible explanation for what happened. It is not based upon scientifically observed experimentation. It is based upon their preconceived ideas on what happened in the past which they then declare to be scientific facts. How utterly unscientific!!!
Here’s my prediction of what portion of my letter, sent to the Journal Star, will be printed, if any. They will only print the first three paragraphs. They will not print my blog address nor will they print my challenge to Joshua or anyone else to prove my posts to be incorrect. Therefore, they will not print my comments that I had earlier challenged anyone to prove that there is a “wall of separation” between church and state. This is the typical Peoria Journal Star response to letters.
Here is a listing of my previous 25 posts on creation/evolution:
This may not be complete but it is probably close to all of them. A note of warning. The titles should be correct, although not all posts were titled, but the dates may not be totally accurate. I dated the posts based upon when I wrote them which is not necessarily the same day that they got posted. However, it should be approximately the correct date. From oldest to the newest posts on evolution and/or creation:
“Creation” Tuesday, August 9, 2005
“Teaching about Creation” Saturday, October 8, 2005
“Evolution or GOD” Saturday, October 29, 2005
“Evolution and GOD, part 2” Monday, October 31, 2005
“Evolution and GOD, part 3” Tuesday, November 1, 2005
“Untrue headline” Saturday, November 12, 2005 (This is not an actual column on creation. I had told someone that I would try to find some sources and this is a short listing of those sources dealing with evolution and/or creation. I believe mostly on creation.)
“The Case for a Creator” Wednesday, November 16, 2005
“References for GOD created the universe” Tuesday, April 25, 2006
“References for GOD created the universe, part 2” Wednesday, April 26, 2006
“Missing link found” Wednesday, June 21, 2006
“Evolution, today’s alchemy” Thursday, June 22, 2006
“Evolution vs. evolution” Thursday, July 27, 2006
“Ignorance: thy name is evolution” Friday, July 28, 2006
“Evolution and Presidential candidates” Monday, May 14, 2007
“Evolution and Presidential candidates, part 2” Tuesday, May 15, 2007
“Evolution and Presidential candidates, part 3” Thursday, May 17, 2007
* “Evolution and Presidential candidates, part 4” Friday, May 18, 2007
* “Evolution and Presidential candidates, part 5” Saturday, May 19, 2007
* “Evolution and Presidential candidates, part 6” Monday, May 21, 2007
* “Evolution and Presidential candidates, part 7” Tuesday, May 22, 2007
“Intelligent Design and Academic Freedom” Thursday, May 24, 2007
“Intelligent Design and Academic Freedom, part 2” Friday, May 25, 2007
“Intelligent Design and Academic Freedom, part 3” Thursday, May 31, 2007
“Updated References for Creation and Intelligent Design” Friday, June 1, 2007
“Updated References for Creation and Intelligent Design, part 2” Saturday, June 2, 2007
* quotes New Testament Scripture referencing creation
posted by Christian Gunslinger at 7:38 AM
<< Home