Научници - антиеволуционисти

[Срећко Петровић]

Зашто ли имам утисак да млатимо празну сламу?  :P

о. Лазар вели: http://www.svetijakov.org/forum/index.php/topic,754.msg6880.html#msg6880

Моја маленкост ти је већ одговорила: http://www.svetijakov.org/forum/index.php/topic,754.msg6910.html#msg6910

У свему осталом се сасвим слажем са мишљењем о. Лазара.

[sasluzitelj]

preteraste vala

vidi se da ste zaludni

[sasluzitelj]

bolje da se uhvatite akatista i molebana :P

[karadjordje]

Па добро Срећко мајка му стара требао си на почетку то да кажеш...Стекао сам потпуно други утисак  :cheesy1:

[Guest Alefshin]

Идемо даље. Позивам опет оне чланове форума који су заинтересовани за ову тему да пропрате научна дела и аргументе поменутих научника не обазурићи се на њихова лична верска убеђења, а о свему томе има доста на интернету-довољан је гугл. Наравно, у питању су доктори наука, тако да их не треба процењивати само на основу једне погрешне изјаве или сл., то је крајње неозбиљно Такође, не позивам никога да без икакве резерве прими све што они тврде већ да једноставно сагледају и другу страну када је ова тематика у питању.

[Guest Alefshin]

Dr. Robert Gentry

Dr. Robert Gentry's main page on our web site

In his early career, Robert V. Gentry served as a physicist (B.S., M.S.; University of Florida) in the nuclear/space defense industries and taught college/university math and physics. He then developed an absorbing interest in testing the conventional evolutionary model of Earth’s origin and age, and has dedicated his scientific career to finding answers that could only be obtained through years of investigating fossil traces of an extraordinary type of radioactivity inscribed in Earth’s basement rocks, the granites. His research so far has resulted in authoring or co-authoring over twenty research papers in scientific publications, such as Science, Nature, Geophysical Research Letters, Annual Review of Nuclear Science, and Earth and Planetary Science Letters. Most of these reports were published during the thirteen years (1969-1982) he spent as a Visiting Scientist in the Chemistry Division of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, some of which detailed discovery of evidence of Earth’s rapid creation and its young age. In 1977 these discoveries led to an honorary D.Sc., and subsequently to his being called to testify in defense of the state’s creation position at the 1981 Arkansas creation/evolution trial. There he testified his discoveries disproved Earth’s evolutionary origin and instead affirmed the Genesis account of Earth’s six-day creation and young age.

His book, Creation's Tiny Mystery, recounts how ACLU evolutionist witnesses failed to refute his discovery of evidence of Earth’s instant creation, being forced to say it was only "a tiny mystery," which they hoped someday to solve. Silence concerning this continuing failure to overthrow this proof of creation has thus far been secured by the evolutionists censoring discussion of this topic from scientific journals for over two decades.

Even more blatant censorship of his most recent discoveries began in early 2001 when Los Alamos National Laboratory personnel deleted his ten scientific papers on cosmology and astrophysics from their U. S. government sponsored e-print archive, prior to their scheduled release on the Internet on the evenings of 2/28/01 and 3/5/01. Continued suppression of these papers, now by Cornell University, stems both from the resistance of evolutionists to the implications of his discovery that the universe possesses a nearby universal Center -- which overthrows big-bang cosmology with its crucial assumption of a no-center universe -- and from his discovery of GENESIS, a new astrophysical model of the cosmos which affirms that the literal six-day Genesis record includes the creation of the visible universe.

More information on his book and two documentary videos about his work, Fingerprints of Creation and The Young Age of the Earth, both of which have aired on various PBS stations since the fall of 2001, is available at http://www.halos.com. More information about his ten papers and documentation of censorship, first by Los Alamos and more recently by Cornell University, is available at http://www.orionfdn.org. Dr. Gentry is a long-time member of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Geophysical Union, Research Society of Sigma Xi, the American Physical Society, and the New York Academy of Sciences. For several years he has been listed in Who’s Who in America and Who’s Who in Science and Engineering.

Robert Gentry Microscopic Chances of Supporting Genesis

[Срећко Петровић]

Robert V. Gentry (b. 1933), a member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, is a nuclear physicist and young Earth creationist who advocates his ideas of creation science including radiohaloes as evidence for a young Earth.[1]

[edit]

Claims and criticism

Gentry has had strong disagreements with other creationists over details of flood geology.[3] A number of creationists, including fellow Seventh-day Adventists, have criticised his work.[1]

In the late 1970s, Gentry challenged the scientific community to synthesize "a hand-sized specimen of a typical biotite-bearing granite" as a test of his claims. The scientific response was dismissive, with geologist G. Brent Dalrymple stating:[1]

As far as I am concerned, Gentry's challenge is silly. … He has proposed an absurd and inconclusive experiment to test a perfectly ridiculous and unscientific hypothesis that ignores virtually the entire body of geological knowledge

In 1981 Gentry was a defense witness in the McLean v. Arkansas case over the constitutional validity of Act 590 that mandated that "creation science" be given equal time in public schools with evolution.[4] The defense lost and Act 590 was ruled to be unconstitutional (a verdict that was influential on, and upheld by, the Supreme Court in Edwards v. Aguillard).

Gentry has devised his own creationist cosmology and filed a lawsuit in 2001 against Los Alamos National Laboratory and Cornell University after personnel deleted 10 of his papers about his cosmology from the public preprint server arXiv.[5] On 23 March 2004, Gentry's lawsuit against arXiv was dismissed by a Tennessee court.[6]

His self-published book Creation's Tiny Mystery was reviewed by geologist Gregg Wilkerson who said it has several logical flaws and concluded "the book is a source of much misinformation about current geologic thinking and confuses fact with interpretation." He also noted the book contains considerable autobiographical material and observed "n general I don't think educators will find its worth their time to tread through this creationist's whining."[7] This criticism of Gentry's "frequent whining about discrimination" has also been made by fellow creationists, who concluded that "his scientific snubs resulted more from his own abrasive style than from his peculiar ideas", according to prominent historian of creationism Ronald L. Numbers.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_V._Gentry

[Милан Меденица :)]

znas Srecko, ja imam problem sa evolucionom teorijom ... odnosno misljenja sam da se potpuno kosi sa zdravom logikom.

prvo sto ne zasluzuje da se naziva teorijom, vec samo hipotezom, jer je sva supljikava i nema nikakvog dokaza evolucije same, vec samo srodstva, i to u tako dugackoj genestskoj liniji, da meni to samo predstavlja dokaz da smo svi nastali od Boga, ne od elektrifikovane vodice ...

mi zaista ne znamo kako se i sta dogodilo, ali to ne znaci da to ne mozemo da upotrebimo. posto sam misljenja da ne moze spoznati Bozju prirodu, posto je deo nje ne obrnuto, tako isto nece moci ni da spozna kako, vec samo sta.

moram da priznam da sam neke od ovih ljudi automatski eliminisao, po njihovoj istrazivackom zvanju i obrazovanju, ne zbog predrasude vere. ako cemo na nacin vere da diskriminisemo ljude, ko zna gde bi zavrsili i da li bi nas stalo pod jedan maslacak. za moj pojam, samo je PhD, odnosno doktorat, dovoljno visoko obrazovanje, koliko vidim ima i kombinovanih doktorata ne samo pocasne prirode, da moze da se uhvati jednim parom ociju razumevanje "mehanizma" u kom svi zivimo.

ja sam licno ubedjen da je ceo svet jedan savrsen mehanizam, fraktalne prirode, zbog mogucnosti izbora, puteva kojim oni vode, i samih interakcija izmedju prirodnih zakona fizike. toliko moje znanje doseze i sasvim mi je dovoljno za sad.

ali kao sto rekoh pre, svakako necu odbaciti municiju protiv obezbozenja, nek je i kineske ili munove proizvodnje

za sad ovde se samo polemise o samoj biologiji. problem je sto se ne slaze biologija sa instrumentima koji je "potvrdjuju" i koliko je sve to ustvari trajalo ...

[Guest Alefshin]

znas Srecko, ja imam problem sa evolucionom teorijom ... odnosno misljenja sam da se potpuno kosi sa zdravom logikom.

??????? ?? ?? ???? ?? ??????? ???????, ??????? ?? ??????????( ? ??????? `???????? ????? ?? ???????`) ?? ??????, ??? ?? ?? ???????? ???????? ?? ?? ????? ????????? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??????? ? ????????. ?????? ??????? ?????? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ??????? ?? ?????????? ? ???? ????, ? `?????????` ?? ??, ???? ?? ????? ??????? ? ????-????? ?? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ?? ?? ?? ???????? ?????? ?? ?????????? ???????, ??? ??? ? ?????? ??????.

[Guest Alefshin]

И овај исто `нема појма`...

Dr. Walter E. Lammerts

Dr. Walter E. Lammerts has a doctorate in genetics, and is well known as a prominent breeder of roses. He reportedly produced 46 new varieties of roses between 1940 and 1981 including the famous Queen Elizabeth. Twenty-five percent of his roses were chosen by the All-American Rose Selection for the years top rose variations. As a result of his efforts the American Rose Society created an entirely new class of rose known as the Grandiflora.

It would not be inappropriate to state that Walter Lammerts is one of the fathers of the modern creation science movement. He was the first president of the Creation Research Society (the first creationist organization in the U.S.), which was founded by 10 scientists in 1964. Dr Lammerts was also the editor of the Creation Research Society Quarterly (CRSQ) from 1964 to 1968. Most notably, he was an active researcher for several decades in biological and geological sciences, and much of his work was published in the CRSQ.

In 1956 Dr. Lammerts did research on overthrusts, such as the Lewis "overthrust" in Glacier National Park (CRSQ 3(1):61-62), and subsequently on the Glarus "overthrust" near Schwanden, Switzerland (CRSQ 8(4):251-255). In a series of papers in the CRSQ Volumes 2, 4, & 6 Walter Lammerts presented data which are very damaging to the :cheesy2: that mutations could have supplied the means of change that would have allowed evolution to occur. He also did an extensive study of Galapagos Island finches at the California Academy of Science, which is published in CRSQ 3(1):73-79. Along with George Howe he published a plant succession study during which they observe the effect of natural selection under widely divergent conditions.(CRSQ 10(4):208-228) And in 1983 Dr. Lammerts did a study on Bristlecone Pine during which it was determined that under certain experimental conditions, extra growth rings could be induced, calling into question the reliability of dendrochronology in establishing accurate absolute ages.(CRSQ 20(2):108-15)

[Срећко Петровић]

@Meda

Crkva te, brate moj, uopste ne obavezuje da prihvatis ovu ili onu teoriju, niti se interesuje tim stvarima. Reci mi, posto imam utisak da se ne razumemo, jesam li ja igde rekao da neko treba da prihvati TE? Ne, samo sa pokazivao da TE nije nikakva jeres, jer se nauka ne kosi sa dogmatima vere, i da covek koji prihvata TE moze da bude pravoslavan, pa cak i bogoslov ili, recimo, mitropolit.

znas Srecko, ja imam problem sa evolucionom teorijom ... odnosno misljenja sam da se potpuno kosi sa zdravom logikom.

??????? ?? ?? ???? ?? ??????? ???????, ??????? ?? ??????????( ? ??????? `???????? ????? ?? ???????`) ?? ??????, ??? ?? ?? ???????? ???????? ?? ?? ????? ????????? ???? ?? ???? ???? ??????? ? ????????. ?????? ??????? ?????? ?? ?????? ??? ???? ??????? ?? ?????????? ? ???? ????, ? `?????????` ?? ??, ???? ?? ????? ??????? ? ????-????? ?? ?? ???? ??????? ???? ?? ?? ?? ???????? ?????? ?? ?????????? ???????, ??? ??? ? ?????? ??????.

@Alefshin

Vi, oce Gorane, sta bas ishitreni u tim kategorizacijama i osudama. Zasto me ponizavate, jel' zato sto se ne slazem sa vasim misljenjem? Sta reci, posredno ste uvredili, npr., ep. Ignjatija, mitr. Jovana Zizjulasa, mitr. Nikolu Hadzinikolaua, o. Lazara Milina, Hrista Janarasa, ep. Aleksandra Mileanta, djakona Andreja Kurajeva itd. - jer i oni, po vasim recima, prkose 'zdravoj logici' (moje je pitanje: cijoj?), a takodje su i 'slepci'. Ovo je vec treci put da u razgovoru samnom ovo cinite: treci put vas po Jevandjelju molim da ne lepite takve etikete i da me ne vredjate.

ps - Ako 'abiogeneza' znaci postanak zivog od nezivog, ne razumem sta je sporno? Nije li zemlja iz sebe na Rec Boziju 'pustila' bilje i zivotinje, i nije li covek sazdan od 'praha'? Ovo sto je Bog ucinio stvarajuci zivi svet, po recima Svetog Pisma, je primer abiogeneze. Sav zivi svet, uostalom, sacinjen je od nezive tvari, i kada umre - vraca se u stanje nezive tvari, raspadajuci se na sastavne elemente. Covek je, npr., po recima Pisma, 'prah, i u prah ce se vratiti'. Mislite o tome.

[Срећко Петровић]

? ???? ???? `???? ?????`...

Dr. Walter E. Lammerts

Dr. Walter E. Lammerts has a doctorate in genetics, and is well known as a prominent breeder of roses. He reportedly produced 46 new varieties of roses between 1940 and 1981 including the famous Queen Elizabeth. Twenty-five percent of his roses were chosen by the All-American Rose Selection for the years top rose variations. As a result of his efforts the American Rose Society created an entirely new class of rose known as the Grandiflora.

It would not be inappropriate to state that Walter Lammerts is one of the fathers of the modern creation science movement. He was the first president of the Creation Research Society (the first creationist organization in the U.S.), which was founded by 10 scientists in 1964. Dr Lammerts was also the editor of the Creation Research Society Quarterly (CRSQ) from 1964 to 1968. Most notably, he was an active researcher for several decades in biological and geological sciences, and much of his work was published in the CRSQ.

In 1956 Dr. Lammerts did research on overthrusts, such as the Lewis "overthrust" in Glacier National Park (CRSQ 3(1):61-62), and subsequently on the Glarus "overthrust" near Schwanden, Switzerland (CRSQ 8(4):251-255). In a series of papers in the CRSQ Volumes 2, 4, & 6 Walter Lammerts presented data which are very damaging to the idea that mutations could have supplied the means of change that would have allowed evolution to occur. He also did an extensive study of Galapagos Island finches at the California Academy of Science, which is published in CRSQ 3(1):73-79. Along with George Howe he published a plant succession study during which they observe the effect of natural selection under widely divergent conditions.(CRSQ 10(4):208-228) And in 1983 Dr. Lammerts did a study on Bristlecone Pine during which it was determined that under certain experimental conditions, extra growth rings could be induced, calling into question the reliability of dendrochronology in establishing accurate absolute ages.(CRSQ 20(2):108-15)

Vi to rekoste, ja ne rekoh>

...he promoted books by Walter Lammerts, a lifelong disciple of SDA creationist George McCready Price... - Brian Baxter, "Should Christians support Answers in Genesis?", http://unbelief.org/articles/should-christians-support-answers-in-genesis/

Lammerts, Walter. E. (1904-?)

Prominent Lutheran young-earth creationist and flood geologist... - http://corior.blogspot.com/2006/02/jehovahs-witnesses-and-young-earth.html

"The Adventists Roots of Creation Science", by Gary Land - http://www.spectrummagazine.org/files/archive/archive21-25/23-2land2.pdf

[сербон]

Crkva te, brate moj, uopste ne obavezuje da prihvatis ovu ili onu teoriju, niti se interesuje tim stvarima. Reci mi, posto imam utisak da se ne razumemo, jesam li ja igde rekao da neko treba da prihvati TE? Ne, samo sa pokazivao da TE nije nikakva jeres, jer se nauka ne kosi sa dogmatima vere, i da covek koji prihvata TE moze da bude pravoslavan, pa cak i bogoslov ili, recimo, mitropolit.

...............................

??? ?? ?? ????? ?? ????? ???? ???????? ?? ? ?? ??? ??? ?? ??.

??? ??? ????? ???????? ?????? ??? ?? ??????? ?????? ????? ??????:

??? ?? ? ?? ??? ???????????? ? ???????? ????? ???? ??????????? ?? ??, ??????? ?? ??

????????? ????? ??????? ? ??????? ??????????

[Срећко Петровић]

Crkva te, brate moj, uopste ne obavezuje da prihvatis ovu ili onu teoriju, niti se interesuje tim stvarima. Reci mi, posto imam utisak da se ne razumemo, jesam li ja igde rekao da neko treba da prihvati TE? Ne, samo sa pokazivao da TE nije nikakva jeres, jer se nauka ne kosi sa dogmatima vere, i da covek koji prihvata TE moze da bude pravoslavan, pa cak i bogoslov ili, recimo, mitropolit.

...............................

??? ?? ?? ????? ?? ????? ???? ???????? ?? ? ?? ??? ??? ?? ??.

??? ??? ????? ???????? ?????? ??? ?? ??????? ?????? ????? ??????:

??? ?? ? ?? ??? ???????????? ? ???????? ????? ???? ??????????? ?? ??, ??????? ?? ??

????????? ????? ??????? ? ??????? ??????????

Ne znam, raspitajte se kod nekog ko studira prirodne nauke.

Ne razumem sta mislite kad kazete da covek koji prihvata Te ne zna sta je ona?

ps - pokrenuli ste vrlo osetljivo pitanje obrazovanja i ovih tema kojima se bavimo. Kad smo vec tu, ne znam da li znate na kom univerzitetu u svetu moze da se diplomira na neki od 'kreacionistickih' (u smislu 'young-earth' itd.) postulata i pretpostavki? Odmah cu odgovoriti: na dva adventisticka, takoreci 'privatna' fakulteta, Loma Linda (http://www.llu.edu/) i Andrews University (http://www.andrews.edu/ - ovaj zadnji nosi ime po jednom subotaru iz 19 veka - John Nevins Andrews (1829-1883)). Iako su ova dva fakulteta u rukama sektasa adventista, to ne smeta nasim svestenicima da hvale one koji su zavrsili te fakultete i tamo odbranili doktorate itd. - pa tako pored forumskih poruka o. Gorana, hvale adventistickim  misliocima mozemo da citamo i na sajtu kragujevacke Saborne crkve, na primer:

""...?????? ??????, ???????? ?????? ? ???????, ?? ??????, ??????? ??????? ??????; ?? ?????? ???, ???????? ??????? ?? ???????????? ? ???????????? ?????? 1968. ???. ?? ?????? ????????? ????????? ???????; ?????? ???????, ?????????; ?? ????? ????. ???????? ????????? ?? ?????? ????????????, ?? ????? ?????, ???????? ??????, ?? ?????? ??? ? ??.  ..." - http://bogoslovlje.sabornihram.com/tekstovi/srecko_evolucija_1.doc

(Interesantno, skoro smo ovde govorili o nekim od ovih imena, i gle cuda - uglavnom su to adventisti...)

[Guest Alefshin]

Дакле, понављам опет-следећи ово мерило секташтва, и за еволуционисте се такође може рећи да су скоро листом секташи, пошто су и они по конфесији припадници свих могућих секти, иако су главни промотери ове теорије по правилу а(нти)теисти.

Члановима форума, опет, понављам-нека прате аргументе противника ТЕ и нека сами процене да ли су у праву.