Fire FAIL

Posted at CARM on December 1st, 2009. Creationist: Dad

*in reference to the topic of the KT Boundary*

Dad:

Interesting that the movie claims that all plants on the planet were wiped out. Sounds like the flood. Also, Iridium. From space and deep below the earth. Flood. Mass extinction...flood. Lots of burned trees, and stuff. Nothing about that whic wouldn't fit into a worldwide disated, in a world of wicked men!

First thought: floods set trees on fire? Well, yes, floods do cause fires. But this supposed GLOBAL flood? Without gas lines or electrical lines to bust through and cause said fire? Lol.

-Erin

Multiple FAIL

Posted at CARM on Nov 20th, 2009. Creationist: LW.

LW:

Vesuvius was within recorded history. Fair game for anything within recorded history.

So that means you have to stop at 3000 BC and no further. Oddly, 3000 BC stops you in Mesopotamia - the cradle of civilization - where all forms of culture magically exploded in a flash of human history.

Roar:

How exactly do you think the volcano formed in the first place?

Also, cradle of civilization my ***. Go tell that to the Chinese.

LW:

the Chinese have a foreshortened history of the world. Let's see, what year is is it on the Chinese calendar? 4+ billion? I don't think so.

Roar:

The Chinese had that whole civilization bit done well before anyone did in the middle-east.

LW:

2009 marks year 4707 of the Chinese new year, putting their civilization in the 2700 BC range - but the city of Ebla (middle east, Circa 3200 BC) has them beat by half a millennia

more unfortunately for you - lists found in the 170,000-tablet library at Ebla list the same cities of the plain as found in Genesis, including Sodom and Gomorrah as trading partners.

Alas, and alas for you.

Geeze. Ignorant of how volcanoes form AND human history! And he's a public high school science teacher!

-Erin

Star of Bethlehem FAIL

Posted at CARM on November 20th, 2009. Creationist: Dad.

This is his actual point of view regarding the Star of Bethlehem in the Bible.

The star of Bethlehem was not seen, or recorded by nations too far from Israel. That rules it out, far as I can tell, as being a star, in the modern sense of the word. Of course planets, and lights in the sky were called stars by the ancients.
What's left?

The flying wheels of God, mentioned in Ezekiel show us that God has a flying spaceship. It really makes good sense that the Father was there around the time of the birth of His Son.

It was apparently hovering over the area. That is why China, and other far countries didn't see it. It also guided the wise men right to a house. Nothing else fits the bill.

Mystery solved.

God's Space ship. Riiiiiight.

No, God really does have a ship that spans the universes. Including this one. It was here before this one started to exist. God was hovering over the waters (earth) right there in creation week, day 1. It is quite reasonable to assume He was in His wheels, described in Eze in some detail.

What it is called, if anything, we don't know. I call it the 'Scepter'

And they wonder why we don't take them seriously.

The ship was hovering over earth creation week, 'doing creation stuff'.

It is simply a matter of record He has flying wheels. But, as I pointed out in another post here, not merely a starship. This baby was here before the stars.

Holy crap that was classic. I hope to GOD this is a poe...but if not? Classic.

-Erin

Understanding FAIL

Posted at CARM on October 15th, 2009. Creationist: Spider.

DNA:

If you have a creationist account for things like cladistics = geology = genetics or endogenous retroviruses or broken vitamin C genes, I'd love to hear them.

Spider:

Honestly, I don't know what you just said, but I'm guessing that was your point. But again, you dismiss things every day w/out knowing the details of them, so why can't I?

*gigglesnort* At least he was honest.

-Erin

Comprehension FAIL

Posted at CARM on October 15th, 2009. Creationist: Spider

G:

What exactly did you think that evolution is?

Spider:

My mom had black hair. I have black hair. Whoopee.

My sister is not a frog though.

WOW! Misunderstanding to the MAX!

-Erin

Atheist WIN

Posted at CARM on October 14th, 2009. Creationist: Scar. Atheist: Phro.

Scar:

come on then atheists, sell it to me

tell me exactly how my life would be happier and more satisfiying by dumping Christianity and becoming atheist

don't complain about being asked to sell it

in the real world where if you don't sell then you don't have a business and no one will give you money because you have nothing to offer anyone

so sell it, sell your atheism to a Christian

Phro:

No. We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.

BRILLIANT!

-Erin

Finale WIN

Posted at CARM on October 14th, 2009. Creationist: Scar. Non-Creationist: Ghost

Scar:

Don't be fooled by the PHds, everyone knows only a small % of people describing themselves as scientists actually will contribute anything worthwhile and revoluationary to the world.

Posting thousands of stupid anti-God messages to prop up your creaky atheism is such a poor use of one's time. Go do your science, get a real job.

Ghost:

We extremely gifted scientists are perfectly capable of multi-tasking, or post here while working at our desks doing otherwise dull but necessary amounts of data analysis OR post here in our free time. Remember, your post count is far higher than many of the scientists you rail against, including me.

We have real jobs changing the world. What is it you do again? What was the subject of your postgrad study? And what was the awarding institute?

Scar:

oh really? should we present your employers with your thousands of anti-God pro-gay posts and see what they've got to say about it, all that time you've wasted on here instead of doing your science

Ghost:

As a researcher in a secular institution they would be entirely indifferent, and what they care about is my research, which is exemplary.

Scar:

well we could take the matter to a more public arena and see how the taxpayers feel about funding your "research"

Ghost:

There is no need, they benefit from it already

Scar:

"militant atheist abuses university internet to promote homosexuality and atheism - thousands of anti-God messages posted from a govt employee" nice headline, bet the taxpayers will be so proud of you and how their money gets spent.

Ghost:

Posting on messgae boards is not listed as an abuse of the university internet. Sorry to disappoint you.

Scar:

you think I'm stupid?

Ghost (for the overtime goal to win the game):

The rules of CARM forbid me to say.

WOO! The finale was worth it. Scar is SOOOOO anti science, it's not even funny. lol Well...maybe a little funny.

-Erin

Caught in a LIE!

Scar caught in a lie! Too fun not to read.

It was posted that Scar had a high end degree in mathematics, and made of 35,000 lbs in just a vfew months

But...this post was found on another forum.

Scar:

Hi there
I need to know if I can claim benefits.

I ran a limited co. for the last 3 years which really did well. I employed myself at min wage and paid the rest of my profits to myself as dividends.
This meant I had lots of cash. So in this tax year I paid myself a huge amount in dividend making myself a higher rate taxpayer, and bought a flat outright with this and everything I had.

A month later, and my contracts with the ltd co. have ceased meaning I am effectively making myself redundant by not paying myself a salary anymore as I have no work to do.

I have less than £6k savings. I have about £6k left in the company that I can take as dividends. Can I claim benefits until my ltd co. gets another contract for me to work on?

Council tax in the flat is £100/month, service charge £100/month too. I have no mortgage.

I know this is cheeky but then again I have paid in lots of tax in the last 3 years when the going was good so please don't be too harsh on me

After it was brought up in his (holier than thou thread of "my mathematics degree is better than yours"), he went in and changed the thread to this.

Scar's NEW post:

So if I were to sack myself as an employee of my own companies and put all my money into properties... could I claim benefits? As then I would have less than £6k in savings thus meeting the criteria for claiming benefits.

Then denies that he ever changed it. Oh, what a tangled web we weave.

Hmmmm....Creationist lieing at its finest!

-Erin

Degree FAIL

Posted at CARM on OCtober 14th, 2009. Creationist: Scar

Scar claims to be a mathematician, yet has never really said much about his degree - only that he has one and is better than everyone else because of it. Here's another famous claim that is an epic FAIL in terms of "I know you are but what am I".

Scar's OP:

I have a 1st class degree in Mathematics therefore anyone who has not achieved a 1st class degree has no credible grounds to allege that I'm more unintelligent than them since I have obtained a higher educational qualification.

Salad's reply:

BSc (Hons) 2:1 Physics (Cardiff Uni)
BSc (Hons) 1st Mathematics and Statistics (Birckbeck)

I was made unemployed earlier this year and since then I have set up my own company (running for 3 months) which has turned over just short of £35000.

you?

Scar's response:

more, so you lose
good luck however

Hmmm...printed a degree from online much?

-Erin

Religion FAIL

Posted at CARM on OCtober 13th, 2009. Creationist(?): NR

When asked: What is an agreeable definition of Christianity? NR replied:

What Christianity is not: Is is not a religion.

*facepalm*

-Erin

Rock FAIL

Posted at CARM on October 13th, 2009. Creationist: Matt Slick.

The atheists decided that the definition for atheism is, "A lack of belief in God(s)."

Okay, quesiton. Since a rock lacks belief in God(s), then isn't it an atheist?

omg...really? All people should stop giving him money. STOP SPREADING THE CANCER THAT IS IGNORANCE!

-Erin

Age FAIL

Posted at CARM on October 10th, 2009. Creationist: Paul.

I read your links and I'm not convinced the Grand Canyon is older than 3500 years.

Clearly because you don't know anything about geology.

-Erin

Answer FAIL

Posted at CARM on October 13th, 2009. Creationist: Evan

Roar:

How do you know that the Bible is God's word? It was compiled, recompiled, translated, rearranged, stories were removed and added, entire concepts were decided by majority's vote. After that it is translated a few more times, then interpreted subjectively in a few thousand ways.

1. How do you know that a deity authored it
2. How do you know it is accurate

Evan:

God Almighty put a conscience in man and we know what is right from wrong..

we know..we HAVE NO EXCUSE SIR, NO EXCUSE TO NOT BELIEVE GOD'S WORD

JUST LIKE ADAM AND EVE HAD NO EXCUSE

SO U GO AND TELL YOUR SAD SONGS TO SOMEONE WHO BELIEVES THEM

THIS PREACHER KNOWS BETTER

Roar:

You again avoid the question entirely.

I'm not interested in your views on morality, they are entirely beside the point here.

I asked you, twice now : How do you know the Bible is God's word?

1. How do you know that a deity authored it
2. How do you know it is accurate

Are you unable to answer these simple questions about your beliefs? Is all you can do scream with capslock?

Evan:

You know it is God's Word just like you know there is a God,and that He is your Creator,you have that knowledge in you,you just choose not to believe and obey Him..you have no excuse sir, none!

Good God man. This screams "I don't know I just do it because I've been told! I can't think for myself so stop asking!"

-Erin

Cephalus FAIL

Posted at CARM on October 13th, 2009. Creationist: Sport

Evos like to claim that human heads have changed over the eons because the "head genes" have accidentally mutated.

Those darn head genes! Always giving me the aches. Zero evidence was presented by the way of these so called evo's saying this.

-Erin

Deity FAIL

Posted at CARM on October 12th, 2009. Creationists: Scar and Matt Slick.

Scar posted:

Time to stop comparing the Christian God with such things as Santa Claus, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and the Tooth Fairy, as those aren't even accurate comparisons. (paraphrased)

Roar's comment:

Fine, then let's pick some ones with did and do have comparative beliefs. Allah. Vishnu. Buddha. Thor. Zeus. The Fates. Apotamkin. Odin. Atlas. Loki. Ares. Cronus. Uranus. Hathor. Ra. Chaos. Eros. There's plenty of stuff to compare it to beyond the obvious ones.

Matt Slick's Response:

atheism... Allah. Vishnu. Buddha. Thor. Zeus. The Fates. Apotamkin. Odin. Atlas. Loki. Ares. Cronus. Uranus. Hathor. Ra. Chaos. Eros.

Atheism isn't a deity. Moron!

-Erin

Tyranny WIN

Posted at CARM on October 12th, 2009. Creationist: Matt Slick.

Matt Slick:

slime becomes people walking upright and going to the moon. All you need is time and accidents...talk about fairy tales and make believe!

Genius:

I thought the purpose of apologetics was to make Christianity look less ridiculous. It seems if you want to achieve this, you best take a science class or two and learn something about actual evolutionary theory instead of using a blatant strawman like that.

Matt Slick:

insulting comment. banned for a week.

WOW! What a blatant win for tyranny and oppression! GO HITLER!

-Erin

Reproductive FAIL

Posted at CARM on October 12th, 2009. Creationist: Spider.

Comment:

It doesn't make sense to have a woman created from a bone.

Spider's best response:

Adam didn't have eggs.

Wow really? We've got an Einstein here folks!!

-Erin

Rules FAIL!!!!

Posted at CARM on October 12th, 2009. Creationist: None other than MATT SLICK! Creator and founder of CARM.

Roar asked (after Matt Slick posted a reply to someone saying "are you STUPID?"):

Mr. Slick, I would request you at least stop using personal attacks, if that's okay.

Matt Slick responds:

Read the rules. I'm morally correct in what I do, per the rules and if you as an atheist were to object, all I have to do is cite atheist moral subjectivity as your lack of right to object.

Here's the rules - as set up by CARM administrator Diane and Matt Slick:

Rule #9:
No name-calling, insults, or mockery of a board poster on forums/chatroom/message systems. No negative comments of any sort concerning a board user, do not quote or misquote a poster in signature unless linked to full context of quote as copy right issue, since only Super Members may link in signature, quoting of users in signatures not permitted for the average poster, feel free to quote posters in body of messages as usual to responses with context, do not discuss or gossip about a forum poster. Do not use vulgarity, which includes abbreviations of vulgar terms, offensive nicknames, attack or insult a poster with nicknames.

Rule #11:
Do not be divisive or inflammatory. Moderators will determine what is inflammatory.

So Matt Slick decides what's divisive or inflammatory? Well...how about that! I'll bet he's never been suspended for calling someone out on bullshit huh? Like I did to him (and am riding out a 3 day suspension).

Pussy.

-Erin

Life FAIL

Posted at CARM on October 12th, 2009. Creationist: Spider.

Comment: What gave the Bible away as Mystical? The talking snakes, rib woman, mud man, magic fruit, unicorn, Jewish zombies or maybe the turning water into wine was a hard sell. Ya think all of those things could have gone eithe way.,.. myth, fact, fact, myth... who knows?

Spider's Response: And rocks evolving into monkeys, and then into men is more plausible?

Yes - yes it is. Though that's now how it happened. Only Creationists think that man came from dirt...not scientists.

-Erin

Multi FAIL

Posted at CARM on October 12th, 2009. Creationist: Spider

This is a multi fail. This means that there were too many fails in one discussion board post to warrant separate fails, so they're all here for you to see.

Fail #1:
Comment: No, dust is made out of US. WE are made from many varying chemicals and elements.

Spider's retort: And Adam was initially formed from dust.

Fail #2:
Comment: How does this make Eve being created from his rib any less ridiculous?

Spider's retort: Scientists have cloned sheep from 1 cell. I don't consider it to be a huge stretch to believe God could make woman from a rib.

Fail #3:
Comment: You still believe that a talking snake existed at some point.

Spider's retort: I believe Satan presented himself as a talking snake, at least.

Fail #4:
Comment: Jesus was a zombie. A resurrected dead body is precisely the same as a re-animated one. Flesh eating or not, Jesus was a corpse brought from the dead. If I recall, one of his disciples even put his hands in his wounds.

Spider's retort (by far the best): They are synonyms, but not the same.

BWA HA HA! Zombie Jesus. lol

-Erin

Sell the Vatican...Feed the World

Best....video....ever.

Not a fail - but whatever. Had to post it.

-Erin

Age FAIL

Posted at CARM on October 9th, 2009. Creationist: Duza.

The earth is approx. seven thousand years old. nuff said..Read the creation account. Gen.1 ff

He says that like Genesis is scientifically accurate. lol And that the writers of Genesis were there witnessing everything being created in 6 whole days (plus a nap time, because God was all tuckered out).

-Erin

Globe vs. Circle FAIL

Posted at CARM on October 8th, 2009. Creationist: Nate

Original Post:

The earth is not a circle. It's a globe. Duh. Duh. Double duh.

Nate's Reply:

Triple Duh. A globe and a circle are something in a round shape. I have them both printed out in front of me. Can you show me where one equals something other than something in a round type of shape?

Someone doesn't understand that globe is 3D while circle is 2D. lol That darn Bible has got him all twisted up.

-Erin

Universe FAIL

Posted at CARM on October 6th, 2009. Creationist: Terc

How do they know that these stars are 13.2 billion years old? what did they use for a benchmark that they know without a doubt is that old? I do not know if the earth is the center of the universe but it does make sense if He was near the earth when He created it that all light energy went out from Him so it was here before it was there.

Did he just say that the Earth is the center of the universe? I think he did...

-Erin

Plain ole FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 29th, 2009. Creationist: Sport.

Original post:

Well then, is it your belief then that I can be a supporter of Evolution AND:

a. Not be in favor of abortion.
b. Not be racist.
c. Not Revel in death.

Sport's reply:

I suppose it's possible. But that would be alot like asking an atheist if he can be a proponent of Christianity. It may be technically possible, but it's seems to me to be a contradiction. Evos aren't evos because of any evidence. Evos are evos because they are messed up in the head. Being messed up in the head usually distorts all thinking, not just some.

Messed up in the head? Us silly realists!

-Erin

Testing FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 23rd, 2009. Creationist: Win.

OP:

Ok, so Christians here love to point to supposed holes in the ToE and then claim that god must be right by process of elimination. But, process of elimination doesn't work like that, so they have to present some sort of test that could allow us to verify their claims.

So, please, give us a test that would allow us to verify your hypothesis. This does not mean attacking the other theory, just ignore the fact it even exists. This does not mean quoting the bible, because thats not a test, its a statement. It means, give us some sort of experiment we can perform to check if the results coincide with your ideas.

Win's Response:

Simple test:

If life is made by nature, that is by rocks or seas in the old times, then, life must not so important to all living animals.

Here is how to test if life is importatnt or not.

Poke a rat or any animals (as threatening to kill) and see how they behave. If they behave happily, then, ToE is correct, life and all living organisms were evolved. If those animals were not happy or afraid, then, ToE is wrong and Interrelation Theory is correct. Life and all living animals were selected to live.

Now, do that experiment or test.

Ummm...what? I know his dumb Interrelation Theory required defensive mechanisms and behaviors...but what out there says evolution doesn't require those things? That's dumb.

-Erin

Pre-Human FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 16th, 2009. Possible Creationist: Lib.

There is a time gap between Gen 1: 1, and Gen 1: 2, This gap could be billions of years, that is when all these PRE- historck creatures lived.
Some of the Giants were still around in Gen 6;
all these pre historic beings are devilish and were not created by God, they wer created by the devil when he fall from heaven to the first earth.
In Gen 6, when it says, "The sons of God" they were demonic beings.

So, the devil created dinosaurs? Didn't know he had that power...

-Erin

Mind Reading FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 14th, 2009. Creationist: Shep.

Shep:

I am trying to give you the picture that God created humans and animals separate; Therefore one cannot "evolve" into another. That man was created in God's image, and animals were not, is just another fact for evolutionists to consider.

AH:

Ecclesiastes 3:18-21

¹⁸ I also thought, "As for men, God tests them so that they may see that they are like the animals. ¹⁹ Man's fate is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them both: As one dies, so dies the other. All have the same breath [b] ; man has no advantage over the animal. Everything is meaningless. ²⁰ All go to the same place; all come from dust, and to dust all return. ²¹ Who knows if the spirit of man rises upward and if the spirit of the animal [c] goes down into the earth?"

Shep:

Would you state your point? I do not "read minds".

Classic Creationist answer, wouldn't you agree?

-Erin

Big Bang FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 14th, 2009. Creationist: BAK.

I think that the term Big Bang was invented by the astronomer Fed Hoyle in the 20th century and in the 19th century Darwin invented his Theories of Evolution and The Origin of the Species. Hoyle and Darwin have become linked by another theory that the Big Bang happened at Creation which was followed by evolution of the species. To me all of these theories are part of Satan’s conspiracy organized in spirit to destroy belief in Jesus Christ and thus belief in our Creator God.

Teach the CONTROVERSY!

-Erin

Earth FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 12th, 2009. Creationist: Win.

I am an old earth proponent but I think Young Earth Explanation is logical.

Biblically, if God will let sin stay in many hundred thousand of years, then, He is not a good God

Scientifically, the separation of continents must be done when the water is above the highest peak on earth, for if not, great tsunami will occur

If OLD EARTH, the separation of continents will trigger more earthquakes that means, more tsunamis. And we could find the traces of tsunamis. But do we have more traces of tsunamis for a million of years?

One word: geology.

-Erin

Correctness FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 11th, 2009. Creationist: Shep.

The Bible is the only true account of the flood. Anything apart from it, whether correct or no, is only speculative.

So wait...anything apart from the Biblical, literal account of Noah's Flood that is CORRECT is...not correct? *confused*

-Erin

Genesis FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 11th, 2009. Creationist: Dr.K

The first 3 chapters of Genesis is science, even if you deny it, because I deny that Darwin is science.

Silly Creationist. Darwin is a person. Science is science.

-Erin

Good Science FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 9th, 2009. Creationist: PS.

God did it is good science. Exclusion of God is bad science. Why? Be cause God did it.

That's not circular at all!

-Erin

Marsupial FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 2nd, 2009. Creationist: RByers.

In fact the appendix in marsupials is from the fact they are the same creatures as placentals. No convergent evolution created appendix in marsupials separate from other creatures and no the creator did not create marsupials separate from the others.

Marsupials are placentals with pouches. And appendix.

It should of been obvious that a marsupial wolf was just a dumb old wolf.

Someone needs to take their crazy hat off.

-Erin

Enzyme FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 9th, 2009. Creationist: Grace.

Nylonase , no matter what the mutation, is still Nylonase at the end of the day.
at what point does it become a duck?

a cold mutates and is still a cold virus.
human ear cells can be grafted and grow to a mature ear (external, on the back of a mouse.
the mouse is still a mouse, humiliated, but his specie4s does NOT change.
and I notice that Nylonase does not change or become more complex.

what I asked for was an increase in the genome that effect a change in species (assumed you would understand this since it is what evolution claims. )
we are looking for a mutation or evolution process where by the information (specifically species identifiers) is increased (to the end of the emergence of a new species.

When the Nylonase reaches the complex stage of fish, you can get back to me with the step by step process whee by the leap was made from single celled organism to multi-celled, complex organism.

Enzyme to duck evolution. Only in the mind of a Creationist, I tell you.

-Erin

Chromosome FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 8th, 2009. Creationist: Win.

Spouting off about the Interrelation Theory once more, here is Win's reason why a telomere is included in human chromosome 2.

Because of the geological conditions of the earth. The future geological condition of the earth and the future species needed/required new type of defense mechanism for humans to live on this planet. So, the injunction of new rearranged (fused) chromosome must be needed.

Really? We have 46 chromosomes because of the geological processes that this planet continuously undergoes? Huh. Our 2nd Chromosome is our defensive mechanism against earthquakes apparently.

-Erin

School FAIL

Posted at CARM Sept 7th, 2009. Creationist: Real.

Comment:

But we do know that the flood never happened! Not only is there not any evidence of a global flood there are dozens of geological formations that falsify a recent global flood in human history.

Real's reply:

I was taught in school that it did happen! I believe the Bible above all!

Sunday school doesn't count as school.

-Erin

Woodpecker FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 9th, 2009. Creationist: VJ.

In the meantime, while evolution is progressing, the woodpecker smashes its brains out before it has any protection, so it won't smash it brains out ... !!!

In response:

Um...what bizarre version of "evolution" did you learn that from??

VJ:

While the wood pecker was supposedly evolving, it would have no protection for its brain, while pecking the wood, which would most certainly cause serious brain damage, as in death ... !!!

No...seriously. What whacked out version of evolution did THAT guy learn in school? ... !!

-Erin

Theory FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 8th, 2009. Creationist: Win.

Interrelation Theory explains defensive mechanisms:

All fossilized organisms had defense mechanisms related to the era and times of their habitation and places of habitation. We cab find them embeddded in the crust of the earth.

There are two types of defense mechanisms:
One is acquired or learned defense mechanism and the other is selective injuncted defense mechanism. Stretching hands of primates, running of feet of mammals, flying of wings of birds are some examples of learned/acquired defense mechanism. All mimicries are selective injuncted defense mechanism.

WOW! Wings of birds are a learned/acquired defense mechanism! And here I thought that the bones of the arm and chest needed to GROW and EVOLVE over time to enable flight. Oh...an feathers help too.

-Erin

Relation FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 8th, 2009. Creationist: Win.

Original conversation: Creationists have a lack of understanding of Biology, and they don't want one. There's no use in trying to pound it into the using evidence, so sit back and enjoy the ride of intellectual ignorance.

Win's reply to that:

Ignorance is when one says to you, "Hey, you come from ape, dude!" and your reply is, "Thank you, dude. Here is my dollar. Go on and research more.". And he come back and said, "Dude, your great great grandfather was an apes!" "Here is another dollar."

Uh huh. Ignorance is the Creationist who affirms that evolutionary scientists say your grandfather was a chimp. No Creationists, my great grandfather wasn't a chimp. Nor was yours (though I'll bet some were closer than others). Duh. If they were, WE'D be chimps.

-Erin

Omniscient FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 3rd, 2009. Creationist: Win.

His post is a little hard to understand, as English isn't his first language, so I've interpreted a bit for you.

You see, omniscient God can know the future of the universe. But the "free humans" are not covered by that power since it is a violation of freedom.

God is omniscient but because humans have free will, God cannot see into the future of humans because it's anti-freedom. (WTF?!)

If you will read the Bible, God had come down from Heaven when He punished Sodom and Gomorah. He cannot see our all decisions.

God was very surprised when humans in times of Noah were doing worst things.

Really? God was surprised to see that the flaws he called human beings were screwing up? Riight.

That means, He cannot allow Himself to know the future of humans EXCEPT for those special humans like Paul or Moses etc that will be used as instruments for His works on earth.

Sounds to me like someone is telling God what he can/can't see or understand.

-Erin

Pack FAIL

Posted at CARM on Aug 30th, 2009. Creationist: Sport.

atheists and evolutionists run in packs. They're like wolves. Their membership in the pack is more important than any sort of truth or reality. The fact that they may have major differences among themselves is unimportant....what's important is that they all hate creationists.

Riiiiight.

-Erin

Chicken FAIL

Posted at CARM on unknown date. Creationist: Mad.

Why can't we see a dinosaur when we open up a can of chicken soup?

Wow...really? There isn't a pole LONG enough for me to touch that with.

-Erin

Brigade FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 3rd, 2009. Creationist: Boo.

The ban YEC in schools brigade are anti-freedom and anti-free-market.

The what brigade? Oh...you mean the science teachers and parents who are trying to follow the Constitution? Silly them.

-Erin

YEC FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 3rd, 2009. Creationist: Boo.

The opinion that YEC has been "thoroughly debunked" is a dogmatic belief of fundamentalist evolutionists which they assume is a fact. It is not "a fact" to YEC. Being of limited knowledge and intelligence, evolutionists are not qualified to arbitrate absolutely on whether YEC has been thoroughly debunked in any absolute sense. Neither are YECs. The only one qualified to make absolute statements about it would be an omniscient observer.

Evolutionary science is a fundamental dogmatic belief system? Just because you can put together random phrases doesn't mean you should.

-Erin

Poloticis FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 3rd, 2009. Poster: Ot.

Inresponse to a question: "would you vote for Cheny if he ran for pres in 2012?"

I wish Cheney would change his mind - the country needs a rational and competent person like him. We've had enough of the ones with "superior judgment".

Yeah. Because the Bush administration was nothing but honest.

-Erin

Anthropology FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 3rd, 2009. Creationist: Flare.

Once again, another classic response to the"If dinosaurs lived with humans" thread.

Humans would be among the last to die there for they would be exposed to scavengers after the flood their bodies would rot and their bones would become scattered. A large number would sink to the bottom of the newly formed oceans deep lakes etc. Then the ones that remain on land where ice sheets came through during THE ice age would simply be ground to dust by the ice sheets.

It is not hard to understand why we have so few human fossils those we do have some that have been given other names such as cro magnon and neanderthal to name just 2.

Uh huh. Someone didn't tell her that Homo neanderthalensis is NOT related to us.

So to answer you question there's very good reasons why dino bones and human bones are not found together typically. Humans are smarter than dinos we would do all we could to survive using our intellect grabbing hold of logs and trying to survive swimming etc. Most dinos would not be good swimmers or smart enough to hold on or just not capable of holding on. They would die fast and sink earlier than humans. Im sure some humans were buried with dinos early on and we just have not found them yet.

No. Those are NOT good reasons. The best reason why you don't find human bones in the same layers of sedimentary rocks as dinosaur bones, is perhaps because HUMANS DIDN'T LIVE WITH DINOSAURS?!

-Erin

Natural FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 2nd, 2009. Creationist: Mad.

Exactly. What exactly is natural??? Is this web site natural? Are you natural??? lol

Dictionary.com says that natural is: nothing Creationists ever say or do.

-Erin

Dinosaur FAIL

Posted at CARM on Sept 2nd, 2009. Creationist: RByers.

Holy crap...this is my new favorite one. This post TRULY is the Creationist FAIL of the DAY! In response to "If people lived with dinosaurs, why don't we find their bones side by side?":

First there are no such things as dinosaurs. All there is are kinds of creatures.
These dinos were just certain creatures dominating some areas.
Now its POSSIBLE that some dinos were in fact just the creatures we have today.
I mean I noticed they would say this or that dino was only separate from mammals because of ear bones etc. Since I know marsupials are just placentals with a few minor details then the idea can be extended that many dinos are just "mammals" with a few different details.
Just speculating but maybe many dinos are misidentified.

People would not of lived with dinos or ever saw them. Before the flood creatures did not fear man and it would be too dangerous.
People lived in segregated areas.

A creationist should not ever expect to find people beside dinos.

Riiiiiight. More astounding scientific logic from R Byers.

-Erin

Fighting Instincts

Posted at CARM on Sept 1st, 2009. Creationist: 1TD. Supplied by ASDF.

In response to (summerizing) saying "I wish you'd all just die":

1TD: Sorry, I don't respond well to being ganged up on; it tends to really bring out my fighting instincts.

ASDF: For some reason I picture someone throwing a stink-bomb into a crowded elevator, then feeling picked on when the elevator's inhabitants complain.

That Creationist just got called a fart in an elevator. But isn't it typical that they insult in the name of God and then cry persecution when you call them out?

-Erin

Interpretation FAIL

Posted at CARM on unknown date. Creationist: KKLL. Supplied by ASDF.

The title of the OP is What the Bible says about Homosexuality! , not what YOU say the bible is saying.

So I could say "the title of the OP is what SCIENCE says about dinosaurs evolving into birds, not what YOU say GENESIS says."

-Erin

Arrogance FAIL

Posted at CARM on unknown date. Creationist: CD. Supplied by ASDF.

You're dead wrong. But just keep all that arrogant and foolish pride going. It clues others in on just how truely ignorant some really are.

Doesn't it mean that...if YOU said that I'M "dead wrong"...by default that makes YOU "dead right"...therefore YOU would have displayed "arrogant and foolish pride" making YOU look "ignorant"? That's what I got out of that.

-Erin

Die Now...or Later?

Posted at CARM on unknown date. Creationist: 1TD. Supplied by ASDF.

1TD: I can only wish you an expedited journey to the destiny of your choosing.

ASDF: Considering "destiny" in fundamentalist circles refers to "going to heaven or hell after you die", when you say "expedited journey", should that be read to say "I hope you die soon"?

1TD: Take it any way you wish; I don't care.

They DO want us all out of the way!

-Erin

Rejection FAIL

Posted at CARM on unknown date. Creationist: CD. Supplied by ASDF.

you've amply shown that you reject truth whenever it gets in the way of your pet sin.

Like...oh, say off the top of my head...rejecting most of science because it doesn't have anything to do with a magical tree, talking snake, or a global flood? Yeah. WE reject truth.

-Erin

Protest FAIL

Posted at CARM on unknown date. Creationist: CD. Supplied by ASDF.

Actually, those who are overly forceful in their beliefs are those who protest too much.

Like, the Creationists protesting gay marriage? Or the Creationists protesting evolution taught in schools?

-Erin

Misunderstand FAIL

Posted at CARM on unknown date. Creationst: Dr.K. Supplied by ASDF.

It doesn't matter if we understand or misunderstand. Either way we reject it.

So...no matter what you're brainwashed? Ok...I understand.

-Erin

Sophistry!

Posted at CARM on unknown date. Creationist: 1TD. Quote supplied by A.S.D.F.

Beware of Satan's sophistry; he's a master at using logic against human beings to cause them to doubt the truth.

BEWARE OF THE SOPHISTRY of SATAN! He's a logic MASTER! And he's obviously around every corner. Paranoid much?

-Erin

Burying the Dead

Posted at CARM on Aug 29th, 2009. Creationist: win.

Original post:

If dinosaurs and humans lived together, how come we don't find their fossils side by side?

Win's comment:

Dinos don't bury their dead. Humans do. So, you will never find those fossils side by side.

BWA HA HA HA HA! I literally laughed out loud at that one!

-Erin

Understanding FAIL

Posted at CARM on August 4th, 2009. Creationist (I think, he pushes the Interrelation Theory): Win.

Win:

Our topic here is vetigial organs. I told you that those vestigial organs that were considered by ToE are not actually vestigials but defense mechanisms, that means, they protect something for something for survival.

Our ears and all parts of them are parts of defense mechanism, that means their function is to protect the life of the living organism agaisnt danger. If they could not hear, they will be easily target for preys...

Is that hard to understand?

Yeah, that's hard for me to understand. I can't quite put my finger on how the bones of our ears aren't vestigial bones from the jaw, they're there for defense against....against....

-Erin

Gender FAIL

Posted at CARM on July 9th, 2009. Creationist: Dr.K.

This response was made after someone said that homosexuals can't love, and Dr.K said that was a "beautiful post".

Normal person:

Beautiful in its degradation and sub-humanizing of homosexuals? You have a curious notion of beautiful.

Dr.K's response:

There are only two genders. To which gender do homosexuals belong?

Wow really? That's why I suppose we went to all the trouble of calling them gay men and lesbians. Ppft. Retarded.

-Erin

Dwarf FAIL

Posted at CARM on May 30th, 2009. Possible Creationist (he/she's new) Yummy.

Yummy's first post at CARM on the Evo/ID debate forum is:

how is it there are PYGMIES + DWARFS??"

What? Yeah, I don't know either.

-Erin

Eclipse FAIL

Posted at CARM on May 29th, 2009. Creationist: Yank (ex evolutionary science teacher, by the way).

Yank's understanding of the eclipse mentioned in the Bible and his defense of how he accidently proved the Gospels wrong.

"the Sun would be blocked by the EARTH, thus it would appear that the entire world (=the Moon) went dark".

Let me translate that. The sun would be blocked by the Earth (=lunar eclipse). Thus it would appear that the entire world (=the moon?) went dark (=solar eclipse). What was it? A solar or a luna eclipse? And how is the entire world the moon?

From a SCIENCE TEACHER! Now we know why the US is so damn far behind!

-Erin

Fish FAIL

Posted at CARM on May 29th, 2009. Creationist: Yank (the epic).

Yank's Comment:

Anyone who thinks that those fossils I posted of fish eating other fish or being destroyed while giving birth (that from an evolutionist website no less) are not the result of instantaneous destruction and imprint upon the surrounding rocks are utterly dishonest. They aren't even worth communicating with.

I will wait to see if there are honest posters who wish to discuss this.

"...and the flood came and took them all away." Jesus Christ.

So fish give birth now?! I thought they laid eggs!

-Erin

Rock FAIL

Posted at CARM on May 29th, 2009. Creationist: Yank

Comment:

This fish like multiplied millions of others was killed instantly and pressure made the imprint in soft rock. WHY WAS THE ROCK SOFT at that moment? You see that's a hint that evolutionists rarely ever think about.

Geology fail at its best. why was the rock soft? Because it wasn't rock. Der. Sand that turns to stone, becomes SANDSTONE. DUH.

-Erin

Trait FAIL

Posted at CARM on May 28th, 2009. Creationist: Scar, yet again. No turkey's this time.

No back story, this is the original, starting post.

Scar:

Another reason evolution is bogus. Sports superstars. Musical superstars. Indeed any superstars in a particular field.

They get born into families mostly who did not possess such outstanding talent. In many cases, the rest of their families were not even interested in their field.

Evolutionists will have us believe that the traits of parents and grandparents will be passed to the child. If this were really true then you'd find generations after generations of sportstars, musicians etc. producing world class performers. Indeed we'd find that they would have as many kids as possible in the hope one would inherit that magical gene and make a fortune.

We don't see that, do we?

Umm no. I know computers but my family doesn't. Does that mean I have a computer gene/trait? NO! Idiot.

Topic FAIL

Posted at CARM on May 27th, 2009. Creationist: Scar

Comment:

Are you unaware that there is as much serious scientific debate on the occurance of evolution as there is on the existance of gravity...namely none?

Scar's response:

turkeys don't vote for Christmas

Go ahead. I'll wait for you to try and figure out what the hell that comment meant and how it fits into the conversation on "why don't scientists debate evolution with other scientists". Screen saver face.

_Erin

Magic FAIL

Posted at CARM on May 24th, 2009. Creationist: Candle.

Candles rebut to God creating being akin to magic:

Magic belongs to a realm of the spirit world that God never uses. It is the opposite to the power of God.

Really?

-Erin

Scientific Illustration FAIL

Posted at CARM on May 22nd, 2009. Creationist: FM.

Original comment:
There isn't just ONE fossil that shows the evolution of fish to tetrapods (land dwellers with legs).

No, Not ONE.

http://afarensis.blogsome.com/images/tiktaalik_limb.jpg

http://www.aigbusted.com/resources/fish_evolution.jpg

I remember the fossil transition before tiktaalik came along (i still have my textbook), they knew EXACTLY what they were looking for.

FM's response:

Not a drawing of one. LOL

WOW! These are scientific illustrations based on the fossils. DORK!

-Erin

Grouping FAIL

Posted at CARM on May 22nd, 2009. Poster FM.

FM's original comment: "Isn't that your hero? Darwin? A racist, sexist pig?"

Response:

Hint for the Quiz: the KKK, Aryan Nations and Christian Identity groups are unalterably PRO-Creationism.

FM's reply:

I am talking about the "Father of evolution", not some random groups of people.

Random groups of people?! Yeah...okay then. *head buried in the sand*

-Erin

Genetic FAIL

Posted at CARM on May 22nd, 2009. Creationist: Sport (on the rampage again!)

Conversation: a bird in northwestern US has changed its tune due to selective pressures from the changing environment to better have the females hear the now lower, and slower, tons through the dense foliage. Sport says "where's the mutation of the genes? Therefore it's not evolution!" And his knowledge on the subject gets even better.

Comment:

So, when a person learns a new language, are you saying that 'evos' claim it is the result of mutations?

Whatever are you carryiong on about?

Sport's Response:

Evos say only populations evolve. Individuals (supposedly) are stuck with their genes. Genes are dumb. Genes don't learn, right? How do you explain the fact that cells and genes (which are just dumb matter) actually learn and comprehend things?

Did anyone else picture a little strand of genetic material reading a text book? I did. :) How do genes LEARN things? By reading of course.

-Erin

Poetry FAIL

Posted at CARM in 2009 (can't find exact date). Creationist: Sport

This is only one example of the sheer idiocy, hate, and willful ignorance of the United States' Creationist:

Sport's Poem to the Evolutionary Scientists:

Here's a "poem" for you:

Thanks, evos, for all those people you've murdered around the world.

Thanks for replacing Christianity with Humanism.
Thanks for warping our kids' minds through your media and textbooks.

Thanks for making everyone think it's "only natural" for a guy to shove his penis in another guy's rectum.
Thanks for making everyone believe angry bull-dykes are sexy.

Thanks for trashing our universities with your limp-wristed, leftist professors.
And thanks for all those babies you've managed to get your hands on and kill.

Thanks for your complete and utter failure in everything you do or try.
Thanks for making everyone question their faith.

Thanks for wiping the smiles off everyone's faces.
Thanks for your lies.

Thanks for spreading hate around the world.
Thanks for making America care what France thinks about anything.

Thanks for making regular citizens pay millions for all your worthless lab/DNA experiments.
Thanks for all of your Eugenics and Euthenasia efforts -- those have been a great help.

Thanks for removing any and all personal responsibility from society by claiming bad behavior is all "in the genes."

Thanks for your desire to scrap The Constitution.and disarm the Military.
Thanks for your redistribution of wealth -- from us to you.

Thanks for your foe battle against diseases and endless empty promises for cures.
Thanks for genetically altering everyone's food. I'm sure you know better than God does.

Thanks for taking nearly all the purpose beauty and love out of life.
Thanks for your undying support for your heros Hitler, Stalin, Kim's Il Dong, and all the other murderous atheist freaks around the world

Thanks for Not caring about our traditions and our faiths
Thanks for Not caring about morals

Thanks for ruining our country.
Thanks for nothing......"

He sounds like a loving Christian that bothered to study before opening his mouth (er, flexing his fingers) doesn't he?

-Erin

Hatemongering FAIL

Posted at CARM on May 20th, 2009. Creationist: Scar

Conversation about hating and dissing other religions because they don't believe in the Christian God. Citing VenomFangX's YouTube video where he said "Satan Created Evil Islam". He got banned, just so you know (thank GOD...no pun intended). He's an ignorant tool. Pure and simple.

My question:

he put up a video called: "Satan Made Evil Islam". How is this not hate-mongering?

It was removed several times and he put them right back up. Why are you sympathetic for this guy? He's a dirtbag! He's using his "faith" to promote hate. Anyone can see that if anyone's ever watched ONE of his pieces.

Scar's answer:

how is attacking Islam hate-mongering exactly? do explain

Headdesk on that one, right? how is hating a religion and posting inflammatory videos about how their religion was made by Satan NOT hate-mongering? I don't know either.

-Erin

Technology FAIL

Posted at CARM on May 17th, 2009. Creationist: Sport.

Topic:

So virtually all scientists are fools?

Why then pay any attention to what we do or say? Why support our work with tax dollars?

Sports reply:

good question. I ask that all the time. I wouldn't mind going back to the 1700s. I've about decided that all areas of science are evil, including technological sciences. Technology is ruining this country. I can't think of a single piece of technology that hasn't hurt society.

Like defibrillators? MRI and CAT scan machines? Toilets? My favorite is the COMPUTER he's using to TYPE his damn POST! lol

-Erin

I.Q. FAIL

Posted at CARM on May 15th, 2009. Creationist: Nate

Earlier in the conversation (about transitional fossils) Nate kicked it off with:

But now that the fossil record fails the TOE, they have to use an example of something made by intelligent designers. So the example proves that complex things have to have a designer.

Response:

Show us where the fossil record in any way fails the ToE.

Nate's Reply:

That has been done many times, as all the evos can come up with are similarities in fossils. Which proves how good my logic is, as all I ask for is the real deal and not a fantasy.

Response:

But this isn't what the example proved. To prove something is to provide a deductive certainty. AT BEST what you could have shown was an inductive argument. You are using words that you don't understand the meaning of.

BTW - this statement is one that is easily shot through by the existence of snow flakes (which are complex things without designers).

Keep in mind, this is assuming your premises were correct.

Nate's Genius Response:

Someone was trying to say that I was saying or trying to say that computers were living things. But my point is that since I know that fossils were living creatures at one time, I can not be saying that computers are living things, because I stated they were non-living things (computers). Again my Einstein comprehension shines through.

No...we don't know where it came from. No...we don't know what it means. No...it doesn't make sense. We do however know that his Einstein comprehension is probably comparable to an autistic dog with a nick name of Einstein.

-Erin

Definition FAIL

Posted at CARM on May 8th, 2009. Creationist: Sport.

Original Comment:

Philosophers and ancient thinkers deduced that the earth orbited around the sun based on observations long before the tools existed to prove heliocentrism. Like those early thinkers, Darwin deduced through observation and those that came after modified and expounded the theory to what it is today.

Congrats Sport, you just figured out how science works!

Sport's Reply:

I don't think real science should be about "deduction," especially when there is no evidence from which to deduce (think Darwin), but instead by experimental/observational evidence.

Ummm...you mean the deductions made by having experimental and observational evidence like FOSSILS...ummm...DNA....ummm...ALL OF BIOLOGY?!

Those kinds of deductions? Sill panda. That's what science is! Deducing based on evidence! Just because you don't believe the evidence doesn't mean it's not there. lol

-Erin

Fossil FAIL!

Posted at CARM on April 26th, 2009. Creationist: Wavey

Wavy asked for proof of an old Earth - so we gave him this picture: Dinosaur Fossil.

His reply:

A bone in a rock. Hint - bones can't talk and neither can rocks. They have to be interpreted within a framework of assumptions.

Ummm....what bone? You mean the footprint? Wow - can't identify a footprint, eh? Don't you think that you're then unable to debate this subject fully?

-Erin

Taxonomu FAIL

Posted at AIG (Answers in Genesis) on April 25th, 2009. Creationist: Probably Hamm, but we'll just say: Generic Creationist that Thinks They Know Lots About Science.

Background: Fossil Seal with Arms Discovered

AIG quote from their article, which can be read HERE:

"Or it could have even been from a broader created kind that included such creatures as otters and beavers"

Scientists reply:

Since when are otters are mustelids and beavers rodents!?

Mustelids: any of numerous carnivorous mammals of the family Mustelidae, comprising the weasels, martens, skunks, badgers, and otters.

Rodents: belonging or pertaining to the gnawing or nibbling mammals of the order Rodentia, including the mice, squirrels, beavers, etc.

Pinnipeds: belonging to the Pinnipedia, a suborder of carnivores with limbs adapted to an aquatic life, including the seals and walruses.

Huh - they don't sound alike at all! And what is this "kind" nonsense still going around?

Beaver KIND. Otter KIND. There is no such thing as a kind - the closest you get is species. And just because "it looks kind of like an otter" doesn't mean that it IS an otter.

I think some people look kind of like a chimpanzee (Bush for example), but that doesn't mean that they ARE chimpanzees.

Silly Creationists.

-Erin

Marriage FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 26th, 2009. Posted by Dr. K

Dr.K's original comment:

Adam and Eve were married because in biblical marriage it is not the ceremony which matters. It is the consummation. I thought you knew that.

Follow up:

Well that certainly is a new concept. Having sex makes a couple married, millions will be shocked by that. And most certainly it implies that the homosexual marriage issue is now settled.

LMAO! Sex means you're married?! Ppft.

-Erin

Time FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 26, 2009. Creationist: the Legendary Dr.K

Original Comment: (talking about length of days and weeks to back up Genesis and the "fact" that the Earth was created with everything on it in 6 literal days).

I gave you support of my positions for evenings and mornings by using the Book of Daniel. However you deliberately ignored it. Keep burying your head in the sand.

Dr.K's response:

The Book of Daniel talks about 'weeks of years', one week in this case equalling seven years, which is clearly deducible from the text of Daniel. Daniel is saying that a week has seven days. Are you arguing with him?

Wait a minute - "one week equals seven years - can't you tell that he was saying that a week has seven days in it from reading that literally?"

No - I can't. Literally has nothing to do with it. Literally means that "one week equals seven years". Herm.

Not to mention that the book of Daniel where it talks about this part is told from recounting a DREAM. How many dreams should be taken as literal? None. lol Good try though Dr.K.

-Erin

Genome FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 23rd, 2009. Creationist: Sport

Original comment:

The cat base pair sequence is different than that of humans, as are those of the kangaroo and mouse. Hence, they are not much the same, even though they may be the same genes and are perhaps in the same place on the chromosome. Saying otherwise is like looking at a lamborghini and a beat up, old pinto on blocks and saying that because they're both care, they're much the same.

On the other hand, your articles are also talking about positioning. So, if mine have nothing to do with the "core theory of evolution", neither does yours. The core theory of evolution to be very plain doesn't require the differences to be genetic either, merely heritable. If you don't like the genetics aspect of it, take it up with Mendel, not Darwin. Additionally, non-coding DNA would be important in any comparison.

Now, since you want to get down to the actual base pairs:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/...om=1&to=167280
Humans, chromosome 1

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/...=1&to=19418419
Mouse, chromosome 1

When you get done, you'll see that there is a very significant amount of genetic difference.

Sport's Response:

show me.....and while you're at it, show me how it is that these sequences make "catness" as opposed to "humanness." science only, please.

What the hell is humanness? *sigh* Sport wouldn't know science if it bit him in the butt.

-Erin

Just Plain FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 20th, 2009. Possible Creationist: 4ale

4ale original comment:

Have you seen the documentary/movie "Expelled - No Intelligence Allowed" by Ben Stein? If not, you might like watching it. It's an unbiased look at Creation vs. Evolution.

Un huh. Unbiased? Riiiiiight. Check out Expelled Exposed and that should clear it up for you. And how is equating the Theory of Evolution with the Holocaust at all unbiased?

-Erin

Cloud FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 17th, 2009. Creationist: Dr. K (again I know...but he's such a fount of....something I'm sure).

Original Comment (made by me):

Volcanoes emit more water vapor than anything else (well...except for lava). It's easy to see that on a planet as volatile as one where the processes are still kicking into high gear, vulcanism would contribute a lot of water.

Non-Creationist post:

If I was on the ball I'd be asking how volcanoes that are not near the sea could actually put their vapor into the nearest mass of water. And I'd be asking why the vapor doesn't eVAPORate.

Wow. Does your brain hurt after that one? Mine did. Why don't clouds evaporate!

-Erin

Evidence FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 16th, 2009. Creationist: Dr.K

Suggestion:

Well I am afraid that court is out and has been for a very long time as it is universally accepted by the experts that it is indeed 4.6 billion years old, you just are incapable of understanding that we have presented the evidence and you have none.

Dr. K's response:

I understand that it is accepted. Every book I consulted, with the obvious exception of the Bible, says that it is 4.6 billion years old. Let's just say I'd like to hear it again. With my own ears. I believe it's dangerous to 'just believe' something. That would be the same as letting other people do my thinking for me.

So...out of say 1,000 books, only 1 book refutes it (even though it really doesn't), and you say "well, I need to hear it more"....haven't you already heard more?

-Erin

Word FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 15th, 2009. Creationist: Sport

Sport's comment:

the article calls them "humans," so I did.....so what?

When the earliest human ancestors left the trees and struck out to make a new life for themselves on the ground, there was no going back, a new study suggests.

Response:

Saying "human ancestors" does NOT equal humans. Self-pwn!

He self-pwn's himself a lot. It's fun.

-Erin

Religion FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 14th, 2009. Creationist: Dr.K.

Dr.K's original comment:

Everybody except the Mormons knows that the Mormon version of the story is a total invention. Surely you didn't think I was going to quote them.

Response:

That could be true for any noun.

Dr.K's answer:

Just because the Mormons are a bunch of liars, doesn't mean that everybody else is.

Yeah! Just because they believe in a space god and that Jesus was alive and died and rose again, but not as a zombie, and that God gave his commandments and had prophets and....wait...

........sounding familiar........


-Erin

Understanding FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 13th, 2009. Creationist: Shep

Original Comment by Shep: Evolution basically equals aborting and killing babies.

Refutation:

Evolution = abortion?

Get real shep.

Shep's Reply:

I am being real. Evolution not only promotes abortion, it supports it.
--Evolution goes much deeper than you would expect. If you delve into the heart of evolution, you will find a lie as the underlying cause of it. And we know where all lies originate...from the father of all lies, the devil himself.

--Evolution is much, much worse that what some of you nonchalantly hold it up to be.

Riiiiight. Why is everything that doesn't back up Young Earth Creationists centered around the devil? It is like the layers of the Earth?

The devil is the core, Evolutionary scientists that don't factor in God are the Mantle, Theistic Evolutionists are the Asthenosphere, and YEC's are the crust?

Ppft.

-Erin

Volcanics FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 13th, 2009. Creationist: Dr.K

Comment:

Most of Earth's heat is stored in the mantle, Marone says, and there are four sources that keep it hot. First, there's the heat left over from when gravity first condensed a planet from the cloud of hot gases and particles in pre-Earth space. As the molten ball cooled, some 4 billion years ago, the outside hardened and formed a crust. The mantle is still cooling down. (It continues into the basics of the Earth's interior heat engine, the radioactive decay, etc).

Dr.K's response:

Do you mean it will never go out?

Lava is not heat. Lava is fire.

Silly Panda! Lava isn't fire, it's molten rock at the surface of the planet! A) you mean magma if it's in the interior. B) fire is an exothermic reaction. C) Stop asserting your scientific "facts" on us all, it makes my brain hurt.

-Erin

Anatomy FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 12th, 2009. Creationist: Dr.K (we see a lot of him because he's....not bright in the science department.)

Discussion background:

Male and female skeletons have distinct differences.

Anthropologist:

Indeed they are. If a forensic anthropologist has to figure out the sex of a pile of bones, he or she hopes for the pelvis. Failing that, the skull is the next best way, with about an 80% reliability.

(Adults only: it is much harder to tell the sex of children reliably because of a lot of the differentiation comes with maturity. OTOH you can tell the age of children within months, but adults only within a decade, once the third molars have fully erupted.)

Dr.K:

Is that a professional forensic opinion?

Anthropologist:

Forensic anthropology borrows methods developed from the academic discipline of physical anthropology and applies them to cases of forensic importance. These techniques can be used to assess age, --->sex<-----, stature, ancestry, and analyze trauma and disease. Forensic anthropologists frequently work in conjunction with forensic pathologists, odontologists, and homicide investigators to identify a decedent, discover evidence of trauma, and determine the postmortem interval.

Dr.K: (heer comz teh stoopid!)

I have it on good authority that it is impossible to determine the gender of a human skeleton.

*facepalm* Look...I realize that large pieces of anthropological evidence is missing. Much the same with paleontological differences.

But...arguing that you cannot tell the difference in sex of a skeleton of the species you BELONG TO?!

New low, Creationists, new low.

-Erin

Just Plain FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 12th, 2009. Creationist: Shep

Comment:

He forgot to add that the fact that Noah built a boat proves the Bible is also an excellent treatise on Naval Architecture. We should start demanding that it be given equal time in engineering classes. *eyeroll*

Shep's Response:

You really should, because Noah's ark is the basis by which all others have their foundation.

All other arks? Or all other ships? Because, either way...not true.

-Erin

Hominid FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 12th, 2009. Creationist: Dr.K

Comment:

Maybe you can also argue that a chicken is an bird or even an animal because someone decided it was so.

Dr.K's response:

I wonder if you have the expertise to question a creationist.
it is only because you are vainglorious enough to think that everyone else must be wrong.

If Hominid refers to a bipedal organism, then a chicken is a hominid.

It requires expertise to question a Creationist now, does it? Darn chicken-hominids.

-Erin

Ken Ham FAIL (another one)

Posted at CARM on April 12th, 2009. Creationist: Mello

Mello's original message:

Fossils -- A reminder of Easter. Well, I want to wish everybody a Happy Easter, and I was searching for a creation-related Easter article. Fortunately, Ken Ham has just the right article, and it reminded me of those childhood fossils sitting by the creek. Check it out!

Mello Posted Ken Ham's Article, which states:

Because much of the church has adopted a history of millions of years and/or evolutionary ideas, the message concerning Christ has been disconnected from the history in the Bible and thus in many people’s minds has been relegated to the position of just an interesting ‘story.’

However, at this Easter, as we begin the 21st Century, let’s reconnect the Bible to the real world by believing its history. Consider this one practical example:

When I look at a fossil bone (say of a dinosaur), I can observe that it is dead! The Bible’s history connects to this dead bone:

‘For the wages of sin is death’ (Romans 6:23). Death entered the world because of sin–there were no dead bones (of animals or people) before sin.

That's your only connect of dinosaurs to Easter?! Dead bones?! You mean fossil bones....right? Dead animals? Not just dead bones.

-Erin

Clade FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 11th, 2009. Creationist: Dr. K

Questions:

Ok, lets try something a little different here. Every clade has its own unique traits. Which clade would you place humans in?

Are we most like Cetations?
How about Bovids?.
What about Canids?
Or are we most like Hominids?

Dr.K's answer:

Cetation - not sure. I think shellfish.

Bovids - cows

Canids - dogs

Hominids - Problem here is I know what you want me to say, but I won't say it because I don't believe it. What you want to say is that because apes and monkeys look like humans, then they must be of the same family.
I don't believe it, and I won't say it.

The problem here is that ordinarily you are using a term - hominid - which would describe man, at least from an etymological point of view, but you are including apes. Why was an ape's name not applied to describe a man? Why is it the other way around? Why is a wolf (Lupid) not included in Canid? Why use two different terms for wolves and dogs, and use only one term for man and ape?

I bolded. Cetaceans are clams? Not whales, dolphins, porpoises?

-Erin

Snail FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 11th, 2009. Ex-creationist: Class

Comment:
For reference - Class is upset at 'ape' being used to describe humans in terms of classification.

I reject that Class is an Ape, or Hominid. I am beginning to think of her as a Enidae.

Class's response:

Please stop wasting my time by posting words that aren't really words. Thank you.

Someone hasn't heard of air-breathing land snails, have they?

-Erin

Conversation FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 11th, 2009. Creationist: Dr.K - Evolutionary Scientist: Les

Les:

Scientists deny magic. If scientists were to accept magic, then science would be impossible. Since science is possible, the denial of magic makes sense.

Creationism is magic. God, according to Creationists, zaps species, individuals, civilisations into and out of existence. No natural law involved. That is magic. Creationism is a belief in magic.

Denialism is denial in tha face of contrary evidence. Science does not deny contrary evidence, it accepts it. Denial of Creationism is not denialism, because there is no evidence for Creationism. It is a myth, and not a very good one. Creationism has not been denied by science, it has been disproved.

Learn the difference between denial and disproof.

Dr.K:

I deny magic too.

So I am in denial.

But I don't deny the creation.

If a man said to you that he could pull a rabbit out of a hat, and he didn't produce the rabbit, you'd say the guy was a fraud. And you'd be right.

But what if he does produce the rabbit?

Les:

Prove it was a Creation by a god. So produce your rabbit.

Dr.K:

You misunderstand. The rabbit is the universe. It has been produced.

Ah yes - based on the famous Rabbit Nebula, containing within it the Cottontail Constellation.

-Erin

WIN of the Day

Too good not to post. A comment from DL in reference to:

"The apes are cars and humans are high speed trains. A high speed train is not a car." - Dr.K

Response:

No, The OTHER apes are ford mustangs(chimps), ford escorts(gorilas), ford LTDs(orangutangs), and ford tempos(bononoes)..... Humans are ford aerostars.

High speed trains are a totaly seperate branch. Probably ungulates of some sort.

For some reason, hoofed trains just CRACKED me up.

-Erin

Association FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 11th, 2009. Creationist: Dr.K

Comment:

"Man" is a bit outmoded these days.

But while "man" can refer to people as a category, "Man" is still a small group within a large group called "apes". Sort of like "Fords" are a small group within a large group called "cars".

It IS possible to be both you know.

Dr.K's response:

So suppose we have cars and high speed trains. The apes are cars and humans are high speed trains.

A high speed train is not a car.

It'd be a good metaphor if humans were that much different from other apes - which we're not. I don't ever mistake a Jetta on the street as a high speed train. Do you?

-Erin

Carbon FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 11th, 2009. Creationist: RByers

Original Post:

On nova on a show about a claimed meteor causing the ice age extinction all these researchers admitted somthing i didn't know. That using new technology has discovered that tiny diamonds were created by sudden powerful forces in energy and rocks etc. They found these tiny diamonds in particles and claimed its evidence for a impact on earth.

Well AMEN.

The origin of diamonds of this type is a good hint of the origin of all diamonds. All diamonds possibly are from the earth movements during the biblical flood. Their need not be invoked slow processes but rather fast processes can do the trick.

It took modern technology to discover these tiny diamonds and is the enemy of wrong ideas as subjects like evolution rely on.

*Sigh* So...because small diamonds can be formed by the sudden pressure and heat from a meteor hitting the Earth...we jump to the conclusion that it means the Earth is young. *shrugs*

-Erin

Reality FAIL

Posted at CARM on April 10th, 2009. Creationist: Sport

Comment:

We would be still living in the Stone Age if there weren't science.

Science is responsible for all the conveniences and improved health we have today.

Sport's answer:

so....

So....living to be 30 years old and dieing from getting an infection on your toe sounds like an improvement?!

-Erin

Evolution FAIL

Posted at CARM on August 2 2008. Creationist: Scarlet

Scarlet's Original Post:

Why aren't there eyes in the back of my head? This would aid my survival since I could see enemy coming towards me from the rear. Yet we look at the animals and overwhelmingly they're blessed with eyes from our cretor yet none in the back of our heads.

I guess those animals which evolved eyes in the front and back of their heads got selected out... in preference of animals with eyes only in the front of their head. Yes that makes perfect sense. Go evolution!

and why not eyes on my knees so I can better see where I'm walking so I don't fall down holes or something

oh that alleged evolution process failed in that respect also

*headdesk* OW! MY EXTRA FOREHEAD EYES!

-Erin

Stratigraphy FAIL

Posted at CARM on November 18t 2008. Creationist: RByers

Question:

There's countless index fossils, more so when you grab a microscope. So Creationists, it's your turn to show us your vacuum of knowledge concerning why index fossils even exist. According to your global flood, all organisms have been around since God created them, and were living and dying at the same time as everything else. And the flood waters tore up the land jumbling everything up.

Seeing as the 3 index fossils I listed were all aquatic, shouldn't they be found together? Why aren't they?

Why do Index Fossils even exist?

RByers' answer:

The clue is not the fossils but the rock formations they are in.
What is the origin of the rock strata and why different from the other strata when its from the same event.
The answer must be that the lower strata was from one week in the beginning of the flood and the other strata from the mext week or day. so the first strata swepted up what was in its path. A clean sweep.

The next strata did not sweep up the lower level as it was already rock but brought from up river, as it were, a different contents of other sweepings and laid it on top and pressurized it into rock.

Therefore these index fossils are just creatures from different areas and different sortings separate from the sortings it traveled over.

Deep areas sediment/life laid first and shallow areas came later with different currents.
The creationist can answer life fossil sorting issues with the origin of the sediment material that became the rock strata.

Hows that? Why do creationists have to give the better answers for geology? what are geologists getting paid for?

Gee...I don't know. Maybe they get paid to have logical, scientific answers to geological questions. Could just be me though.

-Erin

Origin FAIL

Posted at CARM on December 3, 2008. Creationist: Sport

Original post, an article on possible new evidence of Earth's beginning (snippet):

The first 700 million years of Earth’s 4.5-billion-year existence are known as the Hadean period, after Hades, or, to shed the ancient Greek name, Hell.

That name seemed to fit with the common perception that the young Earth was a hot, dry, desolate landscape interspersed with seas of magma and inhospitable for life. Even if some organism had somehow popped into existence, the old story went, surely it would soon have been extinguished in the firestorm of one of the giant meteorites that slammed into the Earth when the young solar system was still crowded with debris.

Sport's reply:

ironic, so the scientific community thinks the earth started in hell, and then sometime in the future the earth will be swallowed up by the sun and so everything will essentially return to the same fiery hell that it emerged from. So we have two distinct stories: God says he is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end, yet the scientific community's "divine" plan is hell in the beginning and hell in the end...hell is the alpha and the omega.... Many of them, I fear, will get their wish.

.....really?

-Erin

Meteorite FAIL

Posted on CARM December 10th, 2008. Poster: RByers.

Question:

So 20 billion megatons of energy (aka heat) is explained as "be[ing] neutralized by methods of God, etc."? IOW, a miracle?

RByers' answer:

Creationism starts from biblical presumptions. So we take on any thing that claims evidence against the truth of the bible. In explaining origins we can easily deal with most things however some things require close reading of biblical boundaries.

There are crators everywhere and probably more destroyed by the moving continents. They have in them sedimentary rock and so are pre-flood by days or more. They would leave a big imprint on the pre flood world.

The bible seems to say that there was a war between Michael, angel, and satan. It says a third of the stars were thrown to earth. So perhaps this is the origin of the crators. The origin of the very unclean dno dominance.

I'm not sure. If its a correct interpretation from the bible, the great Henry morris suggested it, then its okay to bring it up as a fact.

Herm....so....craters formed by the war between Michael and Lucifer? Ummm....oh never mind. lol

-Erin

Avian FAIL!

Posted on CARM on March 3rd, 2009. SDA Creationist: Nate

Comment (made by myself, Mountaineer_elf):

Birds are a form of modern dinosaur, and Archaeopteryx was a bird, so is included in the maniraptora clade.

And no, my claim is supported by the evidence or I (and many other scientists the world over) wouldn't have made it. No other claim is supported by the evidence.

If you're purely going for "well, the Archaeopteryx didn't jump out of the rock and say 'I'm a dinosaur!' so I suppose we'll ignore it until it's 100% fact."

Well, is 99% close enough? Because we'll never be 100%, and it's impossible to think we will be. But no evidence found points in the opposite direction.

Nate's answer:

You do know a bird is a mammal? And that a dinosaur is a reptile?

*headdesk* *facepalm* and any others I may be missing. Oh...and LOL!

-Erin

Classification FAIL

Posted on April 10th, 2009. Ex-Creationist, or so we think: Class

Comment was:

How different are we to other apes, the answer is not much at all. And our geographic differences are compounding over time to the point that we will one day be separate species.

Class's answer:

We are not apes, we are hominoids. Both humans and apes belong to the hominoid group. I can't believe you have a pHD and are a geneticist. People can say they are anything on the net.

Herm. Someone forgot that the superfamily hominidae and all it's inhabitants are apes! Who's making fun of who for having a PhD?

-Erin

Deep Time FAIL

Posted on CARM on April 9th. Creationist: Sport

The question was:

Rabbit fossils in the pre-Cambrian. Find one, and I'll admit we have some problems.

Sport's answer:

define cambrian.....oh, that's right -- the place that houses no rabbit fossils.

Oh the special keeps coming!

-Erin

Biology and Botany FAIL

Posted over at CARM on April 9th, 2009. Creationist: MoGrace

The question was:

If God made non-human apes and humans too, He put a lot of unnecessary, non-functonal details in our genomes that only make sense if we are all closely related. Now why would He do that?

The Creationist answer was:

To show us that all life comes from one source - God. Even plant life follows a simialar pattern as set forth in the animal kingdom. Do not even plants have a circulatory system somewhat resembling ours? The handprint of one Designer at work is everywhere.

Someone forgot that there's this thing called the plant kingdom and that we don't have chlorophyll in our bloodstream. Oops.

-Erin

Welcome!

I have no doubt that I'll get all the inflamed Creationists replying "you evilushunist" but whatever. I am an evolutionary scientist. I'm studying for my degree in vertebrate paleontology

I'm a member at CARM Discussion Forums, Christian Apologetics Research Ministry, and joined purely for discussion in the Evolution vs Intelligent Design/Creationism forum.

Unlike the website Fundies Say the Darndest Things (worth a read), I created this blog merely as a place where I can post the incredibly unscientific things Creationists say when attempting to use science as a debate tool.

If you have a Creationist quote from a forum, or from a source that is a major science FAIL, feel free to send it to: turning_point_102@yahoo.com.

-Erin