Ambassador College and all offshoot versions were not and are NOT places to learn anything about how the real and natural world works. Ambassador did not teach one how to make a living, how to think critically or anything remotely true about science and how the world came to be. It also did and still does a terrible job with theology. Reading the Bible and endless comments and speculation on mythological tales and Bronze Age perspectives do not, and cannot lead to truth in the sciences.
"A Whale of a Tale" was the Churches clever and easy to read answer to what some perceived as the impossibilities of whale evolution. A quick read and "poof!" , the average church member and student had THE answer to it all. Of course, they did not. They had a scientific apologetic to get them through the need for the Church to be correct and scientific inquiry mistaken, but they failed miserably and do to this day.
We have learned more in the past 25 years than in the previous 25,000
"A Theory of for the Birds" was also the shallow church version concentrating mostly on just how could a woodpecker not knock itself out pecking and just how could feathers not just poof into existence to facilitate flight. We now know feathers, evolved long before they ever were also adapted to flight. Feathered dinosaur fossils are a regular discovery these days and it was not because they needed to fly. But that's another story.
The totally discredited and long ago outdated text for Second Year Bible At Ambassador
The deep study of the topic was to outline the book and hand the outline in at years end.
But that's another story too....
The Shallow and Mistaken Church version debunking Whale Evolution
"Disagreements between incompatible beliefs cannot be settled by reasoned argument because reasoned argument is drummed out of those trained in religion from the cradle."
Richard Dawkins
(Sorry, I think this is hilarious)
A Short Course in Whale Evolution for those so inclined
For those willing and able to pay attention for more than two minutes
|
35 comments:
I can hear heads exploding now!
Here we go again. Dennis religiously ignores scriptures such as 'prove all things' to justify his twisted 'belief without proof' definition of faith. And no explanation for the mind boggling design changes (which modern engineering still cannot match) that evolution requires.
Another reality rejecting article by surprise surprise, a apostate.
Well written, concise, and interesting. Thanks for the links!
If evolution is true, then some humans must be more evolved than others. Science is offensive!
am I to take evolution seriously when it comes from senseless twits like Dawkins?
What has the flat earth society got to do with evolution? That's the kind of irrelevant non-argument that makes people piss on evolutionists and regard them as too stupid to take seriously. Their weapon is ridicule based on straw-man arguments. Clearly, this is not a serious article.
Dennis seems to think that science education teaches people to think critically. He seems to accept that uncritically, like, on faith or something.
There was a study done in which theology students were found to be better critical thinkers than science students. The explanation might be that science students think that science already has the answers and so they can just accept what they are told, so they don't learn critical thinking.
Once again someone seems to be falling for the false dichotomy fallacy, i.e. religion is bad so that makes "science" good; religious education is uncritical so that must make "science" "education" objective.
We need more not less Ambassador Colleges and those who can rightly divide the word of truth on these matters. These videos on evolution are just made up and twisted all around to make it seem like a plausible explanation by these godless scientists who simply want to rebel against real truth that the Bible tells us is clearly understood by the things that exist. I've read where one scientist said that his real reason to believe in evolution is so he just do what he wants and sin up a storm without accountability. Evolution leaves morality out of the picture and without out the Bible there can be no morality or knowing what is right or wrong, appropriate or inappropriate. The Apostate will surely change his mind the moment he hits the Lake of Fire but then it will be too late for him.
Mr. David Pack's series on Creationism vs Evolution is genius and whoever that long hair that challenged Mr. Pack was, he got taken to the woodshed by Mr. Pack for his science, falsely so called, as we read it described in the Bible.
As most should know here, the wisdom of science is foolishness with God and only a fool like the Apostate doesn't get that. Some may not like Dr. Robert Thiel, Dr Douglas Winnail or Mr David Pack but they are spot on with their ability to clearly explain why science and evilution is simply impossible and the Bible's explanation for the origins of life and humans is flawless and true.
Diehl needs to take a break and a hike.
In my opinion and analysis of diction, the first 8 postings are written by the same anonymous who does not know how to apply "tongue in cheek" in his humorous postings.
It's all really funny.
I really liked those books as a kid. Colorful and expecially with the funny drawing of the bird with a helmet and a compass.
The brilliance of HWA shows again with the bird on the cover. Seemingly laughing at those "stupid evilutionists". So much more sophisticated than the current religious people.
nck
When I was at AC (two years) I don't think they made the distinction between macro evolution and microevolution. Scripture says that God created . . . but it didn't say WHEN or HOW He did so. These questions (how old is the earth, how did species come about) belong to the scientific community, not theologians. In the army there was an expression, "Stay in your own lane." Meaning, run your department and stay out of mine. Theologians should focus on the WHY, and leave to the scientific community the how and when. Science has always been limited in what it could study. Until the microscope, it couldn't study microbes or even prove that they existed. Science is still limited. Science doesn't have an instrument to measure how much someone loves another or to detect the presence of the Holy Spirit in a church member. Some knowledge (afterlife, etc) has to come from another source.
Critical thinking skills were not taught at AC. I teach at a university and have read articles saying that critical thinking skills of graduates are very poor, also.
There are atheists all over God's creation.
Will Dennis ever read some recent books from people who debunk evolution? I doubt it.
Amazing timing on this post. Only this week the British jewish rabbi Jonathan Sacks has released his excellent 'The great partnership' short film. Explaining the difference and purpose between religion and science.
I would highly reccomend it at rabbisacks.org
Early Tetrapods emerge from sea:
Acanthostega of 365 million years ago (MYA) had eight fingers, then Ichthyostegalia of 360 MYA had seven fingers, then Colosteidae from 350 MYA had five digits, optimizing toward the most dangerous animal of all: modern man (from 0.8 MYA)
140 AD (After Darwin) we have the Millennials generation, the first godless humans. These are being studied by a perplexed Joseph Tkach who doesn't know what to do and hasn't yet figured out a way to transfer money from their pockets to his.
These Millennials eschew binocular vision for their small window on the world, the smartphone which can reveal everything: The Adam & Eve myth, the Flood myth, first creature to walk (360 million years ago)...
My mother says I could walk at seven months. I must have been the first creature to walk.
Post a Comment