Dutch creationists against evolution

[derkvanl]

A few months they spread a little magazine throughout the country that was titled "creation or evolution, what do you believe?"

http://www.creatie.info/books/bookid/3
(sry, in dutch only)

It was filled with the regular bullshit and debunked within hours. And a website terugnaarjemaker.nl (backtoyourcreator.nl) was set to life in order to call as many people as possible to return that magazine to the sender (who pays the postagecosts), with or without extra bricks for the weight.

It didn't stir up that much around here eventually, but today they started the 2nd part of their campaign with "ProGenesis" 95 stands against revolution.

I didn't have time to translate it all. A lot regular creationist arguments (carbondating don't work, species don't evolve, macro evolution, differences between human and chimps, irreducable complexity, bigbang mistakes, earth magnetism) for a young earth and an intelligent design. But here is some of the finest for you.

74. The question to "the meaning of life" cannot be explained by evolution.

75. The, in nature existing, efficient beauty cannot be explained by naturalistic approach.

76. The code, found in all lifeforms can only and exclusively lead to a conclusion that involves an author/source for this information.

79. Because information in essence is non-material, it cannot come from a material being.

80. Because humans can create information (which is non-material), it cannot be coming from our material body.

82. Because all theories for chemical and biological evolution states that information only comes from matter and energy, we must conclude that they are all false.

94. Consciousness and ethics can impossibly be generated by milions of years of merciless survival.

95. The existence of the fenomen of love is to hard to unite with the views of evolution.

http://www.creatie.info/stellingen

 

[nemesiss]

read through it, but its basically a copy/paste from the discovery institute, nothing new actually.
apparently they also review books on evolution and such... its quite funny when they claim that evolutionairy biologists have a wild imagination...

one question though; to what extend is it true that selfish gene theory has been declared false?... as they claim.


edit:
seems that part of their nonsense they got from

http://www.degeneratie.nl/

another dutch creationist site, which hasn't added nothing new since 2006... surprised?
also, they have an english version:

http://www.evolutionisdegeneration.com/

 

[xman]

82. Because all theories for chemical and biological evolution states that information only comes from matter and energy, we must conclude that they are all false.

WTF?! So because an idea has no mass it isn't real? :lol:

 

[WolfAU]

74. The question to "the meaning of life" cannot be explained by evolution.

No shit!

75. [Beauty existing in nature] cannot be explained by [a] naturalistic approach.

Yes it can.

76. The code, found in all lifeforms can only and exclusively lead to a conclusion that involves an author/source for this information.

Nope.

79. Because information in essence is non-material, it cannot come from a material being.

What?!

80. Because humans can create information (which is non-material), it cannot be coming from our material body.

....

82. Because all theories for chemical and biological evolution states that information only comes from matter and energy, we must conclude that they are all false.

Riiiiiiight...

94. Consciousness and ethics [cannot possibly] be generated by milions of years of merciless survival.

The closest thing to a decent argument.
Human beings are social creatures, we live or die as a group, ethics is a "how to guide" imprinted into us on how to survive as a group, the better we survive, the more we flourish as a group, the more our genetic code spreads = Evolution.

Consciousness is the term we give to a self aware part of the human mind, it exists because it can do things that a cold, unfeeling biological computer/machine cannot, it can have ambitions, dreams, it can relate to others, it can get bored, it can think poetically and abstractly. It exists because it is a HUGE evolutionary advantage over having no consciousness.

95. The existence of the fenomen [phenomenon?] of love is to hard to unite with the views of evolution.

Wrong!

Same bullshit, different country. Thanks for sharing.

 

[kf00kaha]

Damnit WolfAU, you stole my post :lol:

I hate time difference...

 

[Segfault]

74. The question to "the meaning of life" cannot be explained by evolution.

I don't know the question, but the answer is 42!

 

[Don-Sama]

Ah the source is geenstijl?

yea it's pathetic really, these guys are lagging so much in real life. they are using the kent hovind arguments which obviously are completely wrong. and since these people have no understanding of English whatsoever, when ya link them the vids that debunk them they simply won't understand it.

Buttt, look at the bride side, these arguments are so STUPID any human with common sence can tell it's complete bullshit, what only works against them..

I actually thought of translating a few too and post them on here but ah well.


~don

 

[derkvanl]

Ah the source is geenstijl?

Part of the source.

Too bad it's not in English. It's from the dutch creationist's website. -> http://www.creatie.info
They came with an magazine against evolution too. It's on their website. But was nicely debunked.
http://www.prefectionist.nl/EvolutieOfScheppingGeannoteerd/82504_SchreeuwomLeven_brochure_gewijzigd.1.1.pdf

You should also read this one. It's actually fun. The dutch orthodox christian newspaper about the Year of Darwin. (offline on sunday) http://www.refdag.nl/dossier/3059/Darwinjaar.html

 

[xchillx42]

I don't know the question, but the answer is 42!

The answer is 'what's 6 x 9'

 

[psychointegrator]

80. Because humans can create information (which is non-material), it cannot be coming from our material body.

Neurons. Those happen to be material.

94. Consciousness and ethics can impossibly be generated by milions of years of merciless survival.

Evolution has explained how ethics came to be.
They should perhaps google "research consciousness."

95. The existence of the fenomen of love is to hard to unite with the views of evolution.

Fenomen?

Time for them to research evolution+love.
Perhaps view Ted Talks to gain even more of a grasp when it comes to silly humans:
Talks Helen Fisher studies the brain in love
http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/helen_fisher_studies_the_brain_in_love.html

As usual, it all comes down to reward center related crap along with addiction to chemicals (drugs).
Which equals an utter lack in need for a godthing.

 

[RoaringAtheist]

You should also read this one. It's actually fun. The dutch orthodox christian newspaper about the Year of Darwin. (offline on sunday) http://www.refdag.nl/dossier/3059/Darwinjaar.html

You know, that page annoys me quite a bit because of the huge list of false stuff in there. 'o.o

 

[nasher168]

You should also read this one. It's actually fun. The dutch orthodox christian newspaper about the Year of Darwin. (offline on sunday) http://www.refdag.nl/dossier/3059/Darwinjaar.html

You know, that page annoys me quite a bit because of the huge list of false stuff in there. 'o.o

I can find nothing that bad in there:
"n 2009 the 200 years since Darwin was born. It is also 150 years since his controversial book "On the Origin of the Species" was first published. The official opening of the Darwin Year took place on November 3, 2008 in the Knights."
-Courtesy of google translate